Jackie, we don't see yourself up here yet. >> Oh, we do know. We're good, Jackie. >> Okay, >> superintendent law. Our uh madam chair, members of the board, our first item tonight is a presentation from the American Indian Parent Advisory Committee, uh Minnesota State Statute Section 124D 170 or 78 states that the American Indian Parent Advisory Committee must meet by March 1st of each year to review the district's American Indian Education Plan and vote whether or not the committee concurs with that educational offerings that have been extended by the district and have been meeting the needs of American Indian students. The outcome of this vote along with the supporting documentation must be reported to the school board and submitted to the department of education. The vote and resolution must be presented to the school board by one or more members of the American Indian parent advisory committee and as formally reflected in documentation provided by the department of education and submitted within the next week. Welcome. I think Oh, there we go. Which is uh Shosonyi. I am a member of the Northwestern Band of Shosonyi. our tribal homelands uh ranged from Nevada to Utah, Idaho, Wyoming, and Montana. Uh I am the APAC chair for the Minnitankka School District, and we would like to uh fill you in and do our formal presentation uh on what our vote is for the year that has to do with the American Indian program. So, the Minnitankka Public School District currently has 156 self-identified American Indian students. Uh, and we had one part-time employee from uh the 2024 school 2024 2025 school year uh to the fall or the February of this year at about 10 hours a week. If you did not know, and I find that a lot of people don't, the Minnesota American Indian Education Program is a statemandated initiative designed to support the unique educational and cultural needs of American Indian students. Um, there is a long list of statutes and you have some before you uh and you can look some more up, but uh it aims to increase academic achievement and graduation rates while fostering cultural identity. One of the things that uh we come across a lot is a misunderstanding as to what and why there is aid. Um and that has extended as uh I am an educator. I am a um a American Indian uh speaker and I do professional development. And one of the questions I we ask everyone when we are dealing with educators is do you know what sovereignty is? Do you know what a treaty is? Do you know what a reservation is? Do you know what a tribe is? And I am surprised when some of our educators don't know what those terms mean. Um, and a lot of people don't understand that the aid is rooted in the treaties that have existed since the beginning of this country. In fact, the United States was making treaties before we had completely broken from England to create our nation. It was one of the ways that we did give ourselves legitimacy was by making treaties with other nations. Um so the history of educational aid for American Indians is rooted in 19th century treaties that exchange vast territories for promises of funding goods and services including specific allocations for schools. And while these early provisions were often used for assimilation, they established the legal foundation for the modern day state funded programs we see today. This is from the MDE website. So this the intent of the American Indian Education Aid is to enable districts and schools to scale up and enhance American Indian education programs and initiatives or in the case of those newly eligible to receive aid to build sustainable programs that are culturally and academically tailored to American Indian students. So to have a program, these are the requirements. The district or school must have a minimum of 20 American Indian students on the October Mars reporting deadline. We obviously have more than that. The district or school must have an American Indian parent advisory committee, an APAC, or be working collaboratively with the Office of American Indian Education to form an APAC. Um, and districts and schools that are required to have the uh APAC, they have to have had the previous year had a compliance um annual compliance vote, which is what we're doing today to present to you. So, the current count is 156. We have a chair, a vice chair, social media adviser, student representative who's sitting over here, and 19 members of the committee. that regularly vote and attend. The APAC is a distinctly unique parent committee unlike any other. Um it serves in an advisory role to the district and help to ensure that American Indian students are receiving culturally relevant and equitable educational opportunities. Apex are critical to the achievement and success of American Indian students statewide and their presence, input, and knowledge is key to strengthening district and parent partnerships. For the APAC to make informed decisions, the district must afford the committee the information and data needed to make sound recommendations. This information includes, but is not limited to, testing data, attendance data, graduation rates, and student count information. In addition to this valuable work, the APAC and district must closely collaborate each spring on annual compliance, also known as the vote of concurrence or non-concurrence. Annual compliance is a mid-year reflection point for the committee and its own unique requirements within state statute. We are here today after uh a bit of growth is what you're going to find out. In 2023, we had 44 self-identified students. In 2024, we had 45 self-identified students. In 2025, we had 146 self-identified students. And that was not because hundreds kids moved in. That was because our MARS coordinator went through and hand selected all of the enrollment forms and found that Skyward likes to put if you put American Indian and another bubble that you mark, it will put you in a category all of its own, which is called two or more races. And no one had gone through to look for our students. um in 2024 they were identified that August. My sister Mary Hamlin over there is just stepped down as the cultural liaison for the district. She was the APAC chair starting in uh 2023 2024 and I was the vice APAC chair. And what happened was we went to the Minnesota Indian Education Conference and found out that that was common. And so we came back to the district and by August we had identified 100 more students. This number is important because when we hit 100 students according to statute, there are some things that the district needs to provide. This is statute 124D.74 American Indian education programs. Now, your slide, you should have a, you know, the packet for you does have a thing that says slides. They're not really numbered. So the slides are in kind of paragraph form, but the statute is program services designed to increase completion and graduation rates of American Indian students must emphasize academic achievement, retention and attendance, development of support services for staff, including inservice training and technical assistance in methods of teaching American Indian pupils. Our students are unlike other students. We have a unique history. We have a unique relationship with education and we have uh tribal sovereignty, provision of career counseling to American Indian pupils, modification of curriculum, instruction methods and administration procedures to meet the needs of American Indian pupils and instruction in American Indian language, literature, history and culture. Districts offering programs may make contracts for the provision of program services by establishing cooperative liaison with the tribal programs and American Indian social services agencies. These programs may also be provided as components of early education and family education programs. That is the statute. So the district needs to help us out with these things. Instructional responsibilities cultural curriculum providing direct instruction in American Indian language, literature, history and culture. Academic achievement implementing programs designed to increase completion and graduation rates by emphasizing achievement retention and attendance. There is an achievement gap in Minnitonka. There's an achievement gap across the state. Curriculum modification adapting existing curriculum and instructional methods to make them relevant to the needs and cultural heritage of American Indian pupils. Up until a few years ago, Excelsier when teaching about um history in America would go out to the field and they would do a Oklahoma land grab and they would grit out the field and they would give little flags to the kids and they would tell the kids on your mark set, go because that's what they did in Oklahoma. You came, it was a field day, right? You went and you stuck your flag on your piece of land and that was your home, your homestead for free. As an American Indian, that is really hard to watch curriculum modification. And when we brought it to the school and said this is not um this is a is a traumatic experience for our students. They modified the curriculum. Career guidance providing tailored career counseling services to support post-secary preparation. Uh there are a number of opportunities that our students are missing out on. At the moment we have things like ASUS which is American Indian science and engineering. They had a conference here. Nobody knew about it right. We have uh the Ethel Curi scholarship. There are a bunch of different opportunities and different um career paths and programming that our students are available to have and we need those opportunities to find early childhood learning integrating American Indian education components into early childhood and family education programs. The administration and staff responsibilities under this programming is professional development, developing support services for staff, including inservice training and technical assistance on teaching methods for American Indian pupils. Program innovation, conducting research projects to evaluate and implement innovative teaching approaches. Administration adaptation, modifying administrative procedures to better accommodate and meet students needs. Community partnerships, establishing cooperative liaison and contracts with tribal programs and American Indian social service agencies for program deliver and the parental advisory maintaining an American Indian parent advisory committee to ensure programs are planned and evaluated in consultation with parents. This is hard. We are issuing a vote of non-concurrence based on the district's failure to meet statutory obligations and provide equitable support for American Indian students. Specifically, our non-concurrence is rooted in the following staff and funding. The district had failed to appoint a coordinator to start the school year. As I said, the statute is when you hit a 100 students that you need to have a dedicated coordinator. We hit that in August of 2024, which meant we went for 2024 into 2025 with no coordinator. The district was aware. Um, furthermore, while peer programs of this size typically employ two full-time staff members, we were offered a single 30-hour position this year with no benefits funded entirely by our own aid rather than a district investment. Curriculum and representation. There's a lack of dedicated language and culture classes for our students which fall in the statute and APEC has been denied a seat on the curriculum advisory board. Consultation. The district has not consulted APE on American Indian related curriculum as required. We are teaching arts and letters. The first book in fifth grade is about the Nez Pierce. Our AP pack did not see it. Um, right now there's no social studies curriculum review. We have not been consulted. Um, when you teach the history of the United States, you cannot teach it without touching on the people whose land this nation was founded on. Professional development teachers have not received APAC vetted professional development and counseling staff are not adequately trained on the specific opportunities available to our students. Uh there was a this was not the district's um responsibility, but we did have an issue with the uh teacher union. They brought in a person to do to up your license, your teaching license. You need so many uh professional development or CEC's that have to do with American Indian culture or history. and they brought in a resource that the AP pack was not had not vetted and was not we thought culturally responsive. It was two Caucasian women who were teaching it. Um and we found a lot of inaccuracies in their presentation. We share the goal of student success, but current data from the Minnesota Report Card highlight persistent achievement and opportunity gaps for our students. These disparities include attendance. We are 5% um points lower. Our academic pro progress is 5% slower. The MCA does not meet category is 10 points higher. Math and reading proficiency 5 to 10 points below district averages. And students receiving sped services and or accommodations are 38 students which is 24% of our population. So this is the statute that deals with uh the curriculum issue that we listed out right parent and community participation. The American Indian parent advisory committee must develop its recommendations in consultation with the curriculum advisory committee required by section 12B11 subdivision 3. This committee must afford parents the necessary information and the opportunity effectively to express their views concerning all aspects of American Indian education and the educational needs of the American Indian children enrolled in the school or program. School districts, charter schools, and tribal contract schools must ensure that programs are planned, operated, and evaluated with the involvement of and in consultation with the parents of the American Indian students served by the programs which is the APAC. Subdivision 7 American Indian culture and language classes. A district or participating school that conducts American Indian education programs under section 12471 must provide American Indian culture and language classes [gasps] if at least 5% of students are American Indian students or 100 or more students are American Indian students. We've hit that number. That is a magic number, the 100. We do not currently have um any language classes when we have our monthly APC meetings. We do do a cultural activity but it is not under a curriculum. It is not under a uh licensed teacher although technically I am a licensed teacher in American Indian language history and culture but I am a parent volunteer American Indian education program coordinators and professionals. We talked about this as with the fact that we had started the school year without a dedicated coordinator. Um and this is 124D.76. So in addition to employing American Indian language and culture education teachers, each district or participating school providing programs pursuant to section 124D uh may employ pair professionals. PAR professionals must not be employed for the purpose of supplanting American Indian language and culture education teachers. Any district or participating school that conducts American Indian education programs pursuant to section 124D uh 71 must employ one or more full-time or part-time dedicated American Indian education program coordinators in a district with a 100 or more state identified American Indian students enrolled in the district. A dedicated American Indian education program coordinator must promote communication, understanding, and cooperation between the schools and the community and must visit the homes of children who are to be enrolled in an American Indian education program in order to convey information about the program. That is 156 students that need to be visited by one person right currently as um I believe that the uh district has hired someone to be the coordinator starting next month. Recommendations. We are required to give you our list of recommendations as to how these things could be resolved and would put us in a vote of concurrence for next year. staff and funding. We would immediately hire or designate a dedicated American Indian educator coordinator to ensure program leadership in a place without further delay. 35 students have an IEP or a 504 and need cultural representation as well as 1567 students need home visits. In the packet I gave you, there is a one uh page thing that talks about um cultural liaison for special education. Um and in the state of Minnesota, that is one of the things that uh the APAC and the American Indian Age Education Program um are put into as a a provision um is that they should have the ability to have their cultural liaison come with them or represent them at an IEP. Um actually any person with a cultural um background can actually require or can request that. Um we do establish full-time positions. We want two people to do the work because we believe it is too much for one and we do that within the recommendations of several other programs across the state that have at least 100 students. You cannot expect one person to visit 157 homes and also be able to teach language and culture classes and keep track of all of their needs and wants. Especially if you have a student who has um a behavior issue or something that's going to require time every week for two weeks to check in with a student and make sure that they are getting the supports they need. The district uh general fund investment We would like you to allocate general fund dollars to support these positions rather than relying solely on state American Indian education aid, ensuring that aid is used to supplement rather than supplant basic district responsibilities. Curriculum representation implement language and culture classes. Develop and launch American Indian language and culture classes as required by the 2023 legislation update for districts with 100 plus state identified American Indian students. And the APAC board seat would formally appoint an APAC designated to represent to a permanent seat on the curriculum advisory board to ensure statutory compliance and native voice in district-wide academic planning. For consultation and accountability, there would be a formal consultation protocol. Establish a mandatory monthly consultation meeting between the district curriculum department and the APAC to review all American Indian related instructional materials before they are implemented. Data transparency provide APAC with regular access to student achievement data, attendance rates, and budget expenditures to allow for informed advisory decisions. Professional development and counseling vetted staff training mandate that all teachers complete professional development on American Indian history and culture that has been reviewed and approved by APAC. If the vote is one of non-concurrence, the committee members must provide written recommendations for improvement to the school board. I have now presented them with you to you at the time of the presentation. In the case of non-concurrence, the school board is given 60 days in which to respond in writing to the committee's recommendations. The board response must be signed by the entire school board and submitted to both the American Indian parent advisory committee and to the department of education. The resolution must be accompanied by parent advisory committee meeting minutes that show they have been appraised by the district on the goals of the Indian education program plan and the measurement of progress toward these goals. So within the packet there's slides there's also statutes there's also a outline of um how we would like to see our dream as a model what what the roles would look like. Um, I also sent the email that I sent to David Law on August 22nd, which also reiterates what we were asking. And you will find um the at the very back of the packet is a paper called IEA. IEFA is indic indigenous education for all. And that is a completely and utterly separate issue. That is a different state statute that is um applies to all schools in Minnesota whether you have 100 students or not. It is a separate program. Um it is the coordination with the Minnesota Department of Education Indian Education um department and there are resources on there from each tribal federally recognized tribal nation that are to be put into curriculum as soon as they become ready. There are not um as many as I would hope for right now as those of those curriculum resources, but the direction is is that those should be implemented immediately as they become available. It takes time to get a tribal government to get together and to agree on what they want taught about their history and their culture. Do you have any questions? No questions. Sally, sorry. >> Yeah, we're getting a little feedback on our lines. No. Um, thank you. No, just wanted to thank you for that. Um, the presentation, the way the information was framed. I have seen some of this information before and just appreciated how it was framed. It helped me to digest some of the um concerns in a different way. So, just wanted to thank you for that, the time that went into that. >> Thank you very much. We appreciate your time. Okay. Can I ask you >> Mike? >> Awesome. >> Can I just ask a process question? >> Sorry, Megan. >> Um, so as a board, we have 60 days to respond. Um, what does that look like? Do we come back together and discuss it? Do like I I just I don't have a good idea of what the next steps are or what that looks like. >> I'll provide a written summary to the board of how districts are expected to respond to non-compliance and whether it involves another board meeting or not. I'll [clears throat] give it to you in writing. >> Sorry about that. Didn't see your hand. Okay. Moving forward, review of policy number 707. Superintendent Law. Board members, we're constantly updating our policy based on changes in legislation or as our policies get outdated or as they become disaligned from our practices. Tonight, executive director of HR and general counsel, Angie Flowers, and our transportation coordinator, John Mley, are going to provide an update on policy 707, transportation of public school students. Oh, there you go. Thank you. So, as Superintendent Law stated, we will be um going over some of the changes that we are proposing to policy 707, transportation of public school students. Most of the changes you'll see throughout the policy is really language cleanup. We went through it and we were very intentional about how we describe students, how we describe behaviors, and just making sure that it was respectful language and that the language was clear. So, if I could draw your attention to page two of the red line version, um, one of the changes you'll see is under resident eligibility, C, fee for service. The way that fee for service works is that students who live less than two miles from the school to which they are assigned are required to pay a transportation fee set annually by the school board. What you'll notice below that are the exceptions and we have some revised language in um item one based on some case law and current practice. So students who have IEPs and receive special education services that are within district boundaries, they are not charged a fee. However, if a student who is receiving those services and the family chooses to transport on a bus, not specifically for students receiving special education services, then the fee would apply if they're living within that less than two mile radius. Anything more on that questions on that? >> You're good. >> Okay. Um, I would like to draw your attention to page five for the next change. the changes um before that are really just the the language cleanup. Actually, if you could turn back to page three, I want to just point out one thing under other policy considerations. So, under prorated fees, you'll see that space will be reserved for students who purchase a bus pass. And that is really again just cleanup language that if a student or family has reserved that seat on a bus, we are not able to assign it to another student. So we just wanted to be clear on that. Okay. Now we can go to page five. This is in the section item B, use of videotape. Does everyone see that? We have some strikeouts there. Um, that's mainly because the videotape that'll be private data. That data may only be accessible um, in certain circumstances. That's going to be by the parents if their students are the subject of that video. So, they would have to make a request and we'd have to look at that situation to see if that's something um that they would be able to view or not. There's also um comments about how this video is stored and how long. We don't store the video footage. We're not in control of that. That's through our contractor. So, you'll also see that that language is stricken for the transportation of nonresident students. That is really clarifying that we don't transport non-resident students into our district. That is our current pro practice. That is not a change. Anything else to add on A or B, Jonathan? >> Okay. So, both of those strikeouts, it's current practice, right? and going to page seven, looking at uh there's a strikeout. Um it starts with consistent with the authority granted by Minnesota law that's under D1. It's talking about the policy and the purpose of the uh policy itself. and we had that at the beginning and the purpose is really to make sure that we're providing that safe and efficient transportation to students and that we're following the law. So that language was somehow in the middle of an old policy. So we struck that and it's just a lot cleaner. The next change you'll notice beyond language cleanup will be on page 10. And this is also current practice if you look at transportation of students by staff. Um transportation is allowed in necessary circumstances by principles, assistant principles and social workers. That is for safety reasons and liability reasons. So we wanted to be crystal clear on that point and those are the changes that we have for you. Any questions? >> Thank you, Angie. Miss Flowers, Dan. >> Yeah, I'm just just curious if when we the the video the use of video tape. I mean, I know that's not a a thing that's actually used much anymore. Is this a like legally a definitional issue or is this fine to just leave as is? >> Let me go back to that. I mean, we have video on the school buses, so I want to see exactly what you're referring to in the language. >> The the the the phrase the noun video tape since that's not everything's typically stored digitally at this point. I just want >> you could just say video. >> Yeah. If it >> I don't sure I don't know exact I don't think they're using tape. Video tape. >> Yeah. [laughter] No, I I I just video recording. >> Video recording. Okay, we can do that. >> Digital we send >> Yeah. Yeah, >> that's a good point. >> And then one question if I may. >> David, I don't know if you know this, but I mean in bus stops, do we do we know if we have any students who have to walk half a mile to reach their bus stops or not? If the if the limits are set at like point4 and 6 miles. >> We do not. >> No, >> we just we we we had to set a limit of that. So So we were kind of we kind of mirrored upon other districts in our area. you know what's fair for the younger kids and the older kids, but no, we usually don't have that far distance. >> Thank you, >> Megan. Um question in the kindergarten transportation um top of page four talks about kids kindergarteners riding midday buses. Um I think we have only full day kindergarten at this point. So did we leave that in there just in case or >> can you start over again? I'm sorry. Uh top of page four, it talks about kindergarteners riding midday buses >> either to or from school. Um to my knowledge, we don't have any kindergarters riding like midday buses at this point. So is that just an >> is that just an artifact? Are we leaving it in just in case we regress or >> that would have been previous practice and I suppose it's left in there for that reason like you said if we end up doing a midday. Okay. >> But yeah, kindergarteners all day. Mike. >> Yeah. Just a quick question about the the stricken portion of the use of videotape. Uh part four there. >> Um you said that it's actually since it's in the possession of the the providers uh we don't necessarily need a policy. Do we need a statement in there saying that we are either requiring it by use of our contract so that they they are required to retain that that data um for the for that twoe period um or is or maybe it already is but do we need uh do we need a statement of policy to make sure that that is included in the contract in the future? >> It it's we don't need it in in policy because we would we could cover that in contract. I'm not exactly sure how long they keep it. I do believe it's longer than two weeks. Um I know anytime that we've needed something, we've been able to get it right away. Um so, but it's something we could consider. We'd have to discuss a timeline, but I'm not Do you know how long they keep it? >> I don't know exactly how long they keep it for. The only issue we'd have to find is that if you go a week or two weeks without a bus incident, you're not going to ever pull that video. So then it's going to loop and then re-record over itself. That's that would be if we if we pigeon hole oursel into something like that, then we'd have to start pulling tape and and archiving it. >> Anyone else? Karen, I I guess I have a question about that. Following up on that, so usually if there is an incident, does it usually fall within a couple of days or what would be practing to pull that? Yeah, usually what'll happen is we'll get a call of a fight on a bus and then that goes to the principles or the APS at the schools and then that email will usually come to myself and the manager per student and they immediately pull a tape of that time frame and then the school AP will get that and they investigate and then they either deem something happened or they don't and then they go from there and the video is held by us and by the school I imagine at least for the Yeah, it it's a pretty fast turnaround when we hear of an incident and we need to look at video footage. We've never had a delay from first student. >> Probably because we don't use the tapes anymore. [laughter] >> Anyone else? Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Good job. >> Okay. Too close to these. Okay. Next is discussion on our legislative position statements for 2026. Superintendent Law. >> Madam Chair, members of the board, you have seen this topic before. Um, our legislative position statements are the same as have been presented to the board in December with some additions. And I'll tell you how we got to this point. We actually reviewed with our case committee chairs, Sally, our board member Sally Brown, board member Karen Jordan. We reviewed the Association of Metropolitan School Districts legislative priorities with our case committee in this room, roughly 40 committee members, and then from that process talked about how we might prioritize anything beyond our legislative uh financial asks. And what you see in front of you is a combination of two things. Additional areas of interest, not to distract from our primary need, which is financial things that surface either on our schoolboard goals and based on community feedback or on AMSDs or both. So for the benefit of the public and we'll approve these with board with assuming the board approves this tonight that we move it forward. The five areas that we will be attending to are support efforts to enhance school safety including community- based mental health stabilized compensatory funding. There's been a that topic is related to as all students were provided free lunch. The counts of students that qualify as living in poverty has been difficult for the state and it's making some wide swings. So, we're supportive of some consistency in compensatory education funding, supporting a re-evaluation of Minnesota's assessment system. We've had lots of conversations about the timing of student assessments and whether or not our students think they're valuable. We did have a conversation in the room about uh the 11th grade MCA test. Our students take that after they register for courses their senior year, oftentimes finding out that result in August. Um, and our students self-reported that they don't have any connection to that data point. They really prepare for the ACT test. I'm not suggesting that that would be a replacement, but parts of that system need to be reviewed. Support an emphasis on student experiential learning opportunities. That is 100% one of our schoolboard goals. One of our things that our students report is is high quality in our system. And support research about student technology in schools, including the use of AI, something that surfaced on our community survey. So anything and that bills come in that area, we would feel comfortable saying that's an area of interest with our board. I would share it back with our case committee. We could gather board feedback. Um but if a bill came forward that supports community based mental health, we would have the board support to say yes, we that is consistent with our expectations. Those are the modifications of our legislative platform. I will tell you our goal next year is to take the AMSD platform earlier in the fall and run it by our case committee again along with our board goals and then by December have a similar version that we're attending to. I'd open up for comments >> without any I'll bring it back for board approval and we are planning to use these. We have some elected officials come into this room tomorrow morning. We're going to preview this with them and tell them what that's what we're interested in. Thank you. >> Any comments? >> Okay. U may I have a motion? >> We don't. >> Oh, no. I'm sorry. >> Next up, discussion on financial stability and enrollment. Superintendent Law >> as Carrie Voltz will be bringing out the um presentations that we shared at the last board meeting. Madam Chair and members of the board, I will provide a quick community update on what was presented publicly on uh February 5th and then we'll uh bring this back for discussion at the board's request. And I'll share just a little bit of the background of that discussion. In brief, one of the schoolboard goals is long-term financial stability, including uh the administration should be recommending adjustments to enrollment, reductions to expenditures, advocacy for legislative changes that will address funding shortfalls. Perfect timing. Our previous topic was recommendations for adjusted legislative action. We have over the last two years made about $8 million in budget reductions. For the benefit of the audience, I'm skipping over the catchy pictures Mr. Bourgeoa normally would cover. Um, as a reminder, about 50% of our budget comes from the per pupil allocation of the general education revenue from the state. Categorical funding is about 21%. I remind our community that we receive 320th out of 329 districts in the state. Very low recipient of categorical funding in Minnetonka. board approved lo board approved local optional revenue 5% voter approved operating levy 16% we have hit the cap on both of those um federal funding which amounts to about 1.8% 8% of our current budget, primarily categorical, not guaranteed. There's a graph that shows that um our resident enrollment has hovered started in 2000 at about 7,600 is down to about 6,700. And yet our total enrollment is about 11,500. Note that includes in person, online, our sale program. Um, and just that's the the in-person target that I'm currently working with is 11,250. So about 250 additional students in those other programs there. You I'll remind you and the members of the public that as we were growing in enrollment from 2006 to 2022, we didn't make any cuts, but when we hit our cap, we had to start making cuts again. Since that time, we've done a a significant number of additions at all of our buildings or during that period of time to address additional students, including traffic, drop off and pickup, additional serving lines at every school, additional restrooms that are coming, additional small group space, additional gym space at every every site, including middle school and high school. Our outy years budget currently as of the board adopted amended budget on December 11th shows us for the current school year with a surplus for next year a surplus but for the following year about a $ 1.8 million deficit. So, I will share new information that as the state has adjusted their inflationary increase, there's maybe a $250,000 to our benefit swing, which would maybe bring that deficit down to 1.5 million that following year. That those would be reductions we'd consider in the fall if we made these adjustments. Um it looks like if we made a 250 or 200 student improvement and again I had shared a slide saying that if we spread it equally across all schools we wouldn't ever knowing we have more space in some schools than others. That would not be our goal. But if it did, the worst case scenario is somewhere between 15 and 25 students per school. Um, with MHS, a bigger school, 60 students. Um, we would target our current, we would continue to target our current class sizes, trying not to put students in in buildings where it would put them significantly outside our class size range. If the board decides this as a solution to address our long-term financial stability, um it would give us another year plus of of not making cuts and another year for the state to act. Um this would raise taxes. If the state isn't weighing in with additional resources at the state level, any solution to address our budget challenges impacts taxes. This would roughly be a 1.7% increase in our residents property taxes because of these new students. If we were to raise it through local optional revenue or voter approved levy, those would also be an increase. I don't have the estimate on how that would factor into finding this amount of money. We haven't got that far yet. Um, but it any solution short of the state making an investment will raise our local property taxes. I just ran through some samples of of what reductions might look like. Um, since this has been adjusted, you know, it in within the last few days, this impact of 1.5 million would be spread across all parts of our system through a process similar to last time. So really, I think the discussion is uh twofold. One, are we constantly evaluating programs and trying to make sure that all of our programs have a return on investment? We are and we will continue to do that. We are always looking at um enrollment and thinning classes with low enrollment and um balancing out where we have demand. And you recently approved two courses in the high school, one that didn't run and one that needed a new name. We're always looking at um do we keep classes that expensive classes are really low enrolled classes uh that are are unique pathways and so we're trying to rebrand them so we can continue to offer them and raise enrollment so that they're financially sustainable and the other part is facilities managing the pinch points in our facilities. I shared earlier, we just met with the city of Minnetonka on a new plan for Mme's, parent drop off and pickup that we think we can stand up for next fall regardless of what we do with enrollment. We're committed to it. We're always looking to address those concerns, but I want to make sure the board has an opportunity to discuss this. Um, we have this would be the third board meeting um to discuss this. At the board's direction, we'll either table this and not bring it back for a vote or we'll bring it back for a vote in March. So, I'm really looking for your feedback and what you'd like to see from administration. >> Thank you, Superintendent Lot. I have a question before I open it up. This when you said increasing the enrollment, the 200 students over two years, right? >> Right. >> Is this 1.7 local tax is that per year? >> No, it's total for >> total. Okay. So, that would be cut in half basically. Perfect. Thank you. I'd like to open it up questions from the board. Tanya. >> Well, I'm just thinking about our uh first presentation from the I want to use the right acronym. >> APAC. Thank you. Um and how we've got some things that we have to work out with hiring and since we're out of compliance, how that will affect right that's going to make the budget harder. So, where does that fit in with all this? And what are maybe these are two separate conversations, but >> well, I I think the general conversation is and uh board member Jordan asked this last time. Um does this add back anything? No. These budget assumptions assume that we're spending how we're spending currently. So there isn't any I mean we don't really have the ability to reinvest. I mean, we're if we can cut something and add something else, um, that's sort of our we're in a trade-off mode more than anything, but there isn't any room for new additions. >> Dan, >> um, first thought is I think we kind of owe it to the administration and owe it to our constituents to bring this back for a vote. either way. Um because as much as we don't like the decision, I think we've got to provide some direction on it. Um and that choice seems to be, you know, we we either are in favor of a cut or in favor of increasing enrollment. Um and both obviously have their downsides. I think what I think what I I would like to see and I think what a lot of the community would like to see is the sort of concrete steps that we're taking like at MME to address areas of inconvenience. You know, if the taxpayers are kicking in more money, you know, it it would really be helpful to to show and demonstrate how we're alleviating their pain points and to and going beyond just keeping an eye on it. I know we're always keeping an eye on it. We're always keeping an eye on class sizes. We're always doing our best with the resources we have to um make that as optimal for our students and educators as possible. But I if if we're going to do this, which I would I would much rather raise revenue than than cut expenses, I think we just owe it to our various constituencies to, you know, m make a handful of promises as best we can to go along with what we're asking for here. >> Thank you, Karen. >> Yeah, I think well said, Dan. I I would agree that I think we do owe it to kind of everyone involved to look at bringing it back for a vote. I I really wish that we weren't in in this position that we have to um we have to make such tough decisions when we are a district that really does a great job with the resources that we have. We stretch every dollar and I think later on we'll have a meeting up up there and talk about some more stretching of what we've done with dollars. And I think that I would really like to make a plea to the this room and to the community that this district has worked hard and has done a great job. The money is in St. Paul. Um this is kind of the lever that we have here in Minnetonka, but the real big lever is in St. Paul and everyone's up for election again this year. So, I'd encourage everyone to talk with their legislators and candidates just to remind them that education is in the constitution and that's one thing that we can offer our young people to get them ready to go out in the world and be successful. And so, um, I'd love to be able to pull that lever, but this is for us probably the only lever that we have in Minnetonka. >> Thank you. And I was just thinking through this and being strategic kind of like what Dan said about these decisions particularly at the elementary level. So if we're getting close to our targets um you know if we're like two over or one to two over students for those teachers that already have you know burdens um considering paras if possible um just to help them out because they're already you know they have a lot to to manage in those elementary. So if that's something we can maybe be really strategic about when we are thinking of increasing our enrollment because like Dan said I I don't we don't want to cut our most our important teachers. Um but you know revenue is really important as well. So if we can think about paras as part of this process I think that might be beneficial as well. >> Megan um I'm still just really conflicted. Um, I recognize that this is the only lever that we have. Um, like while it's great to go and lobby at the capital, we can't control that and we can't control that outcome. Um, I'm I'm also just cognizant of that four, six years ago, the number one thing that I heard from district constituents was open enrollment has gotten too big. it is, you know, that it's pinching our system. And while I'm aware that we have things coming with the facilities project over the next couple of years, they're not in place yet. And so I'm really just wrestling with that. Um, I hope to kind of get more feedback from the community. I think people are really stressed about property taxes and you kind of alluded to that earlier. Um, but you know, I think the perception of us perhaps increasing property taxes while also making bigger class. I think we just have to be super strategic and I think like Dan said, have concrete plans. So, I don't know if there's like some sort of hybrid like we have extra space now that we have the Vanmo building. So, I can justify putting extra bodies at the high school level knowing that we have that extra space and the ability to run more classrooms. Um, or if we can, you know, only fill the buildings that aren't at capacity yet. Um, so I don't know if there's some sort of creative enrollment cap where it um, you know, leaves some of our buildings just untouched because I just really I don't know. I'm really struggling with the idea of putting more strain. We're hearing, you know, we're hearing that the staff are feeling stressed, that psychiatric needs are higher, that, you know, there's a lot of that already. And so while I I know it's 16 bodies in a building doesn't sound like a lot. If that's one more student to a teacher in a classroom, that is that's more work. Um so I just I don't know. I I hope that we can have maybe, you know, I do think we have to bring it back for a vote vote. I like I I don't think we should shut it down now, but I would love to see some practical ways to kind of amilarate some of the things that we hear about from the community because I think that >> what would that look like? Because I've listed all the things we've done physically. I've listed our class sizes. So, I I'm I'm just like I want to meet that expectation and I'm not sure what else I would bring. So, what what would that look like? Um I Like I think that the MME drop off is like a very practical creative like right like so that's been the number one thing we hear from the MME community. So if we can come back and say hey we have a plan for that. Um I think justifying the high school level by hey we have a whole new building we have more space than we had a few years ago. you know, even they could probably house a hundred, you know, if if if there's the demand for that, we could probably put all hundred at the high school level with that extra space at the Vanmo building. So, I don't know if there's some just ways to kind of anticipate where the concerns are going to be so that we can kind of think it through or sometime, you know, with the property tax sometimes when Paul does like when we did the um the referendum it was, hey, this is what it looks like for a house is $500,000. This is what the tax increase would look like. Because if somebody recognizes that it's going to be the amount of a Starbucks over a month, that is way easier than to a pill to swallow, right? Like so if maybe we can have some sort of like >> we can certainly >> this is what it would look like at this level because we >> we're going to hear that from our community. I guarantee that we're going to have folks that come back and say I don't want a property tax increase. Why are you doing this again? So if we can say, you know, oh, it's re we hear you, but that we did the numbers and it's really only going to be blank. I think that that's an easier pill to swallow for people. So, I think just maybe maybe it's not maybe it's not plans that I'm looking for, but maybe it's um responses to kind of the anticipated concerns me >> and also like maybe some practical plans, you know, like I know that Groveland and Scenic are like filled, right? And we're going to be adding that extra loop at Groveland, but it's not going to be there yet next year. So, I feel like folks at Groveland are going to say, I we can't hold more students. And we're going to hear that from staff, too. But we do have buildings that aren't at capacity. So, it could be, hey, it's a hundred students, but we're going to put 80 of them at the high school level and 20 of them at under capacity buildings. I think >> that would go over much better than, oh, we're going to put more in each building, but we can't tell you exact numbers or something. So, I I think just thinking through what are going to be um because I don't want to get back to that place where everybody's mad about open enrollment because open enrollment is so important for our district and it's what allows us to maintain the programming but the public perception has to be there also and like it wasn't very long ago that people were very angry about open enrollment and I don't want to get back to that place. >> Sorry that was really long. Sally, Sally, and then Tom. >> Yeah. So, thank you, Megan, because that's consistent with what I said at the last study session, bringing back from the finance advisory committee where we heard similar sentiment, which is there just needs to be robust communications around this to anticipate what we know people are going to say because they were very much fresh in their minds about that this was a big issue not that many years ago. And it hasn't. We may have a perception that has died away, but I think it's going to come roaring back if we don't really get ahead of it. Tanya, >> can you just remind me uh where do most of our open enrollment kids go? Elementary, middle, or high school? >> Across all. >> Okay. It's not like a consistent pattern that we see. >> The biggest chunks of new students every year, kindergarten, sixth grade, and nth grade. >> Okay. Thank you, Karen. One thing I would say and um I can echo about messaging is always very important. Um, one thing that that in the messaging now that will probably be different than it was, you know, four, five, six years ago is that because of budget cuts, we have lost 40 teachers and 40 paras. And when I was door knockocking this fall, I heard a lot about class sizes. Some I I remember talking to some people that, you know, my junior came home and is like, "Wow, my whatever whatever class is really big." And when when I was hearing from parents, they were talking about, you know, the kids coming and saying, "My class sizes are big," you know, and that was because when you cut, then there are fewer teachers for each class. And in this case, um, if we don't do something like this and don't get money from the state and we have to cut teachers, that's going to increase class then class sizes will am I correct, superintendent law that class sizes will go up. So this is our way of >> this is our way of like >> it's counterintuitive but this gives us a cushion to support more class size >> right right it's or something >> right okay that's what I thought in my head and that's how is that cuts will make bigger classes Dan >> um I wonder if we need a more concrete understanding of what we stand to lose if we have to cut $1.8 8 million. Not just not just FTEEs and things like that, but but practically what does that mean? What are we going to have to go tell parents that that we're getting rid of that their students can no longer have? >> And if we would do that through a process, I I couldn't do that before the March meeting just because we we went to every building and sent out surveys across the district for about 3 months when we went through that budget reduction process last time. So I I I prated it like what it looks like. Um we are you know we are >> um >> you know is is is programming at risk and things like that you know like it >> every low enrollment course in middle school and high school whatever those would be next year would be the things that kids get rolled into higher enrollment classes that that's the programming but to to share the specific lowest enrollment courses and some of that um like if we allowed a group of students to start 9th 10th 11th grade. We're not going to cut it their 12th grade year when it's part of a culminating piece. We would just stop it in the future. >> So, it's hard to >> and I don't and I don't want to cause unnecessary alarm or anything like that, but I but I just a more if I don't know, we just might need to find a more tangible way to say what we're saying for for folks and what that means for the student experience. >> Again, >> um to piggyback on that, I I think we have to do some of that anyway, though. I think we do have like even if we approve this and assuming that all 100 want to come next year and the 100 the next year. I just said the hundred like my kids do. That was horrible. Sorry. Um but like even if we do do that, we're still kind of kicking the can down the road. And so I do think we have to grapple with some of those things like you know rather than running low enrollment courses every single year maybe running them every other year and so it's a full class. And so I do think we have to start looking at some of those other solutions also. And I I think that's probably a separate conversation, but maybe those kind of go together that, you know, what does a budget reduction of this look like? How would we decide what is hit, what isn't, and are there ways that we can kind of mitigate that don't cut the programming, but that do save money? I know we're always looking for that those things, but >> the math problem of this is that I just shared the legislative approved increase for the general fund, but 2.69% total. This body has not approved a contractual improvement at 2.69% for any employee group and that's only half of our budget. The reason every district has an outy years deficit is the only way we can balance our budget and maintain our program is that our ongoing expense matches our ongoing revenue. And that would mean and we all of our bargaining groups, every employee in the district, superintendent and everyone would have to come in less than that 2.69% year-over-year. And our forecast budget is 4% for teachers, 3% for bargaining groups, >> 69% on 54% of our budget. >> Right. And uh I just there are several districts that are still negotiating trying to get down to that 9 to 11% range. >> So we can cut all the 15 section classes, student sections in the high school. We're not getting our long-term structural challenges right sizing. I mean, what you saw on the long-term enrollment um road is [clears throat] essentially the district supplemented the two and a half or 3% from the state with another >> 2% from enrollment growth to balance the budget. That's, you know, that's and the other [clears throat] part that if you've been reading and it's in national news, less and less of our state budget goes to public education because other parts of the budget take more. So, a similar number of students needing a comparable or more expensive programming are getting less and less of the budget. So, we're not trying to fight for more money to get better results. We're trying to hold on to what we have to maintain results. That that's a whole different issue. We we aren't the beast that can't be fed enough. We are someone trying to get the same meal we used to have to get the same type of improved results. I'm I'm happy to bring back the uh the things you recommended. Um, it's premature to talk program. I don't want to scare people, but you know, we can talk numbers. Um, we can commit to prioritizing new enrollment on the buildings that have the most space compared to what space we had 5 years ago. Um, and you know, like we currently open enrollment is closed at East and West and Groland and Scenic. So, we would prioritize our new enrollment on places that haven't been closed open enrollment as a public commitment. It's good. Megan, >> I don't have the numbers in front of me. Do you have any idea like at the elementary level um what is the total number that were under capacity? Like would it fill close to that 100 without? Well, if we filled every elementary classroom to our target, we could take 400 more students across the system. There's the building perception and then there's average class size. Those are different things. >> We we could maintain our average class size across our district lifting because many of our grade levels are under the average for the district. We filled them all up to average. There's room for hundreds of students across elementaryaries. It's just a perception of parent drop off and pick up in space. >> I'm just trying I'm just thinking about how can we entice like the the students that didn't get their first choice of Groveland or Scenic, you know, are there things that we could do to entice them to accept at Excelsier or Deep Haven? Like I think people think that Deep Haven is so much further than Groveland and it's like three minutes. It's really just insignificant. But if we can, you know, think about how to maybe incentivize that. I don't know what that looks like, but >> Right. >> We are well, our marketing team meets with our enrollment department all the time to market to spaces where we have space. Yeah, that would be my preference too, to maintain where things are functioning as well as possible and to fill spaces that aren't. >> So, what is our next step on this super? I'll bring back this >> I'll bring back this exact presentation to the board for a similar discussion and then a a potential board vote the first time uh first week in March, our first board meeting. You know, you could certainly wait a year. We are in the enrollment window. This would raise our target for next year from 11250 to 11350. We're we're currently, like I said, um we know that we lose about 1.5 to 2% of our students who from now till fall. It would just lift up some of our sites a little higher during that window. >> And we do 100 is kind of you overestimate, right? When you're saying >> it um what we would do with 100 are current what we've currently accepted. If they back out like they've always backed out, we would be at about 11250 in the fall. We would just plug in a couple more so that if they back out, we'd be at 11350. >> Megan, >> um, two questions. When a family, like, so let's say they applied for Groveland and they don't get the spot, um, do they is there a conversation there? Like do they tell us why they decline or do they just turn a you know do they just say no and then move on or is there like >> they don't get when we offer the nearest spot that offers that program and then they decline and then they go back to a waiting list for grant. >> Okay. And I'm just thinking about like what that looks like. Um, do we think that there is the demand for these extra hundred seats right now? Like based on what our current open enrollment >> for significantly more. It's a matter of getting them at the right spots, but we do I I do target like I target what we have as a board target. And so I many districts don't have this lever. We are fortunate that we do. Other districts aren't talking about their enrollment cap based on their ability to accept students. There currently is very strong demand for our schools. I I'm optimistic, but it you know we it's all about what they ask for and where we have space. >> Thank you. Anyone else before you move forward? All right. Health and dental premium rates. Superintendent L. >> Madam Chair, members of the board, tying into our long-term financial stability and challenges will be on an annual basis. We review our self- insurance fund and make adjustments to cover the cost of providing insurance for our employees. Executive Director of Finance and Operations Paul Bourgeois is going to run through his self- insurance committee and their recommendations. Mr. Well, thank you. Uh went through our self- insurance history uh last in January, right? And and gone and went up brought us up to where we're at. Um for for this year, uh we are actually at we we increased our our rates by about 5.25%. 25% and uh uh we are actually right now we're actually uh because of our claims we're actually projected out to be in deficit mode by probably seven it not it won't it won't be probably it will be seven figures. So uh the um in the X-ray is looking at all those claims they look back two years and uh they wait they wait the claims for um 80% for the most recent 12 months and 20% for the the second 12 months back. Uh and uh uh in in this particular uh instance our actuary has said that has recommended that we would increase rates by 11% across the board for health and for health insurance and 2.84% 84% for dental. The um uh I I typically every year I also do just kind of I'm not an actuary. Um and obviously I didn't plan one on TV, but um I would do my own projection and I did a projection again this year and some some years my projections pretty close but a little bit lower and we talk about it at the committee and we would come in with our lower projection and and you know roll the dice a little bit. Um and and we you know we've come out pretty good you know more years than not uh and that's why we've averaged 4.15% over 25 years but uh this year my projection was 22 and a.5% for next year. So um the actuary uh is he's saying things are you know with the claims and the way they look at them uh are he thinks that 11% is the one that will get us back to balance. Uh it's it's unfortunate but uh you know when we discussed it at the committee you know it's like what are the reasons we've got a lot of um lot of lot of cardoppulmonary issues um a lot of orthopedic issues uh people are getting you know joints replaced things like that. Um we also um our our district has been high compared to both health partners but now also Bluec Cross Blue Shield book of business in terms of people requesting psychiatric help. So, we're also looking at doing something with that um through with a group called All Thing. Uh the it's a it's an assessment tool to help people uh uh be able to ask themselves questions and and to help determine them if they need help and then to help try to get them connected with people who get help or to get help. So, you know, that's one of the things that we're doing and there's actually not a cost to us. Uh the option is going to be available. um uh to to everybody to take that. But the um a person can choose to then utilize uh people who maybe can do things with them online, which is uh through the all thing clinic um or they can get a referral to somebody else in you know in town or or and and do more in person that way. So we're we're we're that was one of the things that we're looking at implementing uh to try to uh you know that's not the right word is attack but it's the only thing I could but to try to take on that that challenge and try to get a better uh some better outcomes in that regard. Uh the other thing I have mentioned in in the uh uh the cover cover sheet is that uh GLP1 use for non-diabetic is is it's it's a it has a lot of good things. So it's not a it's not a knock on the drug. It's it's not a knock on people who are using it and and a lot of us are going to be continue to use it. They're finding more and more benefits from it. The thing is is we need to try to figure out some way to actually lower the cost because um and we're one of the few districts that few entities in Blue Cross Blue Shield that actually covers GLP1s. So, uh we actually have a uh 50 uh50 match up to $25,000 lifetime and that was based on the uh we had to implement something a few years ago. There was uh people were demanding it, you know, were requesting it, demanding it, requesting um and we wanted to meet that need. Uh and we looked around and and Mayo Clinic had the most reasonable uh option and so we emulated that but we exceeded it. Uh what we did there is we had um um they they had a program or have a program that's 15,000 lifetime and the idea is that you are on it for a while. They'll help you but you also then have to have to look at lifestyle changes to like continue on uh and maintain what you might not gain but lose I guess um uh over over the you know when you hit your cap. We had our cap originally set at um $20,000 instead of 15. And then we we a year ago uh there was a big demand um of people uh asking about an additional increase. So we increased it to 25. Um they we were asked to increase it again. We said no, that's as far as we can go. Uh the thing is is the that environment has changed a lot just in the last two years in terms of availability. Uh if you watch a Super Bowl, you see Serena Williams with an alternative that's u not necessarily the name brand, but it's got the same chemical makeup. Those types of things are out there at much lower cost. And so we need to look at some of those things. I know you can actually get them now through um you can actually get it through Amazon Pharmacy delivered to your house. uh Costco. If you're a Costco member, you can get get uh uh get the name brands through Costco for under 150 or $1501 149 I believe it is uh per month. Uh so one of the things that I I talked to the group about is looking into trying to set something like that up because um in that sit that's a situation to get those kind of savings, we would have to adjudicate our own claims for those. So, but our our insurance people are are confidential. Our payroll people are confidential. Uh our our business people are confidential. But it would be a situation where you would uh turn in turn in a receipt and then we would just pay you, you know, pay you through the basically the accounts payable pro process in that situation. But the other thing is on a $25,000 maximum lifetime maximum and if you're suddenly doing suddenly doing $75 a month, that's about 35 years worth of matches. So all of a sudden the cost goes much goes down. We are currently at 93 people out of about 1350 contracts and 2300 dependents. Uh nationally one out of eight people is on GLP ones already. And so we're not at one one out of eight. That would put us up at about 300. So, um, we're currently, we jumped from about $250,000 a year the first year to, uh, we're uh, $482,000 last year. We're currently on pace to be at about 750,000. So, if we continue at that at that pace, um, we basically right now 750,000 is about 3% of our total claims. So, um, the, um, that's going to increase to 4% 5%. if if we didn't do anything, it would increase up to a level of, you know, eight to 10% of our claims just for that. So, u it's something that we have to address. And again, it's not to do any kind of throwing stones or anything. And and um uh but we've got to look at what other options have materialized out there and come up with some some other way to also help control costs because uh to be honest with you on this 11% about 2% is because of the increasing in GL1. If it wasn't for that, we'd be at about 9%. Now the other thing is is very important is um most of the fully insured school districts that are um on uh CBiz's book of business are actually um according to uh Brock Buckaloo who is our um our consultant with them and and handles uh I he has 55 clients but they are looking at uh insurance increases in in the upper double digits in term well not 100 um but closer to 20% between 15 and 20%. So even with that given the environment you know people are concerned about where healthc care is going uh so we are the um I guess we are the least the least sick program so to speak compared to you know compared to others. So, uh, with that, you know, um, we have the, uh, um, the premiums that are are we're asking you to to, uh, approve again 11% across the board on, um, our health and then 2% uh, for 2.84% for dental. So, >> thank you, Mr. Mais Dan. Yeah. I'm just Can you clarify for me again the month? These are monthly premiums that we're looking at here, right? >> Yes. >> And do our employees pay those across nine or 12 months of the year? >> 12 months. >> 12 months. Okay. >> Yeah. If teachers are on 21 pay, we collect >> uh their their 12 months their summer. Yeah. So it's it's 12 months. So >> um you know >> Yeah. So, so a family on some of these plans is paying, you know, 30 grand in healthcare coverage, which is >> well, and now now you uh what what we have depends on the bargaining group, but each bargaining group has a a fringe benefit allocation that they're given, and that typically covers at least the equivalent of single >> and so they may be making up the difference uh for employee plus one or or family, but uh so so so depending depending, you know, the single premium portion of it is usually the biggest chunk. So, the largest chunk is actually paid as in their contract through the district where it doesn't uh it just the district pays that portion of it and then what's taken out of their their uh wages or salaries are uh you know that whatever that gap is. >> Yeah. No, I mean just for just another part of the message for our legislators, >> right? >> Comments and questions from the board. Megan, >> um, just to clarify for everybody, um, the committee does have staff, teachers, and employees on it as well, right, that made this recommendation. >> Oh, yes. Um, yeah, as the Yeah, I guess. So there's uh actually there's four representatives from the the teachers uh bargaining group and then uh principles clerical maintenance um contract employees nutrition services um pair professionals but they did not they they lost their person uh to retirement uh and and so they did not have a person named identified but pair professionals would participate um who am I missing tech the tech group um so uh there's you know, uh, 12 entities that and then administration. So, I'm actually a voting member. Um, but it was a unanimous recommendation to do the tw the 11% and the 2.84. >> Anyone else? Thank you very much. >> Okay, >> Madam Chair. >> Yes. uh group tonight is the Chinese immersion uh Chinese New Year night and that has taken our regular camera person Andy son late person Andy Smith to the high school in his absence we are going to need to do our special meeting starting at 7:40 right here so we can't start early because we published that time at 7:40 is a start time so in 10 minutes we would reopen here we don't need to move to the other tables Good evening. I would like to call the Minnitankka School Board February 19th, 2026 meeting to order. May we all stand and say the pledge to the flag, please to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, liberty and justice for all. >> May I have a motion to adopt the agenda? >> So moved. >> Dan. >> Second. Mike. >> Mike. May I second Dan. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Any opposed? Motion carries. Okay. First up, we have the approval of the health and dental premium rates for fiscal year 27. Superintendent Law. >> Madam Chair, members of the board, as you just heard in study session, it's that time of the year where we need to review our self- insurance fund and make any adjustments to make sure we're financially solvent. Executive Director of Finance and Operations, Mr. Bourgeois, is going to give you a summary of the process we determined to get to the proposed amount and ask for your approval of those increases. Mr. Thank you. by increase our health by 11%. you uh u and uh get us back to balance for next and um uh continue to to allow us to have a you know a stable uh health insurance fund. The um the district health insurance fund has done very well for us over the long term. These are higher rates than our average. Our average has been 4.15% over 25 years. There have been three years where we've had higher rates than this. Uh and so this is the fourth highest rate increase. But uh we have some uh issues with particularly uh um pulmonary areas, orthopedic areas and psychiatric areas that uh have have a relatively high rate of of incidents. So uh among others, but um this should put us put us or keep us on a steady course. So would ask that you'd consider approving these rates. >> Any comments or questions from the board? Megan, >> um, >> I just want to comment for the public something that I asked about during the study session, which is that the committee that made this recommendation does have representative from the different bargaining units on it. So, they were part of this process um because it sounds like a steep jump, but uh, you know, they did they were at the table and had the conversations and made this recommendation. >> Thank you. It's a good good point. Thank you, Mr. Bourgeoa. Any other comments from the board or questions? With that, may I have a motion to approve the health and dental premium rates for fiscal year 27? >> So moved. >> Megan, may I have a second? >> Second. >> Karen. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> I. >> Any opposed? Motion carries. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Pua. Next up, authorization to sell 2026b general obligation refunding bonds. Superintendent Law. >> Madam Chair, members of the board, as this district has a long history of doing, uh, Executive Director of Finance and Operations Paul Bourgeois annually reviews all of our outstanding debt to make sure that we're paying the best interest rate possible to save our taxpayers as much as possible. Tonight, two of those opportunities have come up for the board and the board will be asked to approve those refundings for the benefit of our district taxpayers and our general fund. Mr. Bourgeois. >> Thank you, Superintendent Law, Chair Foss, and members of the board. Uh we have a couple of uh refunding opportunities where our uh our our bonds have hit hit or in the green have hit hit the green green light to go. Uh in terms of refunding, we have a a a long-standing practice of of watching our our debt versus uh interest rates versus what's in the market and looking for opportunities. Since 2008, we've done 50 different uh refunding transactions for a total of about $26.8 million in savings. And so these transactions tonight also will will add to that. the um uh interest rates have were elevated for a few years, but we actually uh in 2021, we actually did 10 refunding transactions of 15 different bond issues uh to really lock in most of our our our debt at lower rates at that time that was eligible to be called. Uh these particular bonds have been watching because they've been getting close and I keep going, come on, Fed, drop it a little bit more. Drop it a little bit more. We finally got it down to a level where uh we're in the green. And uh so the first one that we have in front of you is is authorization to sell our 2026b general obligation refunding bonds. Uh these bonds were originally issued to basically uh do some long-term facility maintenance over the over various years. We're actually bundling uh several different uh bonds into refunding into one bond. We're we're bundling I guess we're like Jake from State Farm and Flo from Progressive, but um we're bundling the 2015B, 2017B, and 2019 C long-term facilities maintenance bonds. So on one of these uh the uh 2017B, we're actually getting a second bite of the apple. Those were refunding of some 2008 bonds. So you can kind of just take another bite at the apple and keep lowering them and lowering them and lowering them. And so we try to do that as often as possible. For this particular transaction at current interest rates, uh we have we'll have the following benefits to the community. Uh we're going to be able to lower the total outstanding power value by $1,300,000 and then we'll have cumulatively lower payments by $500,373. So the net benefits are about1 $1,800,373 for this proposed transaction. got keep our fingers crossed that interest rates are where they are and maybe we'll head down by the sale date. Uh we're planning to sell by the time we get everything ready to go. In terms of getting the official statement uh about the bonds that goes out to the market, get our bond rating from Moody's. Uh we're going to be selling these on March 26th. And so the um so we'll keep our fingers crossed. But anyway, that's what it looks like right now with our our best estimate. So we'd ask that you give us the green light to move ahead with this transaction. >> Thank you, Mr. Bourgeoa. Any comments or questions from the board? Karen. Oh. Oh, I'm sorry. Thank you, Mr. Bourgeoa. May I have a motion? >> So moved. >> Second. >> Sally and Karen. Second. >> Oh, now any discussion from the board or comments, questions? Karen, >> I just want to thank you for all the work to uh refinance. I don't know if other districts do this if it's a practice. Um, but we really appreciate um the $26.8 million overall savings that you managed to to help us with. Um, and just I guess keep up the great work. >> Glad to do it. Just means I've been here a long time though, that's all. So, but thank you. >> I'm glad to do it. >> Okay, we have a motion and a second. All those in favor say I. >> I. I. >> Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank you. Okay. Next up, authorization to sell 2026 Certificates of Participation refunding bonds. Superintendent Law. >> I'm just going to turn it over to Mr. Bersa. Part two. >> Thank you, Superintendent Law, Chair Foss, and members of the board. The second transaction is not quite as big, but still uh just as important, and we look to save a buck wherever we can. Right. So, uh, these are certificates of of participation, uh, refunding bonds that will refund some of the bonds that we issued for the various 51 different projects that we used over the course of the last 18 or 19 years to build the district and do additions on the schools. Those are done. Those were built with a bond called certificate of participation which is different than a general obligation bond because that just means that we're the short story is that we're paying for those bonds out of our existing uh resources rather than on uh putting them on the tax roles as you do with the general obligation bond. We have uh four certificate of participation bonds, smaller ones that are eligible to be uh refunded. And again with these, we're bundling them together into into just one bond. Uh but the um uh 2017 A, 2017 C, 2018B, and 2018 D bonds, uh the um uh for this particular transaction, we are going to be uh lowering our par value by about $440,000 and uh we're going to be uh having lower payments over the life of the bonds of $311,296. So there's net, you know, benefits to the public of $751,296 on this one. And so just as one of the things I didn't mention is the the size of the bonds that we we're going to be issuing um for the uh the prior amount was uh we're dropping them from 15,165,000 to 13,865,000 uh for the general obligation bonds on the past board item. For this one, uh, we are basically dropping the outstanding par value from 5,580,000 down to 5,140,000. So, we'd ask for your authority to go ahead and u move this transaction ahead so we can lock in the savings for the public. >> Thank you, Mr. Bisa. May I have a motion to approve? >> So moved. >> May I have a second? >> Second. >> Mike, any discussion? >> Okay. All those in favor say I. I. >> Any opposed? >> Motion carries. Thank you, Mr. >> Superintendent. Oh, >> may I have a motion to adjurnn? >> Dan, you have a second. Karen, >> do I have to say any? >> All in favor say I. >> Any [laughter] oppose to adjurnn? >> We are ajourned.