I'd like to call the Finance Committee meeting to order today
on Monday, November 22nd, 2021.
If we could just go around
the room and introduce ourselves, do a roll call.
My name is Kathy. Sticker The Treasurer.
Lindsay Drew School Board Director.
Stacy Winslow Superintendent.
Teri Singer. Board Member.
Regis Baldwin Administration.
Michelle Agee. Board Secretary.
Tiffany Board Member.
Mike French Business Manager.
Mike Davis. As an advisor.
Okay. And Dr. Scholl, you're on.
Via the web webinar.
Anybody else on the webinar?
I see.
That.
One Citizen advisor.
Brian, Do you want introduce yourself.
Hey, Brian SL Assistant Advisor.
Okay, great.
I think that's everybody.
Okay, so we'll move on to approve the summary minutes from the October meeting.
May I have a motion to approve the meet the minutes
from the October 25th, 2021 Finance Committee meeting.
So move Lindsay to. Second Terry Singer.
Hey, all those in favor say I. I.
All those opposed say now.
Okay.
The summary minutes have passed, and we did have one new member join us.
Do you, Paul, do you want to introduce yourself real quick just for the, um,
the meeting minutes?
Paul Latham.
Okay.
And Paul is one of our citizen advisors.
Thank you.
There's no unfinished business and we have three new business items.
We have Dennis Funk here, the elementary school principal,
to give us an iPad 101 less presentation.
This presentation was given to the curriculum Council committee
at our last meeting two weeks ago, and so now it is
headed to finance.
So, Janet, go ahead.
Hi, everyone.
I'm Jenna Funk.
I'm the elementary principal.
I just want to thank you for allowing us to present here this evening.
And also thank you for your ongoing
support of technology integration at Derry Township School District.
We've been asked to give an update this evening about where we are at,
where we are at with for fulfilling our vision, with our strategic plan
related to technology integration, to provide flexible learning environments
and enhancing our learning opportunities for all students.
So we're here today because we are seeking to refresh our elementary classroom
iPad model to include new iPads for the 2223 school year.
And as Mrs.
Secker just shared, we did present at a recent curriculum council meeting.
As technology is primarily a curriculum initiative,
but we'd like to share our plan with the Finance Committee
tonight to discuss how to finance this device, refresh.
So our
focus with technology integration has always been
and continues to be focused on sound instructional practices in the classroom
and how technology can be used to leverage those instructional practices.
So our why behind our models of instructional technology
with the 1 to 1 devices in the classroom connect to two very important aspects.
The first one is that we believe technology will not replace good teachers.
However, technology in the hands of good teachers
can take learning to a new level and can be very transformative.
We also believe that we need to ensure equitable access to technology devices
for all students.
K through five.
So while we consider the impacts
of technology on curriculum instruction, this phrase comes to mind.
And when you think about pedagogy or good teaching and instruction,
that first and foremost drives everything we do.
Technology is the accelerator that we use to to get there.
That power of technology can be leveraged by the teachers and the students to
enhance and streamline their productivity and performance in the classroom.
It can also help provide equitable opportunities for our students,
as well as accelerate and deepen the quality
of learning to meet the students where they're at.
So as we continue our 1 to 1 journey at the elementary school
to utilize technology
as those tools to accelerate teaching and learning, we have several goals
that we keep in focus for both our teachers and our students.
For our teachers, really focusing on
those researched based instructional practices
and using real time data to be able to inform teaching instruction
and to differentiate and personalize learning for for our students.
And then addition,
in order to change instruction to meet the students where they're at,
we have students
coming to us with a very diverse instructional needs, especially now.
And using that technology to meet those needs is very important for our students.
We want to move our students from being just consumers
of content to be an actual producers of content.
And when we know when students are creating and synthesizing
their learning, they're learning at those highest instructional levels
and they're up they're applying their learning in the most authentic ways.
Good evening, everybody.
I'm Dr. Shuman.
I'm also here to talk a little bit about the context of where
we've been with technology and where we hope to go.
So when we think about that, this has been a process that has been ongoing.
I think really for about the last ten years as we've looked to integrate
technology across the district, whether you're talking
middle and high school level or tonight, we're currently focusing on
on the elementary level, but we're currently operating
with a model where we do have
students using iPads, K-12 in our district.
And we're just looking to try to
how can we refresh that and keep that moving as we move forward.
So that's what we're here to talk about with the committee tonight a little bit.
And as Mrs.
Funke shared already, we are following guidance in our strategic plan.
I believe we're in year five of our current six year strategic plan.
And one of those focus areas is technology.
So just
so to be able to be able to do this work,
it first starts with a strong focus on professional learning
because you don't just want to hand devices to students
and teachers and not have any kind of training or learning behind that.
So we do follow best practice.
We use a model of instructional coaching and we have job embedded
professional learning,
which means this work goes on as part of the regularly scheduled school day.
Teachers are collaborate and learning and working with coaches
to best utilize the technology that we have.
The focus is always personalized.
Student centered learning and technology
gives us a lot of leverage to customize what we're doing with kids in the moment.
And as we're seeing the data in the classroom in real time,
you can customize what you're doing with
with groups of kids or individual students.
We also, when we have a model where it is
consistent, a consistent platform, meaning the same type of iPad,
same generation of iPads, same version of the Apple operating system,
it allows for increased ability for teachers to manage devices
and apps and other tools that they're using in the classroom.
It gets a little tricky when you have different generations of iPads
and different versions, and teachers are trying to work with that
while they're trying to instruct a classroom with 25 students.
We also have an increased digital curriculum,
so the iPad becomes somewhat of an accessible key element
and equity piece for allowing students to access the curriculum
because of the amount of resources and tools that students are accessing
every day online and digitally.
The tool actually is a window for them to access their learning.
So that's an important thing to remember as we talk about this as well.
If you look back to where we were
in July 2012, we had a model at the elementary level
with four or five devices in the classroom and they weren't
sometimes that was laptops,
desktop computers,
a combination of iPads mixed in there as well.
And 20 1617, we repurposed
older iPads from the middle school.
Has the middle school refreshed?
They're in their 1 to 1 model.
We took some of the older
iPads, repurposed them and put them in the elementary school
so we could get to a ratio of about ten iPads in a classroom.
So roughly a 2 to 1 ratio with student to iPad use.
But they would take them all right.
They weren't taking them home that.
So we've had a lot of
different models as we've progressed through this,
varying from interactive boards in classrooms,
which really kind of only allowed the teacher and a select group of students
to interact with the technology. So with somewhat limited
shared use
and a 2 to 1 ratio where they didn't take them home, but
they shared them in the classroom, but it wasn't exclusively the students device.
In. The spring of 2020,
we did emergency device distribution and we gave every kid
and because of what we were facing with elements of the pandemic.
So we we got iPads into the hands of every student.
And that is the current model that we're operating under right now.
We have kids using iPads.
The issue becomes in K-2 one, they're using generation
five, iPads that are five years old,
and in 2 to 5, they're using generation six iPads that are up
for the current lease to be renewed
right now at the end of our 30 year lease.
So anybody who who uses Apple technology knows that
after a certain number of years, you you can't update the software anymore.
So I don't know what the timeline is for that.
But I would think that five year iPads are getting close to where
they might become obsolete and not able to be used.
And again, this is really
supports equity for our students in terms of everybody being able to access
the curriculum and also being able to easily, more easily make accommodations
so that kids with special needs are able to access that curriculum.
But it's it's really about everybody being able
to access their education and technology is a tool and a window to do that.
We are currently using clever and see.
So at the elementary school, if you have elementary children,
you know what they're all about.
But it's basically our content delivery
system, learning management system
where through which kids access
the dermot's tools for their learning.
We've already spoken a bit about the equity piece,
but this does allow teachers to do a lot of guided groups
and customizing what they're using with particular groups of students,
differentiating even down to the individual student level.
And there's a lot of accessibility tools
on the iPad, things like text to speech
that allows students to access materials if they're struggling readers.
There's also
translation elements built into the software,
which again can help an l l student access materials and resources.
So a lot of those pieces are just part of the Apple system
experience.
So where do we want to go?
We would like to continue our 1
to 1, K to five iPad lease
for the next four years, 2022 to 2026.
It would be a four year lease,
which makes it it feels good to talk about the numbers
in a minute, but that makes it more affordable
because we're going from a three year lease to a four year lease
because we need to replace the aging technology.
We want to increase access for all of our kids,
go with a common device model for the instructional benefits
of having the same platform in the hands of the teachers and the students.
And then it also would become a fixed line
in the budget as the lease plays out over the next four years.
So to talk about what those numbers actually look like,
I'm going to take a.
Space that the.
Tallest person table for me.
So the lower the mic here.
Well I'm Phil I'm the director of technology here at Derry Township.
So the numbers are on the screen right now.
And as you can see, the current lease, which has 12, roughly 12 iPads per
classroom, is around 39,000, a little more than 39,300
sorry, $139,000 per year.
The proposed lease K-12 sorry, K-5,
this is 1650 iPads, which is iPads
for all of the elementary school students and their teachers
is $150,000 a year.
You'll notice that is a $10,000 difference.
Increased difference.
We are lucky enough to have
a supply of Generation five iPads
and six iPads, which are currently being used in the elementary school.
The older ones, the out of date ones.
The one great thing about Apple products is they hold their value over time.
Luckily.
Well, we'll be able to sell those back and we feel like
we'll get about $80,000 of potential buy back with those devices.
So with all that being said,
there should be some
some savings system and we can also there's going to be some savings
system wide where we will be able to kind of absorb those costs.
So we we feel that there will be very little to very minimal
to no increase in our operating budget.
That's kind of the bottom line is
we feel like there won't be an increase next.
So the benefits of the lease,
we're going to replace the aging technology, the increased access for all,
all the all the kids and all the staff will have the same device.
And that's the common device model.
I'm sure you can understand walking into a room
where someone will have an older device that's not updated,
another device over there, and when you're a teacher preparing for that class
and you know that everything's the same when you're at home preparing and you go
into the classroom and everything's the same, everything's ready to go,
it makes the teacher, I think, feel a little bit more relaxed and at ease
so that they can show up the day and know that things are consistent
across the board.
And something that's important is that it's a fixed
line item in the budget, so it doesn't
fluctuate year to year.
It's something we can account for every single year.
One of the things I know that
Dr. Schumann had mentioned was
we had really kind of
thrown the iPads into the elementary school building
and forced it to be a 1 to 1 situation there.
And that was we were really well prepared because in 2019
we refreshed the high school lease and that gave us extra iPads
that allowed us to just get those devices out.
There were other school districts were scrambling
and looking to find devices and get prepared.
We were kind of already there,
and so we couldn't have done that without the support of the district
and the administration and the staff and the students
and everybody there, because we really went from just having 2
to 1 in the classrooms to a full 1 to 1 K-12.
Because because of that.
So I just wanted to say thanks for all of that support.
And kind of what we want to do is just kind of continue what we've been doing
and providing great technology for our staff and students and any questions.
I'm here and
wonderful people behind me here to support.
Us as well.
Can you first of all, thank you
for for the presentation and
can you talk at all just about the difference?
I know with the buyback, those would probably be for the ones
that we currently own that made up that difference from the thousand.
And so from 2019.
What is the cost difference with the
if we were to go to the least versus having the buyback in the future?
You know, like if you are purchasing them now versus lease,
you know, for the next time, they need to be refreshed in a few years.
And then the second part of my question is what are we seeing
as far as damage, you know, in the hands of elementary students?
Are replacements covered through the lease program if needed.
So we always account for a little bit of I'll answer your second question first,
if that's okay.
And we always account for damage and things like that
in in the case that that happens.
So we usually order 50,
maybe 100 extra iPads for that damage.
We have a person in house that repairs iPads
that makes it really easy and cost effective for us.
I think he repairs it depending on what's wrong with it.
At about $20, an iPad.
Might
not like an apple care program for a large lease of this size.
The MacBooks we do and AppleCare
add on
because they're much harder to repair.
We're the iPads.
Our in-house tech is really good at repairing things
and can get them back to a student in a couple of days.
And sometimes we'll have loaners that we'll give out.
In the meantime,
I believe this the elementary leases is ending this year.
And so we will we will be owning those devices
after this year. So,
you know, we we
we really got these numbers and they they look really good.
And if you go can you go back to the numbers.
And I guess you just clarified it.
So it is a lease to own.
So that's why we're able to do the buyback with all of the devices, not just ones
that would have been purchased. Yeah.
So that clarify.
Things, but it's really pretty remarkable when you think about that.
We were and it is the three and four year thing
too but for a thousand iPads, we're paying 139,000
a year for 612 get, you know, it's 150,000.
So it's just a small difference.
And I really think we can absorb that.
And I'm not too concerned about that.
But it's going to provide that same level
of technology both for staff and staff in the elementary building.
And I think that will be great.
Do you have that 80,000 built in to the 150 already?
So it it's Patty.
How are those numbers?
So that 80,000 is based on what we sell back?
I know, but should it really be 200?
No, that's about one. 50, not counting the eight.
Thousand at all.
So really, we're talking about potential $70,000 savings.
Well, let me clarify one thing.
Sorry. So that's per year.
So the $10,000, it's it's 40.
It's 42,000 spread over four years.
So potentially, yes, we would have a surplus of $40,000.
For the 1066 iPads that we did.
I pulled up the contract just to see how long it ran.
And it was a $417,000 total with 139 per year.
And I I'm.
Sorry, that's my fault.
But yeah, 10,000 per year.
So that's $40,000 over four years.
And so what, what we would do is sell those
so some of the gen fives and gen sixes and we would get a potential of 80,000
which is nice that it's that high because if they said we only get
60,000 back, well we're still going to cover the cost of that difference.
So like I said, I really think we could absorb that.
And like it says there too, we also have some additional savings systemwide
due to the new student information system being cheaper than than our previous one.
So even if we didn't get that, we'd still be able to absorb that 10,000 a year.
And this would be for beginning since our last payment was July 1st of 21
on the current lease, that the payment for this new lease would start July one, 22.
So it would just basically replace with this small increase
budget line item for
next year's budget, not in the current one we're in now, I believe. So
I looked at my gain as the number is.
A little bit better than me.
This is Terry Singer.
So how does this pricewise stack up with what
we're doing at the middle school and high school?
I believe it's competitive.
I believe it's it's it's around that that that same number per device.
And that also builds in cases too.
So cases are built into those costs.
And one thing that Mr.
you mentioned about damages, we were really fortunate to get really
robust cases that protected the iPads well.
And so we've seen less damage with those devices.
And so these that these numbers include cases as well.
And so
I do believe that it's
comparable to our currently in the middle school and high school.
Not a perfect answer, but it's an answer.
Okay. Thank you.
This is Kathy Sager.
Thank you for the presentation and the numbers for me.
You know, this is a no brainer and I just
we have to do this and with it, what, $66 million budget
when we talk about $150,000 to give these kids technology
in their hands, in in the era that we live in right now
with deadly viruses, like, yeah, we just have to do that.
So but thank you.
I think it's important that we do look over the numbers as a board.
And I do think the students and the staff will appreciate
having newer devices after kind of rolling through the last two years.
And actually something I didn't mention is they teachers are using a seven
year old device. So.
Terry, just
for you with your question about the secondary,
we leased 2400
iPads in 2020 for the secondary and the cost was about
just over double what the total lease price was.
So it's really comparable.
It's and
this is Terry Singer again, and if you can't answer this question is fine.
But as far as each home
having Wi-Fi or connectivity or whatever,
we know where we stand on that.
So I'm relatively new in this position, but I do manage the
the hotspot distribution and we,
I think have 20 or 30 district wide that we that we own
and can provide to families that that don't have Wi-Fi at home.
There's I would say
probably 15 or 20 that are kind of in distribution.
So we're able to make sure they can get I mean, they're able to take these home.
Yeah, yeah.
You know.
Again, any family that has issues at home, if they contact us, work through our
wonderful social worker and, you know, we get what they need to be able to do.
I didn't realize we had the hotspots available for those students.
That's that's just an added bonus.
Thank you.
This is Mike Davis.
What generation. Would.
This be for the Generation nine?
They're the ones that were just released like two months ago.
Okay.
This is KIPP show.
Is this is this contract also leased to own?
Yes, I believe. Yes.
And just out of curiosity,
with the newness of the devices, is there
is it better to just to keep the
secondary ones that they have now, like those are still going to be sufficient?
I would think that the secondary students probably use the iPads, you know,
more day to day.
So having the elementary
kind of advanced in technology.
Yeah, I believe.
The timing kind of will roll. Well, yeah, Yeah.
And the devices the devices are comparable.
The elementary ones will probably be a bit faster
and maybe have a little bit more memory.
But probably by the time that those kids are in the high school,
it'll be time to refresh that because I think it's two more years on that.
And then, you know, they'll be getting newer devices as well.
So thank you.
I supported
this this list.
And I'm just curious, I totally agree with Mr. Speaker.
This is something we obviously need to do,
at least on generally involves an annual fee and then a buyout number.
So this doesn't I take it and my.
Can correct me, but I believe this.
I haven't seen the current proposed document
for the lease, but the current lease we have, it is for equal payments.
Once we've made the final payment, there
and there is no there's nothing to satisfy it at the end.
And it was also provided at working with Apple at 0% interest.
So there's no worth paying any extra fees by by splitting this up budgetary.
So they are good to work with in that way.
Yeah.
And the estimate on the the the amount of the buyback
is that part of the negotiation.
They did they share that number before we commit to the contract.
So they they provide estimates they don't buy back the
they will put us in touch with a third party that goes through that process
and it's really up to us to negotiate with them.
But obviously, Apple has knowledge of those deals that happens.
We usually get a range of this is what it could be.
And so I think 80,000 is, you know, it's going to be in that ballpark.
It might be 10% lower, 10% higher. But.
Okay, Thank you.
Mike.
Is this the preferred way for financing of it so that it just stays
a continual line item in the general fund versus being a capital expenditure?
Exactly. Yes.
And just as
a technical item that work for here, if if they're going to
if the new lease would take effect July 1st, 2022,
there is a lot of lead time that the technology department needs.
And so it'll probably be February or March when the proposed contract
is provided to the board for for full approval.
And once again, it would have to be done at that point in time.
But no costs would be incurred until the new budget year.
Thanks, But they do also work with them in providing
the the items before July 1st so that the tech department
can make sure that they're ready for the start of school.
It's a good, fun summer project. But.
Does anyone have any more questions?
We need to.
You. On any motion or since this is an already a line item, is it okay?
I think it's just part of your report.
If you if you just report out that, you know, this will be something
that was supported when it does come to the full board for the contract.
All right. Sounds good. Thank you very much. I appreciate it.
Thank you.
Okay.
We're on to the next new business item.
We have a monthly review of expenses
and revenues and general fund from October 2021.
Mr. FRIEND.
Thank you, Mr.
WICKER.
No exciting
news to report, which is good news from from the finance perspective.
So as I spend as I've been doing these monthly updates, if you can tell I'm
always looking back at our three year average and what of our budgets done?
What have they said over the last three years?
Because not only over the last three years,
but over the last 15 years, our budgets have been fairly consistent
that if they're going to hit certain marks
at certain points in the year, we can be pretty confident
that they're going to hit the mark by the end of the year.
So this review is just done once again
within that vein and looking at some of the high level items.
So total
total revenue collections
are currently about
a little over 67% of the total budget.
And if we look over the past three years, we're at about 67% is the average.
So feeling good that the budget numbers that we have
for this year are solid and something we can count on.
Unlike the year the fiscal year we went through last year,
of that
$45 million in total revenue collected,
most of that is made up by our real estate taxes.
Real estate taxes make up almost half of our total revenue
and obviously
that has been going
as planned as well.
The current collection and the end of the month of October
is usually a good high point to look at because
that's the end of the face value period.
So from now, from November 1st through December 31st,
there's a 10% penalty on anyone who still has an outstanding tax bill.
So we do see collections kind of ramp up towards the end of October
of people wanting to make that payment so that they don't
get our fall within that penalty period.
We're just
a little bit over $35 million.
The prior fourth three year average is about 34 million
and due to current collections,
we can assume that we'll be on pace to hit the budget amount.
The one part of that budget that affects
the real estate taxes are
and this mostly happens with the Hershey company,
but there's always we always have challenges
or appeals to assess value as any taxpayer has the ability to do.
Large businesses seem to do it a little bit more often.
We don't have any large appeals that are currently out
or that that may be coming forward, but we have a bunch of small ones.
So that may be something that affects the current year's budget.
If those appeals come through negatively towards us
at times, we are then required to pay back
real estate taxes to a certain portion of time,
and that could affect the real estate tax budget we don't have
when we make a refund for real estate taxes, we don't charge that to expense.
We just net against the revenue collected. So
collections, we're looking very good.
We estimate our usually around 96% of the taxes
that we issue are collected within the same year,
which is really good because we offer a 2% discount.
So we're already starting 98% is the best we can expect.
100% would be over and above.
So the collection percentage
is right on par with with hitting or exceeding that 96%.
Finally, the amusement tax and this has just been an item
that was hit most drastically by COVID that in our our payment
from the giant center, which will get into some of that information a little later.
But amusement tax collection continues
to be above and beyond
our assumptions for the current year
collections are just a little over $700,000,
and that's almost 90% of a collection of an average year.
So this time in 2019, we were about $800,000.
So really going well, especially noting that
the district we only budgeted about half of our normal,
which is a $750,000, which you know, essentially we've hit.
So collections for a museum tax will slow greatly.
Right now there's no concerts.
Hershey Park is running there.
You know, Hersheypark from the dark just ended.
But we will start to look at sweet lights and some of those things that doesn't
generate a large amount of real estate tax or amusement tax collections.
Once again, with no concerts
or anything planned, it really is just bears games on some of those things.
But looking at how well the summer kind of started out,
very hopeful that that'll pick up there next summer
and really hopeful that we're
can see that we will break the million dollar
level of collections which which is great.
1.5 is what we normally collect in those amusement taxes.
In a normal year, we probably will not hit that close, but but
we'll exceed what we had in our budget, which is a great thing.
Any questions on just the revenue portion of what I went over?
Mike, this is Cathy Seger.
So we're on track to collect
about $1,000,000 of amusement tax, but we normally get 1.5 million, right?
Correct.
Okay, But we budgeted
750,000, so we're going to be over about 280,000.
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
So it's going to reflect well on our budget.
That'll show as a positive variance this year.
And just back to real estate taxes, did you say that
it's we usually get 96 or 98% of real estate in.
96 is what we budget.
98% is the best we can provide for because we
we we provide a 2% discount
and most of our tax payers take advantage of that.
So essentially 98% tax collection is is our cap.
That's the best we could hope for.
And like I said, we're traditionally about 96, 96 and a half,
which is really great that a taxpayer is paying on
time is a huge help to the budget in the planning process.
Okay, sounds good.
Thank you.
Mike, It's Tracey Winslow.
Just for everyone's edification, does the ticket sales
at the theater also count in the amusement tax?
They do. They do. Thank you. Yeah.
Any in our own property.
Well, anything really in Derry Township that that sells tickets
just noted that we added a few.
The Englewood was added to the tax rolls
We got that report this this last week.
So any place that does that but
the Hershey entities produce
the most tax revenue by far.
From anybody else.
So just kind of not quickly
but the the review from expenditures follows the same vein.
As of the end of October, we spent about $17.6
million or 26.6% of our total budget.
If we look over the past
three years, fiscal years as of October
31st, the average of all those years is about 26.2%.
So once again, there is a major caveat there that that we are
operating through the COVID environment, which has shown us in the prior year.
There's some unknowns that have crept up.
Hopefully we're way past those unknowns.
So we should be able to to hit the budget once again
from an expenditure standpoint.
So all good news from for this year's budget.
It looks like expenditures are trending
within the budget and, you know,
the revenue is trending a little bit above.
So we should be in good shape, shape
by year end.
Thank you very much.
Anyone have any additional questions on that before we move on to see
anyone on line?
Are you okay with that?
Yes, no questions.
Thanks for the update, Mike.
Okay.
So we'll move on to the last item on the agenda.
We have expansion, revenue review, five year budget projections.
Thank you, Mr. Sikka.
As we're working through the 2223
budget, we're getting to the point of
in the Act one budget scenario of needing to
to have action.
Currently the deadline is
by January 27th of 2022.
The district either needs to
pass a resolution that it will stay within
the index or approve a budget, or at least post the budget
that would provide for exceptions.
And going above the index.
Of. Everything we've discussed
so far has been under the auspices of the cap of 3.4%.
So we've been talking about living within the index the whole time.
So we'll go over some of this information that I have in detail.
But really at the end of this meeting, do you need the committee to to recommend
whether or not to stay within the index or if we should need to do more work
and possibly recommend to the full board to
two, possibly that we may need to go above the index.
So this is just
a technical item, if you will, for the budget process where
the proposal would be to for this committee
to make a recommendation at the end of this meeting
and then for the full to act on the resolution at the December 13th meeting.
However, they do have two more meetings
that that could go into January as both of our meetings
in January are before the deadline date of the 27th of January.
So just want to set the table there as we're working through
and looking at some of these budget scenarios.
Really only the decision process that really needs to be
made right now is will we stay within the index?
So provided
attached to the agenda, the two charts
showing
scenarios A and B, which essentially
are either adding new staff
or staying with current staff, the addition of the new staff
would be through to address and funded
through some of the learning loss items
that are addressed in the Yes refunding and ARP funding.
Scenario B just provides for.
No new staff does show a tax increase
and both of them are also,
we're to the point now we can look at due
to how the next year's budget
is balanced with a tax increase.
We we able to spend the Esser funds up
through the 2324 school year so we can push that out one more year.
And so what you're what I've noted here,
unlike the other scenarios we've walked through where we needed
to use all of the Esser funding in 2223 to balance the budget,
showing with a tax increase that we don't need
to also use all those extra funds and in fact, we can split them in half
and use half of the money in 22, 23 and the other half in 2224.
We just can just pull up the scenario a
So this
and I can go into a little more detail or as much detail as the committee needs,
but this is just the summary page.
So if we're looking at the projections
of 20 under 23, that's the 2223 budget.
And as you can see with a 3.4% tax increase
and about
2.3 $2.4 million in Esser funds
that with even with adding additional staff,
we would have a balanced positive budget
for 2223.
Why should you pick five staff and not more.
Than the wrong.
Number?
Isn't it seven or eight?
There were seven or eight
that we did not replace the proposal
and now.
I have. To think back.
I think there were seven proposed,
but we had talked about in Cabinet putting it back to five.
Okay. That's why.
Okay, thanks. Yes.
And once again, this does split the the Esser
three funds over the years of 20 to 23 and 2324.
So where we were looking at 23, 24 being a larger
almost a three or 3 to $4 million deficit in that year.
And that's really the $4 million is is the Esser funds going away
And that's part of the whole will be challenged with filling
reason for proposing a tax increase for the next year.
But as you can see, by splitting the Esser funds between those two fiscal years,
actually
24 is also looking closer to being balanced.
Only about $600,000 to the negative and the 24 projection
does not have any tax increase for 24 in there.
And you have all the current
contracts that were negotiated.
18 correct, here, right?
Yes. So these are all the these are our best numbers
we've seen so far, the most accurate number.
They are updated based on the actions that for later tonight.
Okay.
It does not it still does not include
the pilot or the giant center
payment is not included at all in 23, 22, 23,
but it does come back in full in 23, 24 in the estimate that you're seeing there.
So there is about $600,000
in 2324.
That is not in 22, 20.
We can
talk a little bit or get into a little bit of
the update that was provided by H&R for the giant center.
If we want to get into it.
It's really very clear that
the prospects of getting a pilot payment
for 2223 are still fairly slim.
They're a little bit better than they were last year.
As we look forward, but they're still absolutely no guarantee
that the giant center payment will come back in 22, 23,
the rebound of the hotel tax, but also
somewhat of the economy in general and some of the challenges you know,
we're having them ourselves with with labor.
And it's it's happening the same way, too, to other companies
that even if you're able to if the virus is not keeping you from opening fully
the lack of qualified workers
may keep you from operating fully
and could hamper that that payment
in in 2324.
Missed your friends.
We lost it in 2020, 20, 21 or 2022.
Or do we get it in 2020?
We did not.
2020 was the first year we lost it three years.
So the 2020 2021 was the first year we didn't receive it.
2122 was the second year and prospectively 2223.
It does not appear like we'll get it.
So it is a three year period, but that includes looking forward
to include next fiscal year in that three.
Year and where
this might be a conversation that we might have to have other places
that we never figured out a solution to potentially get paid back payment
that could because there's no contract to protect us for that.
But we did talk about trying to work on an addendum to the contract,
but these are parties
that to agree to it, we never really that never move anywhere, right?
Correct. Okay.
Is that
dead or is there potential to revisit that?
Potential to revisit it? Yes. Okay.
I think we should do that.
But that's a conversation
to have at a different time.
So, Mike, this is Terry Singer.
This includes five staff.
It does for focused on learning loss. Yes.
And I guess you'll cover this, but whether we take
an five step or not, we would still be able to use all of the extra funds
in accordance with whatever way they're supposed to be used.
We wouldn't lose anything for not hiring five staff to focus on learning.
Loss would go to existing programs and existing staff for learning loss, correct?
Correct.
Well, the other some of the other portions of that. Yes.
Will go to work that we're already we're already doing.
So it wouldn't be additional increases to here.
The one thing I do want to caveat, though, under scenario B that I have in there,
you really have to show even better scenario because it does
not have those five individuals, but it also does not.
We would have to put in something for the learning loss
so there'd be an expense for programs or something like that.
That is not included in those numbers
because we've been focused on on the the,
the individuals
and not the programs.
Does anyone have.
Well, we still have about 12 more minutes, but does anyone have any more questions
or we do want to make the motion to propose to the board to not go above
the resolution of 3.4% at some point.
At each year?
Sorry, that's Mike Davis.
Each year we raise it 3.4.
How much is that? Approximately an income.
If if it were to happen in the second two years.
That over more than one year? Correct.
How much is that per what real estate tax for a house.
So Mike Michael, you're asking like what?
What is it to the individual
or what is how much money were to generate for the district?
The total generation.
3% is about $1.1 million.
Okay.
So it would it would be right around that each year that that.
Would that. Would generate.
But it changes each year based on whatever the index is correct.
This is Kathy sticker.
I do think
we need to raise the taxes to 3.4, but I don't think we need to go over it.
So definitely support a resolution to stay within it.
But I.
I just don't think we should go
lower than 3.4 just because
we haven't done anything for a couple of years.
This is this is Kip.
And and there's nothing that we've had in discussion
or information that has come to us in the last 2 to 3 months that indicates
that we need to apply for an exception to 3.4%.
And so I agree.
I think we just say we can live with a 3.4% max
for this next year, be done with it and move on.
I agree with that.
I don't think that we need to exceed that.
And I think that we still need to look through the budgeting process to determine
what percentage of tax
increase would be needed and and fiscally responsible.
But I don't think that we would need to seek an exception.
Does anyone else have any more questions
or comments or.
And since we have ten more minutes, it
why is it preferable to spend
as our funding over two years
just because it's hard
to figure out how to allocate it properly because of the grant parameters or.
I think some of that is also showing that that when you include
the tax increase
that it would,
you know, if we used if we increased the taxes on one year
and used the other funds all in the same year,
it shows us adding to our fund balance by about two and a half to $3 million.
So it kind of works in the same way that it would go over.
But I think from a planning perspective, it would be better for us to be able
to look at it and say, if we can split that in half,
we'll use this amount during this fiscal year knowing that we can use the other
half during the subsequent fiscal year, I think would be would be better
in that once it becomes fund balance, then it's not as delineated.
And so I think it would be easier for us to administer that in that way.
We would it wouldn't be over our
8% allocation of the fund balance.
Then the 8% allocation is
is is if it's uncommitted.
So if we found ourselves in that area, then you would just commit fund balance
for in this case we already have fund balance committed for for our health care.
If we would have surprises there, that was never
so we could do similar things,
things in that way.
If I can jump in part of our discussion in Cabinet,
Cathie, where we went from 7 to 5 staff members, was being able to spread
that Esser money over two years and that would give us a better idea
then of where our revenues are picking up to make sure that that sustainable also.
So it helped to balance that over that time and still got us
some of what we were looking for for those purposes
without necessarily strapping us with something that was not sustainable.
Okay.
So you wouldn't be as reliant on the Esser funding potentially
for the ongoing costs of those employees in the general operating fund?
Correct.
Because one of the things we don't want to do is add those employees back
into our payrolls and then two years from now, have to say, sorry, you're right.
You don't get to be here anymore. Mm hmm.
This is Terry Singer.
Is there anything we're talking about in the ad hoc facility planning group
that would suggest that any of this discussion
would would would be different.
All of that would be capital, like any of those types of things
would be capital fund expenditure versus operating for general fund.
So I don't think so.
Meaning that it would all be related to borrowing
versus coming out of borrowing or.
Money in the capital fund.
That would be for one time expenses versus ongoing
year to year. So really I think.
Just the elementary project in terms of it has the potential to have
I think all the other projects that are discussed were discussing that we already.
Would. Use capital funds for that.
The elementary depending on the size and scope of that,
you know, if if taxes were needed to be raised to raise more money,
that would have an effect here.
So that's the only one that would impact the debt service, potentially
any of the other capital facilities planning things that are in progress.
Yeah, don't impact debt service.
Yeah, I guess I'm just what
I don't disagree with everything that's been said so far.
I just wonder how soon then we have to think about
being able to
project the level of revenue
we're going to need to support whatever we decide to do on that.
Well,
if there's no further discussion, I'm going to ask for a
can I get a motion from the Finance Committee to pass a resolution onto the
for full board to stay within the index of 3.4%.
So my friends, at your.
Second Teri Center.
Hey, is there any discussion?
Okay, all those in favor, please say I.
Find. All those opposed to nay
on the resolution passes.
Thank you.
Okay.
Is there anything else for the good of the order?
And do we have any citizens here for comment?
Nope. No citizens.
Okay, then I believe we do not have a finance committee in December.
Is that correct?
That's correct.
Okay.
So may I have a motion
to adjourn the Finance Committee to the next meeting And January 20, 22.
So moved.
Second center. Okay.
All those in favor say I.
I. I. Meeting is adjourned.
Thank you very much. Thank you all very much.