Welcome everybody to this evening's uh business portion of the meeting of the school um of the board of education meeting. Um let us uh um call to order and uh rise and do the pledge of allegiance. I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Uh all board members are present tonight. Um and we will start out this evening uh with the ceremonial oath of office. Uh the ceremonial oath of office will be administrated administered um by myself, the temporary chair to newly elected board member Dustin Smith. So Dustin, we're going to go up front and do the board the an honor that you are elected to guide the education of our community's children. Recite the oath of office. You assume a tremendous responsibility as a director of our school district with the duties empowered by the Minnesota legislature. This power puts you and the other members of our school board in the position of being both morally and legally responsible for equitable quality education of every carrying out this responsibility. You will be asked to fulfill the roles of vision, structure, accountability, and advocacy. Providing vision, the board with extensive participation of the community visions the community's educational future and formulates the goals, defines the outcomes, and sets the course for the to achieve the vision. The board establishes a structure and creates an environment designed to ensure all students the opportunity to attain their maximum a sound organizational. As at the board, we must be accountable to the community. We must ensure a continuous assessment of student achievement and all conditions affecting the education of our children. As board members, we serve as education's key advocate on behalf of students and our community schools to advance the vision of our schools. Furthermore, we must strive to work together with the superintendent and staff to lead the district toward fulfilling the vision we have created, fostering excellence for every student in the area and knowledge, citizenship, and personal development. Having the acceptance of office and oath of office. I hereby ask you to publicly affirm your commitment to the oath of office. Please raise your right hand. Repeat after me. I affirm that I will support >> I affirm that I will support >> the Constitution of the United States >> the Constitution of the United States >> and of this state >> and of this state >> and that I will discharge faithfully >> and that I will discharge faithfully >> the duties of the office >> the duties of the office >> of school board member >> of school board member >> of Independent School District 719 >> of my judgement and ability to the best of my judgment and ability. >> This is the one. That's a special one. Now we'll move on um to approval of the agenda. Uh is there any can I get a a motion? uh for approval of the agenda. >> So made >> by director Atinson and second by uh director Johnson. Is there any discussion hearing? None. Can I um all in favor of of the agenda say I? >> I. >> I. >> Uh opposed. That that passes 70. And next moving to election of office officer. Uh the office of uh we will be filling the office of chair to fill former board chair's position. Nominations for the office may be made by any member and do not require a second from another another member. The vote for the position must be public, not taken by secret ballot. The newly elected chair will take over the meeting immediately following his or her election. Um, okay. Um, are there any nominations for the office of school board chair to complete the year to to replace uh, Chair White? I'd like to nominate uh Vice Chair Bullen. >> Are there any other nominations for chair? Are there any other nominations for chair? I have to ask it three times. Are there any further nominations for the office of chair? Nominations for the office of chair are closed. Um with one only one board member being nominated. Um then I guess I take over that role. Thank you everyone. Um and then moving forward for uh the office of vice chair. Uh I will now and uh take nominations for the uh for the position of vice chair. Chair bullion. Yes. Um before we begin, I'd like to um make a motion um to perhaps not fill that position this evening. Um, per Minnesota State Statute 123B.14, um, it is my understanding that we are not required to reelect a vice chair for the remainder of the year and that we are only required to have a chair, a clerk, and a treasurer. And those duties can actually com be combined and delegated to a single person in the office of business affairs. Um, so that's u my motion is to not fill that position. We only have one meeting left. Um, and I'm happy to as the other executive officer on our team, um, help you to assist you on that last meeting in any way that you need. Um, but my motion is to not fill the position of vice chair and wait till January to fill that position. >> I don't believe that we need a motion for that. Is that correct? Because it's it's the item. >> That's just my recommendation. I wanted to make sure that it stated before we voted >> or it's up for discussion, I guess. >> Yep. Is there any other discussion on that? >> I mean, I would support that. It's only a meeting. So I >> I I think you as former chair um it does help to have a vice chair going through the end of the year preparing for the organizational meeting. So I would think that that that position would be would be appropriate even for a short term before the organizational meeting. >> Any other up to you >> any other discussion on that? I I would say uh serving in the as a vice chair for the last two years um it would be my recommendation to um fill the role for vice chair um because of the um role that they play in agenda planning and also just the supportive position that they they offer the the chair. Um so um hearing all that of that discussion I think that I would still would enter or take any nominations for the position of vice chair. >> I would like to nominate director Johnson. Sorry. >> Very good. I think um I feel like you guys worked well together um during the uh 200 series planning. So I think that would be a great nomination. Are there any other nominations for vice chair? I'd like to nominate Jessica Olstead. Um any other nominations for vice chair? Hearing none. uh with with two members being nominated for the office or for the role of vice chair, a roll call vote is necessary. And so I'm going to uh start with director Olstad. Um and if you could state who you're voting for, either your yourself or director Johnson. >> Myself. >> Director Johnson. >> Myself. Uh, Director Johnson. >> Um, Director Smith, >> Director Olstead, >> Director France, Director Olstead, >> Director Mason, >> Director Johnson, >> and my vote is for Director Olstead. Um with director Olad receiving the majority of the votes and uh cast, she is elected vice chair of the school board until the organizational meeting which will be held in January of 206. Okay, moving on. We will uh I'll take a motion to adjourn the this business part of this meeting and transition to study session. So made >> by uh director France and seconded by director Johnson. All in favor? >> I >> opposed. And that passes 70. So we will adjourn and transition to a study session. Um, do you does anybody need to take a break? Okay, we'll just move right into it. >> Thank you. Uh, Chair Bullian, um, members of the board, um, tonight for our study session, it's our opportunity as always to Victor Olsen's gonna move. >> Oh, I'm I'm sorry. That's okay. That's right. >> Come on over. Come on over. Well, we will start the um the study session. Uh typically it starts with public forum and there is no speakers tonight. So, uh we will go into the purpose and agenda. Uh Dr. Thomas, thank you. >> Yes, sorry about that. Board of directors. Um so this evening we've got a few topics that uh will engage uh conversation and dialogue with you all this evening. Um we'll have a brief proclamation. Um to start us off uh we will do our annual um comprehensive achievement and civic readiness report that we give annually to MDE. Um we have our revised final budget and then we will review the budget priorities that we discussed as a board a few weeks ago. And then uh we have a draft 2627 school year uh calendar for you all to review uh that's coming from our committee and we have uh a conversation with a UHL contract proposal uh that will be be uh be before you and then we will close out this evening with the uh draft legislative uh platform for 26. Uh, first up is a proclamation on inclusive schools week. Dr. Atinson, would you would you I didn't ask you beforehand. I'm so sorry, but would you read the proclamation? >> Sure. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Um December 8th through the 12th of 2025 uh we will celebrate inclusive schools appreciation week in Prior Lake Savage area schools recognizes December 8th through the 12th as inclusive schools appreciation week whereas inclusive schools week celebrates schools that welcome and educate all students. Whereas Prior Lake Savagary Schools is committed to inclusive high-erforming classrooms where every child's unique strengths and learning needs are valued. Whereas educators and families across our district work together to ensure every student feels a sense of belonging. And therefore be it resolved that Prior Lake Savage Area Schools joins the inclusive schools network and schools worldwide in celebrating inclusive schools week December 8th through the 12th. Thank you Michelle. >> Thank you um for recognizing inclusive schools week. The week reflects our district's commitment to creating learning environments where every student is welcomed, represented, and able to fully participate. And that commitment is central to our strategic plan. Inclusion in Prior Lake Savage Area Schools means that our classrooms, activities, and relationships reflect the diversity of our students and honor the strengths each learner brings. That work happens every day through the efforts of our teachers, support staff, cultural leaison, administrators, families, and even the students themselves. I want to express my deep appreciation for the people across the district who intentionally build spaces where students feel they belong and can learn confidently as who they are. Thank you for recognizing inclusive schools week and for your continued leadership and supporting a truly inclusive district community. You >> um next up oversight of operations uh Dr. Anderson and Dr. Zoom Bush. Thank you, Chair Bullian. Um, as the team kind of readies themselves, uh, each year we submit a annual report to MDE, um, for, uh, what used to be called the world's best workforce, which is now comprehensive achievement and civic readiness report along with some of our ANI data that's, um, submitted to MDE as well. Um we shared this with the board last week and um our team stands ready tonight to discuss any of the data points um as well as any of the um strategies as a result of what we are seeing in the data um and any questions that you might have as a board. So we won't walk through the the presentation because you've had it for a week um and haven't had any questions since then, but we stand ready to address any questions or comments that you have um that we can address. We'll open it up for discussion and questions. Dr. France. Um, first of all, with regards to our demographic breakdown, um, is there any did anyone notice any significant changes over last year or the previous years? And who are students? >> Nothing nothing statistically significant from last year's to this year's report in terms of student demographic changes. Um Dr. Thomas, the majority of the work that is um well I guess that this plan supports is this the ANI funding or is it not related to the ANI funding? >> Um it it's a combination. So we so the ANI uh goals that we have in there are completely funded through the ANI work. Um and then um the CACR work is just overall district um uh work that we're committed to doing um as required through the uh CACR legislation. >> Okay. And can you remind um me? I know it's about a million dollars of ANI funding that we receive. What is the local levy though? Because we do local levy for some ANI funds. >> Do you have >> 35% 35% >> which is how much? At a million dollars that'd be about 350,000 >> $350,000 from our community >> that's levied. Yes. >> Okay. >> Okay. So it's about a million3 of funding >> of ANI funding. >> It's about a mill million total >> of which 350 comes from >> Okay. I understand. All right. So about a million dollars. Okay. >> And then my other question is as I look at the results um I know the community doesn't have the presentation but I'd encourage you to go ahead and look on look at the presentation online. And um I guess for me I was I was gravely disappointed. Um to see these results in a district like ours is just I I I I think we need to start having some really hard conversations. Um as far as academics and how our students are achieving and we're spending over a million dollars to support these students and these results are dismal. And I just want to like to know I'd like to hear from our staff. I'd like to hear from Dr. Thomas. What type of plan are we putting in place? This is a corrective action plan that is that's urgent. I mean, we are doing a disservice to our students when there's proficiency rates. And then I'd also like to know why we're lowering the goal when we have a we have a um new strategic plan that's not so new anymore that talks about AC academic excellence and it talks about students reaching their full potential. And I would ask if lowering the goals for students is really reaching their full potential. >> Yeah, thank you um Director Atinson. So I will say that um yeah, we learned from this uh work that we clearly have opportunities where our students are underperforming um and not to the levels that we would want to see our students performing. Um in terms of the data and the rate changing from one year to to the next uh Dr. them both issues. She can explain a little bit of um the uh psychometrics behind how that gets adjusted. And then we do have a couple of our schoolbased folks here to talk a little bit about what's happening in response to some of the data that they see daily in the schools in terms of of how they're able to take on different measures based upon what they're seeing um for their two local school examples that we'll share tonight. >> Appreciate that. Thank you. Can I my question kind of goes along with director Atinson's. Do you mind if I jump into that? So mine kind of goes into the career and college readiness because the goals there weren't met for neither of of the categories. Um, but it doesn't give a corrective action or at least I didn't see a direct corrective action to what we are going to do to meet those goals. Um, moving into the 2627 school year, can we go into what our plan is for that, especially trying to get those young men and women career and college ready? >> Uh, good evening, uh, Chair Bullion, members of the board, Dr. Thomas. Um the the goal setting is a little bit tricky because um every year we set goals for about three percentage points higher than we were previously regardless of whether we met or didn't meet the goal. Um with smart goals, you want to make sure that something is attainable. Um I think that's the A. Um and when I first looked at some of these goals, we had some 12 percentage 15 percentage points increase in some of these. And while that would be lovely to see that, we didn't feel that there was the structures in place to have that big of a gain. And that's basically unheard of um for a single year improvement. Um part of the career and college readiness um and I um I believe at least one of the goals. Just because a goal isn't met doesn't mean we're going down in an area. So it's kind of confusing. There are some that we went down. Obviously third grade reading, you can see the trajectory going down. Um but we did see over the last couple of years an increase in some of our ACT scores. Um and our goal would then be to continue to raise that um every single year. Um so what I'm seeing a little bit um after this I believe this is my fourth goound doing this is the goals are kind of a lot of them are toggling between meeting and not meeting because when we meet a goal we set it for you know however many points higher it's harder to meet that goal. So then it kind of reorms itself. Um not to say that we shouldn't always increase. Um but I think that's a little we're seeing a little bit of a toggling. Um and that in particular for the ACT score, we're seeing that a bit. We're not seeing, you know, huge declines. It's that we if you see an increase, you're setting your goal for higher than that and then it's harder to meet that goal. So, um not to say that that's an excuse, but just some context around the way the goals work. Um in terms of the plan, um I would leave that to my academic friends. >> Sure. And then in terms of some of the structure and I and I know we've got a couple of our principles um here tonight to talk a little bit about from an elementary and a secondary perspective on I think probably some of the graduation components and the career college readiness components as well as what we're beginning to see uh with regards to some of those early uh reading components as well. I'll just start also by stating that um one of the challenges that I've experienced and you've heard me probably say this, I think Dr. Anderson has said this within his first time coming in. Um we we are a very very lean system and so some of the infrastructure of support to capture students when they're maybe not on track is really challenging. And so when we look at other uh districts that have a more uh depth to some of their MTS uh their like tiered support um staff um to provide comprehensive interventions, we just don't have that infrastructure and we've been in a reduction mode and some of those areas over the years have been areas that have been impacted. So I think for us getting resources where they need to be given the finite resources that we have um is is a really significant challenge uh structurally for us in the district. Um we also know that for um improvement to occur you have to provide some type of treatment or some type of intervention. Um we are beginning to see that comprehensively with Redact and that's something that uh we will really begin I mean we're engaging that uh pilot right now this year. So we now are actually bringing in a tool and a resource that can actually be marked as a a an intervention or um a treatment so that we can have uh outcomes for students that are different than what they've started with. Um just a case in point in terms of our leanness, we have also done a math adoption. Um typically you do a K12 math adoption. This in in our district we did that over a course of three years um because of resources and time and and and bandwidth of staff. Um so we're doing that simultaneously with multiple adoptions that are coming down the pipe from MDE as well. So, I know that right now our staff are feeling that load, feeling that impact of having to um adapt to new resources while simultaneously finding ways that they can provide those infrastructural supports for students when they're seeing that they're tracking, you know, uh or not being on track. Um so, just I I offer that in a general structural uh standpoint. Dr. Anderson, I know you've invited a couple of our building staff as well here this evening to speak kind of boots on the ground. What are some of the tangible things that are happening? >> Can I add one thing real quick? >> I'm I'm sorry. Go ahead. >> Sorry. Um I just wanted to call attention the career and college readiness equity goal. Um this is the slide that talks about our two lowest subgroups, the Hispanic Latino and black African-American. Our goal for um CACR was to increase the average ACT score by a full point um across that population. Um, so if if you see the goal was to increase from 19 to 20 for Hispanic Latino, we actually increased the average score from 19.0 to 19.1. Um, but that still is a not met goal. So even though it increases, we didn't meet the goal because the goal is a full um point increase. We're trying to measure or trying to also set goals that are um, you know, stretch goals. So, the black African-American um group, the goal was to increase from 16.7 to 17.7. It did go from 16.7 to 17.0 as a.3 increase. So, even though that's um not meeting the goal, it is both of those groups still increased in their average ACT score. So, that's an example of what I'm trying to explain about um the goals a little bit. Just because a goal isn't met doesn't mean we went down in that area. Um um Director Zumbush, if you could look at slide eight and nine, um I know what I was referring to, and I'm sorry if I wasn't more specific, is our third grade third grade reading level. >> Yep. That went down. >> And so there where we had a goal of 65 to 67% and over half of our a little under half of our students are not proficient in reading. And I guess my concern is that we've had really good reading curriculum in for the last what three years we've been teaching phonics. So, I'm having a hard time understanding. I understand the readact training and I get that and the money we've invested in that. But my concern is this number right here. If almost half of our kids are not proficient in third grade reading, that trickles to math, it trickles to science. And so, I know we have, like I said, a million dollars of ANI funds. I know that we've adjusted some of that and hired different staff for that, but are there other solutions we can bring forth to ensure that our students are proficient in reading, which is the most important thing um at third grade level? >> Yeah, I think one of the things we're finding as we dig into our um literacy resource foundations, there's probably some more some greater gaps in that resource than we initially thought. So the the more that we're digging into and working with our literacy committee um realizing that the resources that are laid out from the state do have a higher level of alignment um and a different pacing than what we're seeing in foundations. Um foundations is also as you know we've talked about the readact and all the different components. That's only a a subcomponent of all the skills that students need to learn. um and it doesn't include that comprehension vocabulary section, that comprehensive um looks and that is really what kicks in around second and third grade. That foundational skills is more at the lowest level. Um so we've identified those gaps. Um we know that that needs to be um filled and that's what the you know the pilots are working on and um that comprehensive package that'll be implemented next year um should be filling the gaps that we are seeing across the system. >> I was going to ask actually the same thing on the graduation numbers. Um I don't sorry know what number slide that is but um you know I I when I read this it's like our current rate is 89%. We're dropping some of that to 85. Um I was just curious why we're lowering or keeping equivalent some of those numbers versus trying to increase. >> Yeah. Um a couple reasons for that. One is um that's guidance from the state is that um the goal is to have all subgroups at 85 or above. Um this came out of the idea that initially goals were set relative um with different sub with different demographic groups. The idea now is that you know we don't want to lessen a gap inherently in and of itself without you can you can um you can decrease a gap by decreasing a subop. So this idea is to make sure that all sub populations are at that 85 or above. Um, as we've gone over the graduation data in some previous meetings, um, the the students who are not graduating in four years are mostly due to students who um, need extra time in our system. Um, and they are um, continuing in the system and we know that a lot of them have already graduated. Um, so the decline in um, in four-year graduation here um, is really reflective of students that need additional time. We're not seeing an increase in dropouts or um there's an unknown category that basically students just no one's able to identify where they are. Um and our unknown and dropout has gone down. Um so this decrease in the four-year graduation rate is due to students needing additional time. Um, so I think it's um always good to have um the the rates go up, but if a student needs additional time and we know that we're providing supports for them to graduate in five years or six years, um then that's a component of this data that's not being shown here. >> Thank you. If I can have um is it Kate is in is it Kate and Chad? Are you >> principal Sherman is here and Dr. Chad Thorp from the high school are here. >> Thank you. So, so perhaps uh Chad, you can speak a little bit about some of the work that we're doing around ACT um support um college readiness and some of our a AP work that we're conducting. Um we might be able to open up a little bit of a conversation that you and I engaged in with the state too around PSO and alternate things that are beginning and I can speak to some of that as well, but if you want to maybe speak to that aspect from the secondary standpoint. I know it's a big question with a lot of stuff. Can you be more specific? >> Yeah, going back to Director Johnson's question, kind of that dovetail of college and career readiness, particularly at the high school level. Um what efforts that we're engaging in as a result of what we see with our um CACR data, our school improvement plans that you've identified at the school level for the high school. How are we getting kids in that college and career readiness pathway? um particularly emphasizing some of our work around AP, our ACT um support that we're giving kids and I may dovetail a little bit with some of our PSO work that you and I just began a conversation with with MDE. >> Okay. I think I'm tracking as much as I I'll share what I what I where I think you're going with this. Um I I think one of the phenomenons we're looking at is is we do have a pretty high 2 to fouryear college readiness rate. I mean our students are moving on to college and so we have to reflect on the data. Are are they finishing college? Are they are they prepared for college? And generally we would say yes. Um we're not getting a lot of evidence to say they're not. So we look at the things that we feel are strong to prepare them. Um we've shared recently our AP advanced placement numbers have gone up each year for the last four or five years. Even you know 50 kids but 100 200 kids uh 1,200 of our kids at the high school will sit for an exam in May this year about 2100 exams right now. So more than a third of our students at the high school are advanced placement students. Again, based on the evidence from last year, 80% of those kids got a qualifying score of three or above, which objectively anyone would agree if you've got that score, you're you're college ready within that discipline. So, so when we look at things like that, we're saying at least of a third of our students are college ready and and ready to go. Um along with that, the post-secary options that we offer within the school, we we've got growing enrollment within those. um multiple courses now are offering college credit within that and those students are tremendously successful. So, as our advanced learning opportunities have grown, we've seen more engagement, more enrollment with those kids. So, we're super happy about it and and and our teachers are happy about it and they're saying this is the direction our kids want to go. Now, there's other numbers that we look at, too. Um ACT scores, ACT scores are something that we're we're looking at. Um, we would agree from a secondary perspective, we'd like to see them better. We'd like to see them grow. Um, something we've had a lot of conversation about very recently is is uh looking at the data. What can we do to support our teachers to help grow these numbers? Uh, for example, we're looking at our professional development and if you've been following, we've got a lot of new state standards. We've got new national standards and and these standards have changed in some cases considerably. Science standards are considerably different. So, one of the things that we're reflecting on as teachers with these new standards, our current practices, our assessment practices, are they matching with what the new standards are? Um, we know our teachers are growing, they need some time to look at these and then reflect reflect on their practices. Are we assessing at the right rate? So, when they take standardized exams, which when we're talking our our MCA, our ACT, are they performing because they've been prepared in the classroom? So we think it's really good, but we do have some questions also about like what are we doing within the system and and for a secondary people we're looking more 612 the kids that we get, but what can we do to boost those scores? >> So Mr. Thorp, I think you bring up a really great point. You know, like an AP course is very focused. year in like AP Chem or AP Bio and those kids are very focused into that subject. But when you dial into the MCA scores, our science score, and I don't I don't know exactly what it is at the high school because I think we need to still need to update our website, but it's like 35% proficient in science and I know the standards have changed and all that, but that would be more reflective in an ACT score of the with having science included in ACT. Correct. >> Science is included >> in the ACT. Yes. >> Yeah. Correct. Right. So, I'm just saying when you say we're disappointed in our ACT scores, it could have it could relate to the fact that our kids aren't proficient in science. Their their proficiency rates are so low in science that that's relating to the ACT. Where the AP scores, the kids who are taking AP Chem are very focused on AP Chem. You know what I mean? So when you took at the look at the general population of students, there may be a connection there that the the science proficiency scores are impacting our total like the ACT scores, you know what I mean? So dialing into that. >> Yeah. I I I I think there's that's some conversations that we've been having and I think what we're also finding too, Director Atinson, is that when students at the high school level particularly, and this is where you see the over propoundonderance of optouts of MCAs, um the MCAs don't necessarily reflect the general population and those who are typically opting out are those who are concert concentrating dialed into the AP track or maybe the PSO track etc. So those who are maybe captured in that aren't truly the general population, you know, the term that you use, you know, the aggregate of all of our students, so to speak. So we're looking at perhaps a subset of students that has a mismatch and and an alignment to then the ACT because typically those kids in the PSO AP track are going to be doing that ACT because that's what's more important. And when they're taking I think it's the junior year. Is that when they take uh MCA science? >> It is the junior. >> Yeah. So um and you talk to many uh students who are juniors, they know colleges aren't looking at MCAs. So their prioritization is going to be the ACT. And so I think this is also kind of a a tangential conversation that's happening at the state level too. and that is the Blue Ribbon Commission on Assessments and really questioning um are we do we have the right suite of assessments? Are they um measuring what we hope to measure um and do they have relevance to what we're trying to accomplish um in terms of continuous improvement for students as well as overall performance for schools uh schools and school districts. Um that's that's happening right now as we speak. um that will be in the next session um with some other uh kind of blue ribbon commissions that are that are engaging in. But you bring up a very good point that the complex nature of how we're assessing our kids. Um is telling portions of our story and I want to be very clear with the board and with our community. Um we absolutely believe in assessing the performance of our students and we want to make sure that we can do it um an assessment that's authentic, that's relevant and it's responsive to the needs of kids. Um we've talked a lot about MCA data and MCA talks about a student's um readiness um to uh align their knowledge to that said standard within that scale of that particular grade band. But when you begin to start to quantify MCA from uh grade three to grade four, that's where it breaks apart. It's not a comparative analysis on on a scale from third grade to fourth grade because they're fundamentally different standards that we're measuring against. And so so I think this is where it gets a little bit more complex um to to come out. I want to say we know that we have opportunities to always improve um as a school district. Um and we know that the complexity of the conversation isn't just about kids are tanking. We are seeing this across the entire state, dare I say across the whole country, which is opening up the bigger conversation of assessments um and the readiness skills that we're looking for. um just looking at our own state, this is something that um I I believe is really going to get some traction this go around um to really ensure that when we're looking at these comparative analyses of of students and what we've learned kind of post 2019ish to 2021ish, if you will, um during the the pandemic, we're seeing a very fundamental different way of how we're assessing our kids and how students are showing up um with their readiness to to learn and engaging to learn. Um, we've seen some of this at the elementary. Um, Principal Sherman, if you wouldn't mind stepping forward, if I could maybe just set a context for the board. It was my first year here. I think we invited you because we were showcasing foundations. >> Yeah. >> And this is before the Reed Act. This is before um the standards changed around the expectations. And we knew that our um age-old curriculum at that time was not fulfilling the needs of our kids. Foundations certainly brought a dimension to that and within a very short period of time um through the science of reading um we have learned significantly more um as well as things have been legislated differently um to mandate um different requirements uh within reading. And so our approach moving forward uh we can live in those. we wish we would have known eras for a little bit, but what we know today versus just in 2022 is significant. And so maybe you could speak to a little bit about some of those changes and what you're beginning to see emerge from maybe your initial work with foundations, the gaps, and where you see some of the resources being field tested right now speaking to maybe that gap. >> Yep. First of all, to your point, Director Atinson, um we do have a strong phonics curriculum. We as we've learned more about the science of reading through our Ola training, we've also understood that there are some gaps um that we specifically focus on phonemes versus phonics and then also decodable text. It really doesn't have any decodable text for our kids to apply what they're learning in phonics. So those are two big holes that we want to be plugging. Um but if you think about um or what we've learned through the science of reading is that phonics and decoding is one really important piece and there's another layered important piece that actually has more pieces to it including background knowledge. I pulled up my scar bro's reading rope uh graphic uh literacy knowledge, verbal reasoning, language structure and vocabulary and the current ELA program that we are using which is reading units of study is not does not address that. It's actually we know it to be to have been called out by the science of reading as not effective at teaching those things. So right now we are in the middle of a field test of arts and letters which is one of those sanctioned curriculums. I think it's the only one um from MDE and we're really early in it but early reports are that teachers and parents feel like they know so much more about their readers and that the rigor is really high. So when you talk about an action plan, we can't wait to get going. Our teachers were immersed in the learning around um science of reading in the past couple of years with the OLA training and the biggest question that I got from teachers was when can we get a new reading curriculum? When can we get a new reading curriculum? So there's great urgency and what we learned from our implementation of bridges is it's it's better for our achievement our students and our teachers to actually be very intentional in our implementation. So, as much urgency as we feel, um, it takes time to do it well and we owe it to our kids to do it well. >> And I'll just add on to the implementation piece, the fidelity of implementation implementation is key. And I'll be the first to acknowledge our our staff, and I think uh, Mr. Thorp spoke to this as well, our staff are seeing significant changes of standards um, um, from MDE and more yet to come. And um I think we talked a little bit about this with science and social studies uh maybe a year or two ago with the board as well. And you know we we are literally learning the new reading while elementary science is going to be kicking off in January. Um and they still have yet to you know fully embrace a full year's worth of resource field test and adoption for that matter um to to a new resource. And now we're going to start introducing science. And then, you know, at the secondary, we're doing the math as well. And so there's just a lot on the the the plates of our staff with much needed change. Um much needed increase of rigor. Um likely going to be some new perspectives of how we're going to assess for that um in the future as well. Um so I think the culmination right now is that we're we're we feel your urgency. We feel your sentiment of a deep ethic of care for the kids to to improve and trying to balance the load that uh one single teacher can carry if you will in the classroom. >> Can I say one last thing? If you pull up the kindergarten slide from that and it says school readiness and it and you can see that this fall. Oh, thank you. Okay. >> Um, in early math, our kindergarteners came in with 85% of our students at low risk and 65% of our students are um, low risk in in early reading. So, what that means to us is we think that if more than 35% of a classroom is flagging um, for high risk or some risk that we need to intervene. But as our class sizes grow and our resources diminish, like to your point, Dr. Thomas is it comes all down to that classroom teacher. We have very limited interventions interventionists. We have one interventionist at each school, one EL teacher at each school and that doesn't really change depending upon um who the children are sitting in front of us. So the load that the teachers carry is increasingly heavy. Um and that tells you too when I look at this. So our kids come to us with higher readiness in math and we have a great curricular resource curriculum resource um that we can meet them at their levels and when I look at that for reading we do have some great phonics instruction in place but 65% of our students are at low risk which means there's a great number of kids that are at high risk and our curricular resource right now does not position us very well to take them where we are and this is before we've even instructed anybody body. So, I just wanted to point that out. >> Yeah. And I think that this just looking at I I remember reading the screen and it it kind of goes back to those Fastbridge scores the same thing like they're they're very um they're very similar that there is we're showing that there is a risk and there's there are high-risisk kids within that um the kindergarten kindergarten category. So, you know, as a board member, I want to hear solutions. I want to hear what we can do to support you. So, I appreciate that and the more you can continue to communicate that um the better. >> If I might, Chair Bullion and Superintendent, I just want to give a nod of the cap, a tip, a tip of the cap if you will, to these site leaders and certainly do uh Dr. Zush for positioning us to try to unpack this. These are great questions that you're asking this evening. uh we have high expectations uh and we have to acknowledge some contextual things that we're dealing with. There's headwinds here. So I think Dr. Thomas did a great job of outlining, hey uh MDE has shifted some things. Um we're agnostic about what they're shifting. Uh we know that the assessments are measuring um in new ways. We're in that shift. We're in a shift of standards asking for more rigor and uh the folks at the site level in our system are being asked to do more than their colleagues in other systems and that's in part because of our resource situation. So, I was analyzing the Edina uh footprint today in their teaching and learning and academic services and we're we're uh leaner than Edina. For example, they have MTSS staff. We do not. I was talking to Minnotonka last week. They have 30 interventionist principal uh Katie just talked about, well, we've got we have one that we can access. So, uh anyway you look at it, we've referenced the leanness of our system over time. We're in the middle of a shift of saying we value our strategic plan a lot. We we love that academic service academic excellence is at the forefront of our strategic plan. It's part of what attracted me to this district. I have deep respect for my upbringing for optimizing resources. I'm telling you what, we're doing some amazing optimization of resources. And part of the move we're in right now is asking Katie and Chad and their teams to do even more with less while we consolidate schools. So we're asking principles and site leaders and built teams, hey, I know it's a lot to implement new math and new literacy and new science and meet all the needs that kids are coming with more than they've ever come with before. and you must work harder at the site level than you've ever worked because the district doesn't have the bandwidth to support you in the move. So I know what it means when they come and share. We are doing this work. We want to grow. We want to realize the strategic plan and we're doing it in a super lean environment. So I'm just impressed by our amazing teams. Teachers are working their tails off. built teams are working really hard and we're asking them to shift in new ways and take even more ownership. So my thanks to your your your work. You're making a difference for kids. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Any other discussion on that? >> Please. >> That one's quiet. You got to really yell into it. >> All right, I can do that. Um I I think my my comment too is very similar is I'm looking at all of these and you know in conversations with teachers who you know a middle school teacher told me a few weeks ago like I'm pushing 40 in every single class. Um, and I know the elementary is no different and high school class sizes are big and you know what do you do and try to do as much individualized teaching as you possibly can and take things out of the take kids take things excuse me take kids out of the classroom for you know some group time and things like that's hard to do um when you've got you know a lot of class sizes and you know to your point Dr. Anderson, we just, you know, closed a neighborhood school and for the coming year. And um I guess I just want to echo that sentiment that we know that, you know, academic excellence is so important to all of us, to to the teachers, to the kids, to the community, to the families. And um I just want to echo that statement that um we know how how hard it is to to do that right now with less resources. So appreciate it. >> Anyone else? >> Thank you. We'll go on to the next item which is the revised uh final budget. Director Ryder. >> Thank you. Good evening. We are at that time of year in which um back in June of 2025 on June 9th, the school board adopted a budget for the current fiscal year of um fiscal year 26. And so since that point in time, we have had fiscal year 25 final audited results presented to you on November 10th. And it is typical that a school district would review what it is they need to maybe adjust about that budget that was approved back in um June. Many things are done at that point in time based on estimates based on um anticipated um expectations regarding expenditures or even revenues. Right? So in the mean or in the um time period then that has passed, you learn more about your enrollment, right? You learn more about what federal program revenue allocations truly are going to be for the current year. You learn about other grants that may have been approved even since the board had approved an adopted budget. Um we learn what adjustments might be necessary based on the final audited data from the previous year. And you're also taking a look at whether or not there's any adjustments necessary as a result of legislation. Okay. So those are the typical reasons why you take a look at revising a budget. And so um many school districts choose to do that once a year about midway through. Um they do like to wait until they get the fall enrollment kind of understood and understanding like are we coming in close to what we had projected or not. And then they also want to make sure that the audit information has been um reviewed and analyzed and and accounted for. Right? So, it's that time of year for us and um this what you have in the board packet there are two documents. One of which is uh what we would anticipate being the resolution. You'll note that the date on that is not till the 12th of January 2026 as this is a a conversation tonight regarding the uh revised budget recommendation. Uh there are all of the funds listed here on this resolution and you can see the revenues and you can see the expenditures for each of the different funds. Um this is typically how our board has approved budgets in the past and so that's therefore reflection and understanding. But secondly, there is a document that also takes that information and shows you the preliminary adopted budget that we have from last June and then the revised and this is at the top of that page. So you can kind of see how things have changed. Uh below that then we have taken and identified for you what are those changes made up of. Right? So, I'd like to walk through those changes briefly and help you understand kind of where that falls in that list of things that I said we want to kind of take a look at. Right? So, let's start with the general fund. And with the general fund, we have uh four line items there that are about revenue. So, let's start there. With regard to revenue, you're seeing an adjustment recommended here for $3.4 million addition to the special education revenue because of the expenditures that we had over in 25. The special education formula is based upon your prior year's actual expenditures. So the state is in the process of recalculating that for districts and there's a new calculation out there as of November 13th and um in taking a look at that calculation there is these are estimates and I told you before in the process of forecasting too that you'd find me being more on the conservative side of things when it comes to exactly what we're going to include in revenue and when it comes to expenditures being conservative and what understanding what that true cost might actually be. So there's a range oftentimes when you're looking at special education because their formula isn't final yet. They will be making changes to that formula as they know more information from school districts. We have already reported our audit. A lot of districts have not, right? The deadline isn't until December 31st. So um if you recall last year there was a proration to the stated formula because there wasn't enough money to go around for everything, right? Whether or not that's going to happen again, not sure, right? um that will take everybody reporting their final year prior year before they can calc everybody alto together and know that for certain. There are also adjustments that are going to be made for federal expenditures related to special education for every single school district. And then there's a tuition um adjustment that's made, right? And so some years ago, the state took over the whole tuition adjustment piece. So, if we have special education students that are our residents, but they're served in another district, there's a behind thescenes calculation done by the state, and they call that the tuition adjustment. Okay? So, those are three main factors that impact just that formula alone. So, you'll see that I've put in $3.4 million as the recommendation. There's a range there as to what you could choose. where that actual number is going to come through is what we're kind of um taking a guess at. When it comes to the federal adjustments, you see $235,30 in addition to the revenue. This is a result of last year's actual federal grants. Those actual numbers, if they didn't spend the full allocation, then a school district's able to carry over those dollar amounts. And only Title One is limited to 15%. the rest of it can be carried over. So those adjustments now that we are final and done, we did the process of rolling it forward and so we are now seeing those new numbers in our 26 federal grants. Um didn't know that back in June, right? So now we know this information that is what that's reflecting. When we do federal grants, I always take the step of making sure that your revenues are matching your expenditures in the budget. whether or not you use all of those dollars, federal funds are only reimbured to you when you've spent them. So, you're not going to find that that's not equal at the end of the year, right? So, um the budget then needs to be equal as well. So, that's another step that's taken in this process. You will see then that there is um an adjustment on the revenue side for miscellaneous and TRA parah state aid. um slight adjustment, but while we're at it, might as well make them correct. Federal adjustments on the expenditure side. These don't exactly match the amount you see on the federal adjustments on the revenue side. Um I wasn't here for the adopted budget, but I I usually try to make those equal. Regardless, they're now equal. Okay. Uh so we're adding expenditures on the federal adjustments for 338648. Uh there is salary and benefit expense of $280,000 overall and that's just in the process of when you adopt the budget, we have totals. We take those totals and then we compare it to our salaries when we get into September. We know the particular employees we have. We know whether or not they're carrying certain insuranceances. We go through and we review by department, by grade level, by school site to see whether or not we have the budget in the right spots. Okay? And as you hire new people, you're taking a guess as to where they're going to land on that salary schedule if you're a licensed teacher. At the time when we're building that budget, now we're kind of fine-tuning it. We were a little shy. So that's where that 280,000 comes in. severance was understated and we found that um to be the case in the audit and we needed to um up that a bit to be able to kind of keep up with it you might say right severance is a guess how many people are going to actually have severance in the next year is going to be dependent upon um individual choices right so that's just to kind of bring it up to where it's not going to be a big jump if we have to in the future transportation we had talked about we had um this number that you're seeing here assumes a 5.3% increase over our prior year actuals and adjusting our budget to reflect that. Okay. Uh payments for educational purposes to non-school districts. This expense assumes a 7% increase over our prior year actuals. That 420,000 is not solely PSO of that amount. Um sorry, let me just grab that number. PSO for is 320,000. The rest is um dollars that are also contracted services, but um that the budget was a little bit shy on those. Uh moving on down, we have utilities. Um literally snow removal, $50,000 because we're just we're anticipating that's not going to be enough what we had in there. and then an additional 3,400 which was just a clerical adjustment. So that's the general fund list of actual line item adjustments similar to what you saw when we talked about the forecasted numbers going out into the multiple years. I used that same data, updated it for our budget as of November 17th because remember when you approve the total dollars of adopted budget, there is the line item budget that we're dealing with. And in our district, we allow for those budget adjustments between line items and we encourage it because we want to make sure if you're going to do a PO, do you have budget or not? If you don't have budget, you're not getting that PO approved. So that's the reason why we do do those what we call transfers. So you'll see that your line item budgets are going to shift and move around dep depending upon where that needs to be spent as um actual expenditures are being incurred. But the total is not changing now. The total is going to change with with this approval, right? And so that is how our um budget cycle works. And as we look at just the other funds briefly, um, community education did come through with some line item adjustments that they felt were needed. Total of revenue was $162,80 and expenditures 155614. When it comes to our debt service, previously in the adopted budget, the amount of interest income wasn't really taken into consideration. So that's a recalcul we do to see kind of what can we anticipate given the amount of dollars that we have um receiving from taxpayers that are going to go into payments, but we have those dollars set aside in an account until that's needed. And then other state revenues that come through as well. Our trust fund is 125,000 of local revenue that wasn't necessarily recorded previously and we felt it should be. And then when we look at our internal services fund, this is an an internal services fund. Basically takes into account the revenues and the expenditures you're going to incur for those internal services, which is your health and your health insurance, your dental insurance. And um you're going to find that those dollars are kind of in a separate fund all by themselves. They're not a part of the general fund, but how that those claims are coming through is what this is going to reflect. Okay. So, we felt that the health insurance needed to have an increase in well, let's start at the top. Miscellaneous health revenue needed an increase where we're going to see approximately $2.1 million more than what had originally been budgeted. And on other miscellaneous health income, there's another million dollars there. The interest 100,000. Then you have three lines of expenditures. A little bit for the health, for the dental, and for the consulting fees. You can see those are all slightly increasing. When they're increasing, so are our premiums. and those were adjusted then for that reason. You don't know when you're doing the adopted budget exactly how many people are going to take that insurance and so that's what has to come into play here. And taking a look at our OPED every year we have an amount that is levied on the um other post-employment benefits and that amount of that levy can um is it varies depending upon the actuarial study. So that needed to be adjusted by 350,000. These are the line item adjustments that we're making and the reasons behind the changes that you're seeing in the above table. And I guess the next step to point out would be the use of fund balance. When you adopted the budget for 26, the anticipation was that we would be on the general fund in exc of excess of the revenues by $982,438. After these adjustments are um included as recommendations, then you see that for the revised 26 budget, we would be anticipating that our expenditures would be 768423 in excess of the revenues for the general fund. That's the um the crux of the changes that we're recommending for your consideration. The action would be requested on the January 12th board meeting, but we wanted to lay this out there for people now and see um if there's any questions. >> Thank you. >> Up for discussion. >> Um yeah, I had a few things that I had emailed in. Thanks for the responses. Um I'm not sure I understood the um I guess my main concern is around um the revised res uh resolution. So when we originally approved the budget and had that 982k, we approved the use of restricted fund balances in specific areas. So I think we talked about reduct and um LTFM. There were three areas I have it somewhere. Um but the states were using unassigned fund balance. >> Um so I just want to understand that. So, are we no longer look looking at using those restricted fund balances for those purposes or is this in addition to the restricted um I don't know if this is very clear on the resolution. It it isn't entirely clear because you don't know right now, right? >> Okay. What you do know is that your line item budgets are going to exceed the revenues, right? and and in the proposed budgets. If we put these budget line items in, um the next layer of work would be to take and identify exactly which of these dollars and line items are restricted, which are not, and which are unassigned. Typically speaking though, when you are looking at an overexpenditure on your on your cost, let's take a look at the fiscical year 25 audited numbers. Where did we see those over expenditures? We saw them in transportation. We saw them in special education. both of which are pulling from the unassigned fund balance. Okay? >> Right? >> They are not in the restricted areas. So if you have um LTFM and you have expenditures that exceed your revenues for LTFM, which we will have this year because your levy adjustment um is uh $490,000 was adjusted down. So you know you're going to spend more than what you're going to see coming in for revenue in LTFM. As a result, you're going to spend down that fund balance. So that's built into this and that restricted fund balance will be reduced. It won't impact your unassigned at that point. Okay. So there's an example of that. But if you have over expenditures that occur in your special education, you don't have any restricted funds just for special education that's restricted and carried in a fund balance. Instead, it's anticipated because we have a cross subsidy that you're using your general fund dollars to cover that difference. the similar case with um English learners, right? We don't have enough funding coming in for those specific purposes and needs to fully cover the cost of those services needed. So then you have a cross subsidy. That cross subsidy is always unassigned dollars. Okay. Does that help? I mean sort of but I guess we went into approving that budget with the assumption for example I think I had written down 300,000 of it was for readact. we were taking, you know, part of that budget expenditures in um in um that expenditure section, right, was for redact that we could specifically take out of restricted because that money was sort of set aside. That was one example. So I would expect to see kind of that same level of breakdown to understand like I don't think personally I'm not a fan of just approving you know 768k of overage and unassigned fund balance unless it's out of a specific um restricted category for a specific one-time purpose like we were discussing when we approved the budget. So that's what I'm and maybe it would be help helpful if we could get the updated like revenue and expenditure breakdown with these updated numbers um to see that. But um that was the assumption when we approved the budget that these specific costs were for purposes and that was why we approved using that restricted balance. So I'm trying to understand, you know, we have an additional $3 million worth of expenses. Are they in those categories or are they now taken out of certain categories and moved somewhere else where we're not able to use that restricted? So all of the redact money as an example is included in those additional expenditures. Yes. But it has a restricted fund balance. Right. So those expenditures are going to comes directly out of that restricted fund balance. And our fund balance policy says you're going to use your restricted fund balance whenever you have expenditures that are applicable first before you use your unassigned. So that will happen. But let's say that restricted fund balance has a budget and we're, you know, we've got an allocation of $357,000. That $357,000 for readact and we have activities that going to occur. They might spend 250,000. That means 100,000 is still going to carry over in that restricted fund balance. Okay. But your budget was 350 seven. Okay, you with me? >> I am. But typically your budget is for that purpose, right? And then if you know if you don't use the extra 50 grand, you don't get to use it for something else. It's just you >> it's carried forward still under that restricted for redact again. Right. Right. >> Yep. So that's going to happen if it's if we're talking just redact. Right. But what I'm suggesting is that we have expenditures, particularly transportation, that is going to exceed what we have in revenue coming in. As a result, that's unassigned fund balance. To be honest, if you take a look at the dollar amount we're talking about, you could use that all as just transportation costs. You know, because transportation costs are not restricted. I mean, there's no aid coming in that is restricted just for transportation. you know, part of the gened formula is int indicated and expected to be used towards transportation doesn't come close to covering our cost of transportation. So, if you were to take and look at your fund your budget and exclude all transportation out of the mix, you wouldn't have a deficit or you wouldn't have expenditures exceeding your revenues. So, that's all unassigned. So, when I say it's unassigned, it's because that's really what we're using is the unassigned dollars. Let me see if I can explain another way. When we did the audit, the auditors were like, "You have an assignment that in the previous year was enough to cover what you were expecting to be a deficit in the following year on the adopted budget. This year, you had an adopted budget that's set for 9 82,438. our audit for 25 does not show in assigned an amount large enough to cover that full amount. Why not? My response to the auditors was we don't have the unassigned fund balance available for it. So I can't assign it all because I've got to stay as close as I can to the 8% as possible. So ideally what we want to see happen for ourselves is we want an assigned amount. Remember assignment means that it can be done at an administrative level. Committed is at the board level. Restricted is at the state level. Okay? And then your unassigned is just available for everything else. So, as we're talking about what we want to see happen as we move forward, you want to see the restricted funds that are still available for those specific state purposes and only those purposes, right? So, you just keep track of them. That's a requirement of ours. You want to see an assigned amount that's going to cover any anticipated over expenditures in the future year. And then you want to see an unassigned amount that's going to be at your your fund balance policy, which is to strive to be at least 8%. Okay, that's where we want to be. That's where we would be healthy. Okay, we can't get there right now. So, I can't show um an assigned amount that's going to cover this um budget. So, instead of restricted, I think that was a to me it's it's not correct to say it was restricted in the past. I don't know exactly. I can't speak to that because it was only assigned. Restricted is what state determined, right? And that's that's already determined and included in our expenditures. But when you talk about our our assigned amount, that's at the local level and you're pulling from your unassigned in order to set that aside for the specific purpose of being able to cover the over expenditure you're anticipating for the following year. And ideally, you want that. We couldn't make that happen in the FY25 audit. We just didn't have enough. >> I I mean, I think if we could get a breakdown, an an updated budget breakdown um showing what were expected in each department like we had, that would be helpful because that was very explicit that we are taking certain buckets out of um restricted fund balance, not unassigned. This was a document you received previously from >> Yeah, it was like a detailed um it's on the June I'm looking at the June board meeting where we approved and it says the use of 982,438 of restricted revenue for the general fund. It was the same exact resolution that we've approved. And I guess >> my question and I I won't I we'll come back to you, but my question to add on to that is so are we using that 982,000 of restricted and now we're asking for an additional 783 of unassigned. >> No, your revised budget that is recommended is actually an improvement upon your adopted. It was anticipated at the adopted that you were going to spend in excess of your revenues by 982,000 >> but explicitly stated that we would use restricted balances that were out of three different buckets. That was very very explicitly stated in that June >> and restricted funds are one time only funds. And so >> I think I'll have to go back and and listen to the conversation um because I I'm I'm really not clear on exactly where that's coming from because I'm telling you that >> I'm I'm not um your expenditures that are overextended over your revenues I do not believe are going to be a result of any of your restricted dollars. Follow me. It's going to be because of the unassigned the costs that are in excess of the revenue because you just don't get enough revenue for these expenses. >> And I think my concern is you're still dipping into those restricted funds though. >> If I couldern if I could, >> it's my first day. I've been playing a game of double dutch just trying to get in here. So you'll just have to excuse me. Um, first, if if I'm understanding correctly, what you're saying is if we have redact funds and you budgeted $350,000 >> when we adopted that budget, if that was over, then we would take from the restricted funds because it was over. We we over spent. And that's an that is a situation where you would take from the restricted funds to replace that. So if we spent what we were supposed to or we underspent what we were supposed to but we over spent in an area like transportation, we can't take from the restricted funds anymore because it's not restricted work. So what we adopted in June or July quite frankly right now is irrelevant because that was then and now we have overages in other areas that are not restricted funds. So while we explicitly while this board explicitly approved restricted funds that is no longer the case. Am I understanding that correctly? >> If I if I may just comment on that. Um, Director Smith, what we approved was using um what we approved is certain expenses because they were coming out of restricted funds. So, we would have never plans on that $400,000 worth of redact literacy training and all the things in our budget if we didn't have restricted funds to use for that purpose. That was exactly why those things were there was four different buckets. >> Sure. >> So, I certainly would recommend everyone kind of go back to that meeting, but that was we were very clearly talked about that. So, we would have never included that in a budget or approved a budget with those expenses had we not had those restricted funds for that purpose. >> I'm sorry, did we use those restricted funds for the readact? >> The intent was there to use for that purpose. You have restricted funds that in are in a fund balance for restrict purposes only for readact. As an example, LTFM is in there. Capital would be in there. >> There's a whole list of them, right? >> Um there's a one-page document. I've been accustomed to using in my past that kind of lays it out where it starts at the top of the unassigned, but then it lists each of the different restricted areas, shows you the beginning fund balance, your revenues, your expenditures, and your ending fund balance. >> I'm thinking that that is what you would be looking for to be updated. >> Yeah. Or just even the like crazy spreadsheet that we had is any any whatever is easiest for you to update in those buckets. But I I just I if I can go back to just like that was my um biggest concern with this is we're now stating we're going to use unassigned fund balance when we approved expenses because we knew they were coming out of restricted for a certain purpose and I personally um think that I mean we are violating policy by approving this budget and I think we can't do that as a board. Um we're knowingly violating our own policy. So, if if we're going to approve unassigned fund balances, well, we really shouldn't be able to do that until we go back and have a conversation about edit editing our policy first. Um, >> that's where my question comes in. Uh, first off, thank you for the level of detail that you've gone into explaining this. I want to say that first off. Second is where if we were to approve this, where does that put us at with our fund balance policy? Yep. Yep. >> Because I know you discussed that with us at the last board meeting. >> Um and so did the auditor. They he >> I think that was a recommendation from him. I don't want to misquote him. >> So let's back up to when you approve this would have been June 9th. Right. At that point in time um was the conversation that expenditures for transportation were going to exceed budget? >> Yes. >> Yes. as well as special education again and most of the and most of the detail for that and the discussion again trying to explain restricted versus unrestricted etc actually happened in the study session before that not in the June 9th meeting I did not hear what what everyone else said they heard I didn't hear we're taking anything out of restricted but I did hear that we were going to be over um and and it was explained and thorough so I think the best bet is to go back and actually listen to that meeting. >> Sure. >> Uh because I'm not I'm not I didn't hear what what others are claiming they did. >> Okay. >> So, um I will pull together the one pager and I will run it on the adopted budget and I will run it with the revised budget so that you will be able to compare those two. Okay. And then in addition I want to state that um anything that is restricted in the previous year in a fund balance at the end of the audited year is going to be then available for expenditures in the coming year. Your revenues may not be there because in the case of readact you got the money in 25. You're not going to get more money in 26 for that particular purpose but you are going to spend. Okay. So those expenditures are certainly going to come only out of that restricted fund balance. you cannot exceed that without the general fund having to pick that up as unassigned. Okay. Um there may be activities that would exceed a particular reserve, right? And when that's the case, then that's where your unassigned is needed to pick up those additional costs, right? Um so I'm not certain I'm getting to exactly what you're asking, Dr. Johnson. Could you repeat a little bit more about what you want to hear? Oh, fund balance. That's what it was. Sorry. >> Okay. So when we did the audit it was 7.6% was the calculation. Your our fund balance policy states that it is to strive to be at 8% for unassigned fund balance of your budgeted expenditures. That's great when you're planning and budgeting throughout the year. When you get to the audit, keep in mind that your base just moved on you, right? Because now that calculation is going to be based upon your your actual expenditures as a percentage of your or I'm sorry your fund balance as a percentage of your actual expenditures. Okay. The goal in a revised budget is to get those expenditures to be as close to the actuals so that you're not seeing a big variance. Similar on the revenue side. Okay. Last year's audit we had expenditures that exceeded significantly in a couple of areas. And in that case then um that that impacts your fund balance calculation compared to what you were budgeting and planning for and now you're doing it against additional expenditures that are $1.5 million higher. Okay. So as we move into this particular revision and you run the calculation that 7.6% 6% becomes 7% after the 768. Sorry, I got to get the numbers in front of me. Right. After the 768 423. Okay. So when we talk about what we're going to do for the new year, we have some flexibility with regard to what are we going to consider for total expenditures, what are we going to do for budget adjustments, right? How much of that can you do in the current year is the question. Oftent times at this time of year um people in my role were trying to say, well, where is it we might undersspend that will offset where we might overspend? And you hope for more of the underspend. Like I came from a district where we were finding it very difficult to find staff and so we were finding a lot of positions unfilled. We had this ability then to kind of offset some of those over expenditures with that under spend. That's not our current reality. Right? So the challenge right now is as we shift into this revised budget, you're going to see from me what I anticipate those actual expenditures to be represented in the revised budget I'm giving to you for approval. Okay. I am adjusting that transportation significantly to bring it back up to where I think those actual expenditures are going to land closer to, right? Um, additionally though, I'm also increasing the special education revenue. And for us, that's significant this year because of the overexpenditure in the previous year. So, in taking a look at trying to balance this in conjunction with also knowing and understanding that we need to find a more conservative approach, it's going to land us in a place where we're going to end this year, my hope is in a better position than we did in the previous where if we're going to see adjustments, it's going to be to the other side of the fence. Does that make sense? We want to see revenue that's coming in higher than budgeted and we want to see expenditures that come in under budget. Okay? If you look at the areas that we were overbudget, it's not as a result of spending that occurred that was just like, you know, inappropriate or anything of that nature. It was because of costs that we can't necessarily do much about. Transportation costs couldn't do much about those things. We have um work being done now to try and review and address um address the issues and try and figure out what that recommendation is going to be for the future. Okay, it's something you have to respond to in a way, right? Um but for a revised budget, now is the time to make the adjustment. A school district could choose to do another budget adjustment in the spring if you find that there's a significant change of some kind or another. I don't foresee that being a necessity for us. The one area that would be is if we find that the special education aid adjustment final calculation that the state's coming up with looks significantly different than we anticipated. Okay, that's one reason I could see us possibly considering that because you want to make sure that your budget at the end is reflective of where you think that actual is going to come in. But at this juncture, um what you see before you is us going through rerunning all the revenues for the enrollments. It's and that wasn't very far different. Okay. Um in our district, just for enrollment purposes, let's keep in mind the fact that your fall numbers usually come in higher than you do at the end of the year. And that's very typical. Um and sometimes it's not about losing students, it's more about where are students receiving some of what they get, right? So if they are partially with us and partially with um PSO or or something else, not PSO, that's probably a poor example, but um online school, right? And yet there's somewhat with us, right? They're still going to be listed in your fall count because that's more of a headcount. They're not necessarily going to be a full 1.0 ADM at the end. Okay? So some of the some of the decline in numbers isn't because kids are leaving. It's because of what they're using us for in our services, right? Um I think what else to I think that's all I have at that moment. Um, Director Ryder, I just wanted to add that I think if you go back and watch those two June meetings or maybe it was May study session, June board meeting, I think the the thing that it was my understanding as a board director per our port board policy 701 where the board policy does say the school board shall review and project revenues and expenditures for the school district for the next fiscal year and make such adjustments in the expenses or expenditures as necessary to carry throughout the education program within the revenues. And when we approved the budget back in June, it was my understanding that that was a balanced budget, even though we were taking $900,000 out of our restricted fund for the things that we were talked about during those meetings, but that was a balanced budget. And now you're basically coming back and asking us to re to adopt a revised budget that's not balanced anymore and goes against our policy. And I mean it even says in Dr. Thomas's contract that we have to follow policy. He has to follow policy. We have to follow policy as a board director. So I think it would be my ask to go back and rework this so that we can if we need to revise different categories. We got more revenue for special education. Wonderful. Um we got more revenue for other things. Great. But if we need to revise the expenditures, they have to be within the revenues that we receive per our policy or we're not we're breaking policy. >> I agree with that. I I can appreciate what you're saying. Um I can see where the conversation may have been about those reserves. What you see in my revised budget should not be a worsened condition, but I want to prove that to you. So, let me just do that. >> I appreciate that. >> If if I may add to I appreciate the fact that you're like bringing additional expenditures and trying to be conservative with these numbers. I think that's really great. I I would rather you give us a picture of what reality is than not. Right? So I I think you know for me it's not an ask to go revise numbers um based on your assumptions but really it's for the administration as a whole to look at the expenditures and determine do we have to cut something else right in order to have a balanced budget. Um because that to me is is what's key here like we are we really cannot vote for this as it is in direct violation of policy. So, I don't I mean, and it's just in my opinion irresponsible spending. So, um I know that we're lean. I know that it's hard to cut things, but if that is like we can't approve an unbalanced budget and continue to dip into our unassigned fund balance, um so if that's what we're left with, you know, we need to understand those choices. >> Anything else? Is there any any further comments on this? Um I'd like to understand like what what do you think is your >> to we cannot spend more money than we receive. We c we are below our policy in and fund balance. If we don't have emergency funds for four to six weeks of operating expenses, god forbid something should happen, right? um if if there was a tragic event in a school or you know there was funding frozen for a period of time and we can't pay our staff and there's a million things that that's that's why the policy is there it's an emergency fund and so I do think it's irresponsible to go below what we have voted as a board in policy um and and I don't even know can we do that like that was my question is that even possible we're knowingly violating our own >> we need to revise the policy and I think if If we as a board, just speaking from our community who doesn't like to pass levies, I think we're going to have a really hard time um if we're not showing fiscal responsibility and living within our means, I think it's going to be a very hard ask to go ask our community for more money. >> I'm sorry. It's my first day, so I'm going to ask a question. Is this money that we already spent? So, what Okay. Okay. Thank you. >> No. um the the dollar amounts that you look at on the general fund alone because that's I think where the confusion and concern is right um you know the expenditure adjustments that we're making the federal adjustments on the expenditure side compared to the revenue side are um a little bit higher but not very much your salary and benefits to be 280,000 is all you're looking for for adjustments there that's not bad on the size budget we're talking about um severance That's that's an adjustment that if we didn't make it, we may not be over budget right on that. You might find though that you have a significant number of people who may retire and then that number is much higher, right? So those that's that's an occasion where you shoot for an estimate and you may or may not make that mark. Right? Transportation. This is $1.786 million that we're adding to the expenditure budget. Um if we don't add if we say we just add 1 mill okay you would no longer have an amount that is you'd have a balanced budget you'd have you'd have revenue in excess of expenditures but I'm not suggesting I don't know that your actual expenditures are going to come in under that amount is my point. Okay. >> When doing a budget and preparing a a proposed revised budget, I have suggested an increase to the transportation costs reflective of where we landed last year because that is what would be needed in order to cover those actual expenditures is the anticipation. And as I recall from uh uh when chair white was still we were having this discussion with chair white and I I recall him saying you know in these two um buckets in which we consistently find oursel over it in transportation special education costs if we could make adjustments there. And what I hear you saying, Director Writer, and thank you for, um, your explicit, you know, going through all of this with us, um, is that that's exactly what you're doing with a more conservative approach. But I feel like what's um with the with the comments and the concerns that have have been expressed at the board um tonight, I think that there's um additional comparisons that you'd like to see from what how things were presented to what they are now. when you talk about the buckets or when you talk about that um expanded spreadsheet and being able to see uh I think one thing that um might be a little bit of a a disconnect or a struggle that we're having is that um the questions that we're asking is including information more than what's in our in our packet. um we're ask we're having conversation and we're we're discussing things that are from the June meetings and from past um information given and so um while all of you know that's what we do at a study session is we're we're discussing all of these things um this is the the uh first goaround at this revised final budget and so I think this is good conversation and good perspectives given Um >> um >> yeah, >> if I just may real quickly too. So, >> and I I go back to I think our two meetings ago when we were I think it was at the audit meeting perhaps that very point that you made with the former chair and I want to just bring context to this comment about um you know the message to the community about living with within our means. Um, I don't disagree, but where we're above our means is not necessarily in our full control. And and I think that's a very different message than saying we are living beyond our means. Um, because everything else is contained within that. Um, we we clearly can see where the outliers are. So, we're trying to build and norm for that and also consider other options about contracts etc. um, in that space too. But I I I caution the statement of living within our means as if there's a level of recklessness around spending because the areas we're talking about aren't the areas where we're are over where you would say we have all this unnecessary spending. So I just want to share that. >> Thank you. >> I know say I >> appreciate that. I think the challenge then is if transportation we have fewer students right than last year. We have fewer students than last year. >> The routs don't change though. >> I understand the routes don't change. But isn't it our job being fiscally responsible to challenge the transportation company our resources optimize our routes but to say we're going to add a million7 >> when we have fewer students than we did last year. I mean I just that's where I'm challenged. Like it's easy to just say okay go ahead spend an extra million7 you know it's but we need to fix it we need to find places to cut because our policy says we have to live and there's a reason we have this policy I mean it was put in place because we are a fiscally responsible district and so if we want to remain fiscally responsible then we have to live within our policy that's built within our within our expenses within our re revenue >> and if I may just I don't think I think we all understand like transportation totally, you know, it's out of our control right now. We're trying to fix it. We all appreciate that. Understand it. Nobody wants to make any more cuts, but the reality is we might have to to make up for transportation. And so that's where absolutely I mean I I can I can appreciate that statement um directors uh in where you're coming from in that >> and tying us back and I just offer a an additional insight. So when we are making additional cuts to offset um a fixed industry cost, I'll just call it that, you know, for a lack of better term that we don't necessarily control. Um going back to our first topic tonight, we're going to be cutting from the very fabric of support that we need then to get the outcomes. and and and we find ourselves in this catch 22 and we just say keep working harder, keep working harder. Okay, we're going to reassign that to this staff. Folks are feeling it and and so when when we don't have the resources of the infrastructure of support, but we have a balanced budget, but what then then something else is going to give and and that's the challenge um that I think is important to convey. We don't disagree that we would love to find ways to in which we are exploring how we can mitigate those costs. Okay. If we make deeper cuts, which we anticipate we're going to be making cuts um without in a significant amount of revenue, um we will be compromising the infrastructure of support for doing anything in this district. And I just the board needs to understand that. And it doesn't matter if it's admin cuts or teacher cuts or para cuts. We're such a small district. You will feel it everywhere. It doesn't matter what it is. We're going to feel that. And I just want us to understand how do we temper the expectations then that we're going to move needles miraculously when we have to make significant cuts. >> I think Dr. Thomas, it's about priorities. And you know that million dollars of ANI funds, it's about priorities. And so I get really frustrated when I hear about cut cut when in my my feeling is it's about priorities. And like you said, giving the staff they need the support they need, but then it's administrative administrative's job to figure out how do they how do they fund those priorities and those become the priorities versus other things and that's a tough job. And so I think but that's our what that's why we have the policy. So um >> thank you. We'll go on to uh the next uh item in the study session tonight is our budget priorities. Uh we'll open that up for discussion. looking at this um this what was presented in our board packet uh follows along with what was given um what we decided uh previously. Um if anybody has any comments or questions or dialogue regarding that >> should I read it? Yeah, I was going to say I think it'd be nice for our community if you want to read it. >> Yeah, absolutely. Um, uh, resolution on the 2627 budget priorities. Uh, the board of directors of Prior Lake Savage Area Schools hereby directs and empowers the superintendent to bring forth a recommended budget for the 2627 school year that prioritizes empowering each student to reach their full potential in the following areas. academic excellence. Support student achievement by maintaining and lowering class- size targets to ensure students receive personalized attention and support they need to thrive and maintain and enhance differentiation and enrichment programming for gifted and advanced learners, ensuring all students are appropriately challenged and supported at their individual levels. The second area was optimize resources, streamline transportation operations, and evaluate partnerships to maximize cost savings and operational efficiency, enabling the district to allocate more resources directly to classroom instruction and student learning. Uh, you know, one of the things as I uh visited the schools through American Education Week um was was a a consistent concern um in in um the financial state of the district, the if with nothing changing um uh the cuts that will continue to happen. And while our strategic plan does list um our four our four priorities, academic excellence, optimized resources, positive learning environments, community partnerships, I think it's it would it's really important for the board to be sensitive to the I mean, we're all of this is we're it's people, it's our staff, it's our students. Um, and so with these continuous cuts, I think, um, you know, I just want I just want to relay the consistent message that I received last week was that it's hard to consistently hear about um, academic excellence when um, everything that is needed to support that is, you know, falls on one a single teacher in a classroom. and um hearing that at uh most locations that I I um visited, I'm just sensitive to it and I just I just, you know, I just wanted to share that. Um so with that, uh we can open our our um budget priorities from the board uh um up for discussion. And if there is none, we can if there's no I mean I just took what we discussed at last meeting and typed it up and obviously that was shared in Friday's 52. >> Okay. Um I just have one one comment and I want to go back to also my trips around the various schools in the past week. um when you're talking about lowering class size targets um the cost to that is incredibly large. Um so and right now I I I'm director Olstead, vice chair Olstead said you know what she observed and what I observed in the um particularly in the ninth and tth grade um classrooms as well as the middle school um that these class sizes are incredibly large. Um they're overwhelmingly large and and they're getting that way also at the elementary. uh and the teachers are expected to wear multiple hats and have less and less support in the schools. So if that is our priority of lowering class size or keeping them the same or lower in general, um the cost to that is is huge. It's you know just a couple of students per class I think is in the millions if I remember correctly in the calculations. So, um, we need to understand that when we're talking about optimizing resources and where our priorities really sit because if our priorities with academic excellence, we can't cut. We just can't. >> I think the one comment that I would like to ask the board um the in the typing up of this the supporting student achievement by maintaining or lowering class size targets. I think that um maintaining I don't think that we're in a position to lower class size targets. I mean financially speaking we're just not in that position. Uh so I am curious um if we can if we can edit that by just saying maintaining I think that's what we discussed. So, if I may, Chair Bullian, um, >> so that that evening when we were talking about that, >> um, we were talk, we weren't talking about class sizes, we're talking about class size targets, which are two different things. >> And also based upon our enrollment, um, if enrollment goes down, the targets kind of adjust for themselves. So, so I I think I think it's captured correctly. Okay. um from the discussion that we had um >> I think >> no I was going to say and just to director France's point yes on average it's roughly and you can check my math it's about for one student K12 uh in true class size it's about a million dollars for one student decrease um across the entire K12 spectrum >> I think if I recall from the conversation is that we're not increasing like that's not something that we're going to come when you're developing your budget increasing class sizes is off the table based on this bullet point. >> Um, act this is this. No, it's it's operating it's within target. We're not we're not increasing class like we did last year. >> Right. So, our sizes may fluctuate as long as we're within target, right? >> Um at or below that. >> Yep. That was my understanding. So, I'm comfortable with it as is. >> Any other discussion? Um the only other thing was that um for the differentiation and the gifted and talented that we said we weren't going to spend more in that area than what we are getting from the state already. We weren't going to exceed those and those would be your typical restricted funds if we get so much from >> our GT funds that come in. >> Anything else? >> All right. >> No, go ahead. Um I'm having trouble with enhanced differentiation based on again kind of the conversations that we've had. Um if >> I recall the discussion around this it was enhancing the syn are we calling it the old synergy in replacement of sage if that does does that >> it's how it's how we were moving forward within the budget allotted that we received what program we could build to address that um students that may be identified and you know that are talent talented above you know a certain threshold >> right >> so so That's that was the context of this conversation and you know I think we were just talking about like the amount of FTE that we get from the state around that is like roughly the equivalent of like 3 FTE um give give or take. So it's it's it's nominal um and uh you know and then also looking at the interpretation of statute that we might be able to save cost based upon how we go through identification processes and not do full batteries of KATS etc. So we have a different model. So we find ways to address the talent needs um and learning needs of our students and we also added the fact that that plus you know ensuring all students are appropriately challenged and for what that looks like for that particular kid. You know that's still in our scope of work. >> So are we looking at the elementary level or K through 12? um >> with this bullet >> th this bullet I think applies across the board how how we're supporting >> this bullet for me in terms of how we define equity is all about equity >> what are the unique learning needs that kids have you know that we would need to differentiate our instruction there are some where we slow pacing down and then there are some that we accelerate pacing you know advanced content etc um so this this bullet was to the whole experience and and I just want to be clear. >> I don't know how this is achievable for us. >> Well, let me let me just let me just share. So, these are budget priorities, okay? You're not scripting what that actually looks like. These are just some guideposts. Michael, when you and your team are building out the budget, we want to make sure that you are meeting the unique learning needs of our kids. We're doing this bullet right now. I I just want to be very clear. >> U we're doing this bullet. >> Um and that and what we're doing has drastically sh has drastically shifted based upon the limited resources that we have to bring things to certain scales. um or you know bandwidth of you know particularly at the middle school level where we um um had programming in the past what does that look like supporting them in their home schools versus concentrated on one campus so it looks different you know Mr. Thor talked a little bit about how they differentiate at the high school with some of the AP. I mean, it's happening. Um, and the board is saying and Michael do that and we understand that it may look different based upon the resources and what we have to do to adjust for that, but we're not going to abandon differentiating for our kids. >> Well, I think that was the agreement with Sage is like if we're not going to have Sage, then how do we do it differently? And I think the whole board, we had full board alignment that we did not want to get rid of that gifted and talented program, but it was going to look different. And so that's that's where it's and it goes back to our strategic plan. Honestly, it's um I mean it's aligning with that plan. So >> I I think the the question is maintain and enhance or maintain or enhance maybe a a little bit more gentler way of doing it. something that we could we could live with because otherwise to say and enhance we don't have the money. >> Yeah, we might not have the ban. That's a fair I think that's a fair push. Change and or or and or you know because there might be areas that we do that and not in all areas. >> By the way, thank you Director Mason for >> writing this up. >> Yeah. Any other discussion on that? We'll move on. All right. Next up, the 2627 cal school calendar draft. >> Director Catherine. >> Hello and good evening. >> Thank you, >> Chair Bullion and Directors, Superintendent. Um, in front of you, you have, you're going to have to bear with me through this. Uh, in front of you, you have, um, a draft. Um, we've had two, since the last time we met, uh, the calendar committee got together, we've met twice. uh for two hours and we spent most of those four hours working on this uh 2627 draft. Um and uh the calendar committee is made up of we have a principal from every level, a teacher from every level, member from teaching and learning. Uh we have another member from human resources and myself. Um and so I enjoyed getting to learn the history um that makes up this district's calendars over the years and where the thought process has come into. Um, so that was uh fun for me to hear all of that. And this year when the committee got together, a lot of the focuses that they wanted to talk about were around elementary conferencing was one and around PD was another one. um from some of the committee members what they're hearing from some of their families and some of their teachers that um with elementary conferencing with you know some of the members of the community that uh it would be beneficial to have some time during the day to conference and not just always in an evening because some of the members of community uh work during those hours and so it'd be beneficial to have some conferencing time um during the day. So that was one of the things that we we focused on was seeing how we could u accommodate that. And you know I give the committee all the credit. There's just so much knowledge that's on that group of people who have been doing this for so many years of thinking of strategic ways to accommodate that to to help the families uh here in the district with that. Um along with like I said some of it was around our professional development. Um some of the conversations stem from um attend you know some of the professional development days um based on where they're placed in the calendar might not be as quite as heavenly intended if those days were maybe placed someplace else. Um as well as uh some thought around is there a way to maybe break professional development up into you know maybe half days um instead of looking at trying to professionally de develop for full 8 hour days which sometimes can be difficult for all of us. So those were a lot of the conversations that s from that. So what you have in front of you is the makeup of some of those uh a majority of those conversations where um some of the highlights um you'll see is that one of we did move a professional development day um and to November 3rd. Some of the conversation is we realize that we do we know that we only have one school that is a voting site, but I think some of the feeling was that if we could, you know, not have our students in school um on any election day um especially the ones at the polling site, that would be a benefit to our to our families and to our students. So, we did move one of the professional development days to that Tuesday, November 3rd, and that way uh students would not um be in school. Um, another thing that uh you'll probably then realize is that right now um on that MEA uh Wednesday that now has become a uh student day, student contact day for both elementary and high school. And the biggest reason that it is not for middle school and they're going to use that as a professional development day is also as a work day is simply because that is their Washington DC trip. So they have about 250 students out of the middle schools at that point in time along with 20 staff members. so did not feel that it was probably um a good idea to make that a student contact day for them. Um but then we shifted that around um um as well for for them. Um so some of the other like I said some of the other kinds of things um some of the members did bring in some like calendars from our some of our neighboring districts um that did show that some of our neighboring districts are running uh conferences during the day and that they are you know doing having that time for the families that might appreciate having a conference during the day rather than doing it of an evening. The other thing is too from an elementary standpoint, as most of you probably know, right now they run a conference for um we have two three-hour conference night conferences this year along with a 4-hour conference, so a total of 10 hours twice a year. Next year, this would do 12 hours worth of conferencing um twice a year. And the reason behind that is with some anticipation of possibly staffing closer to our targets that the elementary teachers may need an opportunity to have a little bit more conferencing time with with those families. Just as I'm sure all of you know that you know when you're doing conferences for 15 minutes back to back to back sometimes some of those do go over and you need um a little bit more time. So that was kind of like I said those were some of the focuses that we um worked on in our 4 hours. I I know there was some discussion around 2728. We just not have time. We did start talking about some of those. Um and we did, you know, start putting some drafts together. I think one of the things that we talked about was we had mentioned at the last board meeting about going out to the community in in January and talking a little bit about um a holiday to holiday, seeing what their take is on that as well as uh possibly before after Labor Day. So, we wanted to work on maybe putting something out there for the community, getting their feedback, and then, you know, bringing more of a of a thoughtful 2728, but in the 4 hours we had, it just wasn't enough time to bring back a really good draft for you guys for a 2720, you know, for the multiple models of 2728. So, we just focused most of our time around 2627. >> Thank you. Any discussion? >> Um, Mr. Dr. Catherine, I really appreciate you um talking about um getting the feedback from the community because I understand this impacts staff, but it also impacts 8,000 students and 16,000 parents. And so I think I look at it as a representative of our community. I look at it from their perspective. And a couple things that um I wanted to ask questions of is one um I'd love to understand how many um I I keep hearing that we have extra days in our calendar. Prior Lake has extra days baked in their calendar compared to other districts. Have you can you give any feedback on there? I was heard like we have like an extra six days baked in our calendar. Is that >> Well, I mean I think from Yeah, from the Department of Education roughly they say if you run about 165 days at like 6.2 hours a day, you're going to meet your educational threshold. In every level, we're going to be a little bit different. So those six days for surely are probably at the secondary level, but that's simply because you're required more minutes at the secondary level than you are at the elementary level. So like kindergarten for example, I want to say it's like 930 some hours at a kindergartener needs to um or 425 instructional hours at kindergarten and then 935 grades 1 through 5 and then 1,020 grades 7 through 12. So, you're always going to have to make sure you you have a number of days at that secondary level to to adhere to that and then you have some more wiggle room at your at your elementary, you know, and middle school levels. Okay. >> Um, as far as November 3rd, um, my only concern about that is one, parents, you start the week on a Monday and then all a sudden no school on a Tuesday and having to take off work and all that. Um the other thing is it's right budding up to um end of quarter I believe. Yeah, end of quarter is November 12th. So preparing our kids being off school closer to the end of the quarter is hard for them because they're getting ready for exams. They're, you know, doing their tests. So I I would question that November 3rd. I understand we have that voting precinct, but I did not see any other districts that had um election day off. Um, I'd actually like us to make it a f federal holiday. I think it'd be great. But, um, but from a learning perspective and not disrupting the learning environment, I'm I'm challenged with that date. Um, and then January 4th, I really didn't understand that as everybody's coming back from we're all excited to go back to school. All the kids are excited to go back to school and then we have to take another day off. So, help me understand that because that did not make sense to me either. like we have so many days off in January and from again I think about learning disrupt disruption to the learning environment we have you know we have work to do you saw that tonight we got to focus on >> being as much as we can >> no great question and and that's one that you know we talked about it within the committee as well too um it's just one day that uh one we had to try to you know look at where we could um get in another day from a professional development standpoint Um, and are there other options? We definitely we could go back and look, but one of the things that was talked about was uh I think it was uh referenced as kind of like a uh soft introduction back from a teacher standpoint that they would then be coming back. They would have some professional development. They would, you know, get ready to go for then coming back after that break. But, um, it was brought up within the committee that that we understand what that date's going to to to look like. Um, and uh, it was just decided at that point in time that we would put it on there and see what the recommendation was. >> I have a couple questions. >> Yeah. >> Um, the October 14th um, parent conferences for middle schools specifically. So, I would be challenged having conferences um, starting out of MEA. I know a lot of families travel during that time on fall vacations, whatever. Um, and then also as a parent of a middle schooler and one going on the DC trip, how would we be able to attend conferences? And a lot of those kids go to the conferences, I believe. So, if if a lot of the students are gone, um, is that the right time to have conferences? I don't know. I would >> Yeah. I mean it, you know, once again that was, you know, brought up in the committee and both our middle school principal and our middle school teacher was there that felt that, you know, that it would that it would work or at least um to to try it. Um and but yes that was brought up and uh even by a few people about the kids not being there and is it something they want to attend and go to those conferences but it was the recommendation from you know the people on the committee that are in that environment that said that they feel that having that conference time during the day during MEA could work. Would we offer makeup conferences for parents that are gone or like I'm on the trip myself. Would I be able to have conferences for my two kids in school? I don't know. I'm just throwing that feels concerning to me. I don't know. I feel I I just feel like a lot of people I know in the community travel that week. So, >> um I that would be one concern for me um to maybe take back. But and then I just in general have a question about the um staff development days. Is there a like number that I didn't see anything in the teacher contract but I wasn't sure. Is there a number that we have to have in our calendar or it feels like when comparing to other districts um we have a few more than than most districts surrounding us. Is there a reason for that or just additional development days that we offer? I don't know if it's contractually or just something we have in calendar. >> No, there's not from a contractual standpoint. um the the 4 days is is what has been done. Um and I do know for 2728 that is something that we are looking at to possibly talk about is the amount of of PD days. Um but as far as getting something for 26 27 with the timeline that we had, we just didn't know if we would have enough time to have those robust robust discussions. And once again, um, you know, looking at potential, you know, a new revised meet and confer, um, felt that that would probably be a great place to start that discussion. >> Okay. Yeah. And I I also had those dates circled as far as concerns with the Tuesday. again as a working parent um and we don't have child care in our middle school for example or for our special needs kids and other things um taking a Tuesday off is difficult um as well as I think for children like going to school for a day then having a day off and then going back to school like I would much prefer to see that on a Monday or Friday. Uh so that no November 3rd date I don't love. Um >> we did take it from a Thursday just so you're aware. I think that date was originally Thursday, September 24th was the date that we took that from. So from um >> from this year, do we have a Thursday this year? >> I don't remember some of them. Maybe >> we moved all our half. >> I thought we moved them all to Friday. So >> no, >> I thought there was discussion. >> It should be Wednesdays, I do believe. >> Oh, no, you're right. It was Friday. Yep. Yep. Okay. >> I I guess I would I would advocate for a Monday or Friday, personally. Um, and then the January 4th also like get we get back to work, everyone's gung-ho trying to get at it. We have to take off a a vacation day the first day of the year. Um, that's that's very challenging for I think a lot of people in the community. Um, so I guess that was my feedback. >> Yeah. The only thing I would say is January's got a lot of days off. Um, three right with the 4th, the 18th, and 29th if I'm reading this correctly. That's that's just three days. Um if we could split that up, I agree with with the other ones on on the third. Um I'll be the dead horse with that. um moving those into other months um just seems appropriate in any way we that could possibly be done. >> And I was just add I know I wasn't here at the last meeting. I apologize for that. Um but like the day of the day before Thanksgiving, that's like an extra day off. Um, my feeling is that by the time you hit Memorial Day and you're getting into almost the middle of June, like people are so spent. They want to be on summer vacation. And so, um, any any way we can, you know, be in school during the school year and be out of school by the time you hit Memorial Day or even like into that first week of June, I would be a strong advocate for. So, I mean, I can see four days in this calendar that could potentially could go away and then we could we could be done the first week of June if I'm looking at it. Um, that would be my I know I was a big advocate for Labor Day to Memorial Day. And if we can't make that happen, um, then I would just challenge and say, can we look at are there really days that we need to be off like January, November 25th, January 4th, um, uh, where's that other one? November 3rd. And could we possibly then move up our end date? You know what I mean? If we're in school on those days. >> Anyone else? Director said. >> Yes. Um so when I was visiting um schools um last week um I did I had a very quick conversation with um a member of the calendar committee and this person told me she's like we've never been prouder of a calendar uh to pres to present um a recommendation. So I just wanted to put that out there because she said it was pretty um evident I guess. Um, and so there's that. Um, a couple of things. I know that, um, election day, what, November 3rd. Um, and I know she was talking to me about that and she said she knows it was different. Um, and knew and it was from a safety standpoint. So, I'm just relaying what, you know, she told me. Um and um and I know other schools, not every school, but I know there are schools that do that um as well that they don't have students that day who are that are polling places, I should say. Um I think moving something like a day to a Monday or Friday, I think you're still in a daycare question, so it doesn't really matter what day it is. Um and I and I say that as a former daycare person or a daycare family. Um, I get it and I and I understand. And I guess the way I look at this too is if we're looking at like say November 3rd, you know, you've got a year to plan if that is, you know, something that we decide to do. Um, and I think um, January 18th, yeah, there are three days off and I can't remember what it was for this year, but like the 18th is a holiday. Um, and so factor that in. Um, I do appreciate the elementary daytime conferencing option. um just because yes there are a lot of people who can't come in the evening and if conferences start I think day was what right after school so like 4:00 3:00 um so I appreciate having that option for the families that need it and I know we offer online options too um great and I think again if class sizes are where they are and I think you said what it went from 10 to 12 in this scenario hours I write did I write that down right 10 hours of conferences to 12 >> oh yeah yeah yeah >> potentially more kids um so you know it's it's this is a different calendar for sure um and there are some new days and I think it's it's worth a look Um, you know, the nice thing about calendaring out a year in advance, you've got a year in advance. And I think we wanted to look at, you know, this kind of scenario to see what it would do. You know, ending school on June 8th. Yeah, it's a few extra days. I get that. Um, but personally for me, it doesn't bother me. I know everybody's got their own opinion on that, and that's completely fine. Um, you know, it's it's it's new. It's some things to consider. I' I' I'd really be interested in seeing how this works with the new items. Um, because again, we can always change it. That's the beauty of it. So, for the next year. So, my thoughts. >> Thank you for that. Um, I think that Oh, did you have something, Mary? Yeah. I just wanted to clarify because I mean with the with the staff days where they get together and not just professional development um we had agreed not to have so many half days for them for the benefit of parents and actually bulk them into full days. So I think that's where a lot of these days are coming in. Um also um in January of course you've got end of semester which is the 28th and 29th. That's typical. We've always had that and then the other day is a holiday and then there isn't anything in December except for the the winter break. So that seems perfectly reasonable to me and it seems a little bit easier than to breaking up the first week of January uh to have that in service for staff um right after they just get back. Um so I appreciate that. Um I I um I do have a question though about the 12 hours worth of conferences. Um that's an awful lot and we currently have it split up between two evenings. October 13th and then October 14th is the Wednesday. Um so um with with that in mind given historically where the conferences have been um have they always done this within those two days? I know it's right around that week anyways. Um and and that still seems like you just said the increased number of hours and now it's it's pretty much the same two nights I believe. >> Yeah. So I should probably clarify. Yeah. It's not it's not 12 hours consecutively. I mean they're still going to do a 4hour evening session and then an 8 hour kind of you know I think some of the things that were thrown out at the committee were maybe like a 10 to 6 or a noon to 8 or something kind of along those lines. Um so it wouldn't be you know 12 hours it would just be accumul accumulation of 12 hours where right now it's accumulation of 10 hours over the three days. >> Okay. But there is there there are um not just the Wednesday of MEA when the kids are leaving to DC. You still have the other day available for conferences. >> The middle school level. Yes. >> The middle school. Yeah. Okay. >> This year it was the Thursday before and the Monday before. So not not around MEA break. >> Correct. I have a question about that. Where where is the other day October 14th? >> So, the middle school's going to do theirs >> um I think they were going to do Hang on a second. >> 15th. >> Middle schools going >> Sorry. Yes. >> The 13th and the evening and then the 14th. >> Yep. Thank you. >> Anyone else? I think um to thank the committee for the work that they put in. Um and also I I think I just want to um make the statement that you know the committee consisting of the um individuals that it it does consist of people who are working in the schools day in and day out. I don't think that there's probably any perfect calendar. So appreciate all the board members um input and I think also um as board members we have to be careful not to just be speaking from our own personal uh experience. Uh we're serving like director Atinson said all of the students and all of the parents. And so while the suggestions um I'm sure are are noted and um we just have to be mindful that um the people that work to bring this forward are the people that are in the schools day in and day out. So >> I have a question. So, is it our expectation that our staff is going to make changes to this um calendar that as a board we can all feel comfortable with and we're taking kind of a give and a take and um taking our perspectives into account or are we going to see this exact same calendar >> when we come back and vote on it? I just want to level set expectations. >> Sure. That's a that's that's that is a fair question. Um >> I I would be really happy to see something that incorporates all our feedback. I'm not saying you're going to say, "Okay, Lisa, we're going to take and rework all these days." But it would be nice to be able to make some of the changes from a community's perspective um taking that feedback back into account since you said basically the community didn't have feedback in this in in the calendaring and we are representative of the community. So, I just want to know what to expect. >> Yeah. No, I think that's really fair. And I think um on the on the opposite side of that, it would be just as fair for the uh um directors to know, you know, what exactly does a board is the board suggesting? um because you know there was many comments made here at the table and I think um uh one of the challenges could easily be trying to decipher you know what to change and what to come back with. So, I really appreciate that that question. Um that question to um the administration, but they we also have to give them what our expectation is in any changes made because um sitting here listening to all the suggestions, I I didn't write down all of yours and yours and yours. You know what I mean? So I think level setting, how do you suggest that happens? >> Well, my question is would you be going back to the calendar committee and saying we met with the board and these are some of the things that um they would like us to consider as a viewpoint of our community and taking that feedback to the community and reworking the calendar and bringing it back to the board for our final approval. I would say we probably should have one or two items that maybe we we are, you know, the board wants to give direction toward like uh I heard multiple comments about the January you know you know having so many days off in January. So, um if we could as a board um suggest like it could one of those days be moved and having the getting the will of the board and giving them the um giving them something to work with. >> And if I may, um you know, if we talk about incorporating all of the changes that we talked about, I mean, you moved one thing, now you're have to moving a bunch of other things, too. So, um I do agree that the more specific that we can be with the director and and making sure that we are clear about like here are one or two recommendations instead of saying here's 20 things, try to rework it and come back to us. I think is is prudent. I think it's it's definitely a case of let's be specific about one or two things. >> Well, I think something specific was November 3rd. Do we want to keep November 3rd? Yes or no? >> I think that's a I think that's a a very valid um point. And with the safety concern for the one campus that is a polling place, um the the staff bringing forth that suggestion of um no school that day and wanting to give that a try. I think it is um I think you know again there's no perfect calendar no perfect um it there's just no perfect decision. So, is that something that the will of the will of the board would be to um have that day as as suggested or >> we're going to bring up a safety concern then we should talk about safety as a whole with within that, right? Like, has there ever been safety concerns around the election? Is this something new that's being brought up? Why is it being brought up because of that? >> Right? There's got to be a reason why they're choosing that, right? And if it's one school, right, we're affecting, right, we should make a determination. Should it just be this one school, right? How could is that a possibility? Can we make it one school? Is that a possibility versus affecting every other student in the district? Right? And there should be more communication around that because I just had a conversation with the safety, you know, guy from the district and we've talked a lot about safety things, but this was not anything. Not saying it might not be a concern, but it's not something that has been brought up recently, right, until just now. >> I I'll say we toured that school together and we talked about this. I'd love for you to share what you shared with me because I this is a surprise to me. So, >> yeah. So, this this uh I I wouldn't put this at the top of the safety priority list um in terms of um the day needing to be off because of unsafe polling places. Um that that hasn't been the case since I've been here. Um I heard that when I first started and um as a result of that um on the days that we have voting that Red Tale as a voting precinct site um all of the senior leadership rotates and provides coverage and support. So we have a stationary coverage and then we have a roaming coverage. So we've never had an issue since I've been here. Um, and I think we've addressed the concerns that were brought to my attention um around safety. Um, so I if I could just from a time standpoint tonight, can I make an offer to the board? Um, just in terms of coming coming back. Um I'm hearing the will of the board is to you want something to go back to for us to go back to the committee to consider some days fluctuation that as it stands today there's enough there's enough wonderings from many of you that something's going to have to give kind of some trade-offs here. Um the November 3rd date is one that I heard. Um the coming back on the 4th >> was one that I heard. And then in general, the month of January seems to be heavy in terms of time off period. Those are the three things that I kind of heard throughout the conversation that kind of stood out to me. Um enough that I wrote them down. Not that these are the be all end all, but these are three that I kind of heard different iterations of and and as you've said and others, there's no perfect calendar. We understand that. Um but are there some things that we can negotiate some time and days um to bring something as a an addition back. So we have this and here's another iteration that the board could consider. >> Um I I have a question for director co uh coin. Um, if we take January 4th out, do we move it to December because we still need that staff in service day? Um, and I'm not sure how that would affect the calendar, affect stuff that's going on in December cuz like you said, it's it's all kind of planned out and there's codependence in here. Um, so that would be my question. And then my other question to to tail on, there was really only those two dates and that was November 3rd. If they could come back with a reasoning for that. Um and um I know they're trying it out. I have no problem with it, but um just a reason for it. Um that would be great. And because it would that would also be a potential uh November date that staff would meet. what would happen with their time. Um we did, you know, we do have so many days where the teachers get together, uh staff gets together, etc. Um and um we did agree to not do the half days and do the full days. So I'm sure there's a codependence there between November 3rd and January 4th. It's not like they're just going to go away. They're going to end up someplace else. And I have no idea the impact of that because the calendar committee I'm sure spoke about that uh most likely ad nauseium as they were going through this. >> So without without reallocating the days here at the dis um I think what I would like to offer the board is um to that point that you were just saying director France if the third is a date what's the rationale and if it's going to be moved where where might it be moved but that would be the proposal that we would bring back if we are going to keep it. Um, so I guess for me I would look at altering the days that I mentioned. Um, uh, the third and the fourth are the two days that came up in all the conversation tonight um, of wonderings. And I'll just put it as that. And, um, if I could offer to the board, we're going to look at those two days as um, our starting conversation to come back with an alternate. They may uh, land somewhere else. They may go away, but we're gonna we're going to look at those two days as conversation points to bring back that I think captures a lot of what I heard from the board tonight. >> So, is is that fair? Okay. >> Thank you. >> All right. Then then we'll do that and then we'll come back to you demember 8th. Thank you. Correct. >> Dr. William, can I just ask another question? I'm just curious who is all on the calendar committee and like does that go Sorry, did I miss that? >> Yeah. >> Um, and like does that ever go to any of the other committees, board committees that we have before it comes to us? I'm just curious committee on that committee. >> Got it. Okay. >> And we have elementary rep, middle school, uh, secondary reps. >> Um, and then we have district services reps. >> I think he said just all staff though. >> But it's all staff. Okay. I was just curious how the process work. Thank you. >> All right. We good. Everyone good? All right, we're going to move on um to the UHL contract. Director Powers. Uh the I'll just read what the agenda says. The contract with UHL is to replace an obsolete and no longer repairable building automation system um including the controllers in several locations, FiveHawks, Jeffers Pond, and Greenwood and Westwood. This will allow us to better control the indoor air quality and temperature at those sites. Director Powers, thank you. >> Hi, good evening everyone. Um, a couple of things I wanted to talk about first. That was not a clean copy. I apologize for the two numbers that are on the bottom that had nothing to do with this contract. It was a piece of scratch paper at that particular moment. So, I will make sure that a clean copy is in for everyone to see for the next um board meeting. Um, one of the things I really wanted to make sure and talk a little bit about tonight, um, we have two companies that right now we have in the district. One of them is Seammens and the other one is UHL. Those are the only two companies we have right now for our control systems for the building automation system. So, when we look at inviting in estimates um, at this time, those are the companies that we would talk with. Um, we could open it up and look at other types of systems. Um, that's not something I would recommend because it would add a level of complexity that would just make things a little bit more challenging. Um, when we look at contracts like this, part of the reason that we are able to limit it down to one or two um, companies is a system through the state contracts. So, there are an absolute ton of different types of state contracts. This one in particular is through Omnia, I believe. I'd have to double check my notes. Um, but they've got um what the state does is they will go through these vendors and they will certify um the quotes that they're giving to make sure that they're within the range that they expect to be charged by everybody. So when they are looking at um operating systems, when they are looking at controls or any of those types of things, they need to be able to make meet that guideline or that um pricing that the state is expected to do and they rebid those every year or every other year. So this is a constant thing that they are going through to do. So when we looked at this particular one, I did get an estimate for from Seammens um and UHL both. Um the Seammens one I didn't provide to you. the I can get a copy of that to you. The reason I'm recommending the UHL1 um with the operating system that we absolutely need to replace, they are also replacing control modules in two locations and controller an overall controller at all locations. So, these modules will actually be a decent upgrade for us for these controllers to make sure that we're operating these systems optimally. um it'll just be a better way for me to control everything and using one system like UHL will still um it will still it will make it so that um controlling everything the old seaman system honestly was I won't use the word it wasn't the best it was an older system it's obsolete that's part of the reason we need to replace it it's on a a drive the district operates that drive this drive is so old that it cannot be upgraded at all it's a part of the system that's got an old Windows operating system on it that we need to replace. On top of that, it's failing. On top of that, the Seaman's one that's on this drive hasn't been supported in 11 years. So, we've been limping this along for a long time. Um, and right now, because of the Windows changeover, we absolutely need to get this replaced. And that's the reason that I came forward with this UHL proposal. And 269,000 is a lot. it will be covered on the LTFM side. >> Any discussion or questions for Director Powers? Um obviously we've um I've heard about this year after year and we've been replacing them as they've been failing but I have noticed that um seammens um over the last 10 years or so has slowly been replaced completely by Ule as we've I call them Ule not UHL but um um there there even though the seaman systems are much older and the ule are better and we do want uh to limit the um having to do justification technology-wise between different systems. Um I can't help but wonder what if UL needs to start getting replaced or another company comes along that's better because I don't think Seaman's playing well in the space right now anyways. Um but um how will that happen? because right now with all the buildings that we already have on the newer um systems compared to the old ones um I guess the question is is are we going to continue this roundroin or are we going to try to get the whole campus all the campuses under one manufacturer and then start to plan to replace them all on a regular life cycle in the same vendor? >> Absolutely. Excellent question. So, as we break it down, um there's a couple of things that are in play with this one. The new systems use something that's called backnet. So, they talk to each other. Doesn't matter who the overlay or the program that's in charge of all of these things, all of those systems will talk to that. Part of this upgrade is to make sure that those old seaman systems cooperate nicely with this new overlay. as we replace things like air handlers in different buildings, we will be upgrading those systems with new controllers as well so that it's constantly being upgraded. So in the future, if someone comes along that's going to be better for us than UHL or ULE, um they'll be that new overlay that we can use all of that existing software with. So, in those locations that we've got um those four locations that we've got Seammens at right now, those are old Seammens proprietary type equipment, two of those locations, the controllers that are in those machines are actually they aren't usable as an upgraded system. >> The the seaman's bed that I did look at though was an upgraded version. It's it's the Diggo system. It's they use it in hospitals and everything else. It's a It's a very good system, but the what we're doing with the ULE is actually creating a more usable system for us at a better price considering what we're replacing for the modules and everything else. >> Seammens has been going a totally different route than like school districts and apartment buildings or office buildings. They've been going to the specialty. So, I get that. Um, the controllers are clearly the most expensive part of the machine to replace. and if they're not talking uh with the rest of the system like if we start to rip them out. That's the only thing I was wondering about a life cycle management just in case we start going to another vendor than Ule because I mean if you're if you've running large buildings also with the building automation system you know that if one floor or one section goes up goes out and it's a controller and you start replacing it everything has a hard time talking to each other and you'll find that your maintenance people are using multiple devices to do it because they're not speaking the same language anymore. That's the only thing I was questioning and and I've seen this happen over the years here >> and that's and that's exactly where we're actually technologically we're at that point now when we replace those different air handlers or anything else >> that that piece of equipment the controller for that actually will work. It's it's more compatible with um future overlays than anything that we used to use because you're right, there used to be when we had to change a controller. Um when I did um when I was in Lakeville, one of the middle schools, we had to go and change the controllers for that one and I had to do it for every piece of equipment that had a controller in there and that added about $50,000 to the cost. So, the upgrades that we've been able to do so far um make it um less of a challenge as we go if we need to change systems again because that'll be a different overlay that will talk through the backnet to all of these other controllers. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Anyone else? >> Thank you, Director Powers. >> Thank you. Uh next up is the legislative platform. Dr. Thomas. >> Yeah, thank you um board. Uh this is uh essentially a carryover of last year's uh legislative platform but just reduced to two areas that matter most and that's reducing the mandates and enhancing local control. and we've put a couple of of exemplars. Um we could change some of those um based upon you know what we've had in the past or what we are hearing presently. Um you all know that MSBA, AMSD, MASA like all the they're going to have an exhaustive I just think from our platform short and sweet and that was something that we whittleled down last year even. Um, so this is even really to the point of what what I think matters most. And so we just carried those two domains over um um for this year and allowing to go deeper through our professional organizations. So that's what you have before you today as a draft. >> Thank you. Any suggestions or comments? >> Um no, can you just ex you know um explain more under the enhanced local control and flexibility the two bullet points of um just add a little bit more context to that? I mean, I'm fully aware of the first two, but the second two I'd like just like a little bit more context to. >> Correct. So, so in terms of the flexibility um for our learning environments right now, I mean, you actually heard uh uh uh Lisa speak to this earlier this evening. When we don't have the 1.0 experience with our kids, we lose ADM on them. And so we're trying to find ways that we can um not lose the revenue while students are getting the experiences that they need whether it's met through us or in partnership with you know um higher ed etc. Um so in that in that particular case so that's one area that we want to make sure that we can protect that so we don't lose that ADM funding while students find ways to enhance their learning experiences. Some of that might be in our school's proper, some of that might be through auxiliary services. Um, and then the per pup uh the per pupil limit uh in LTFM right now um and Dan maybe you could speak to that a little bit better with the LTFM in terms of or Lisa um and how that's allocated to us um currently. Sorry. Removing the per if we remove the per removing the per pupil limit in the long-term facilities uh maintenance revenue program, there's a cap that they districts have a dollar amount per in place. That means cover those costs would um be considered in a different fashion. Across the district that have the ability to go above and beyond that cap are having to all us being with a cap, we carry a fund balance. But if you don't have fun balance, then based upon the number of students, there are some districts across the state that do have it. that allows them for them to receive. >> So in essence, >> yeah, sorry. Um, >> thank you. >> Sorry for interrupting and cutting you off there. Um, so in in essence is it increasing our our local controls the flexibility here? Is that what I'm hearing you say? >> If you do approve something that's above and beyond, it's going to have to then go through the process, the levy >> approval process as well. So >> yeah, there just one thing I wanted to add to exactly what Lisa was talking about. So, it's limited to a certain legacy amount of um school districts that are able to increase their LTFM fund by approved approval from the board. Um, a good example of that is actually Lakeville schools. Um, Lakeville Schools approved LTFM levy amount is $15 million. That's 10 times what ours is. >> So, so they grandfathered into something. There are several schools that are grandfathered into this ability to um ask for more money on the LTFM side. >> Okay. >> And the limit it's 20 schools, the top 20 schools. I believe >> it is it is a there's a formula the state uses based upon the age of your buildings as well, right? And so like when we were looking at that um we potentially could be there within 10 years where we would then be eligible for that level, but it's going to take us that long to get to that point. And so there are some some school districts that are in that what they call a 1A group and they don't carry a fund balance. Instead, they have to levy for the exact projects that they're going to do and then they have to make sure they spend it within that time frame. And if they're over or under, it gets adjusted in the levy process moving forward. >> I thought we did use that for Grainwood and Five Hawks for the before the last referendum passed. That's a slightly different program for when you're um >> selling bonds. >> Yeah. >> Because they were over 30 years old and they had and so we got more money and we could transfer more money between the actual construction and the LTFM. We kind of combine those. >> There's definitely another layer that we can add on top of that for that. And then um when you're talking new construction, completely a completely different thing also. So it's there are several different layers that we jump into for a lot of these things. One of the things that um Lisa was mentioning was when you're looking at LTFM, you have that base number based on student population. Then you've got that secondary number which reduces it based on the average age of your buildings below 30 years. So that's all of those things end up where we are for this number. And honestly, local control would give us a heck of a lot better way of >> being a that we could yeah that we could decide >> the board and the administration could look at the needs and base that a lot better. And that's if I was if there was any one thing that I would go over there and beat the doors down at the capital, it would be this. >> Are other school districts are they do you know if they have the same? >> So I'm I'm I'm on the delegate assembly. I was actually elected to be the district 17 rep. So very proud of that. Um I'm actually like going through this process. Um that was one of the resolutions that was submitted by Becker School District and it was passed upon. They did MSBA did not support it and I'll have to go back and find out why it but it says that MSBA has a position on it and they didn't support it. Now I'm not saying that we as a school district shouldn't support it because there's clearly a need by other school districts. Um, it's just I'm just saying it's not one of the the 30 or 26 resolutions that M MSBA actually said yes, we'll get behind this or you know what? >> Let me ask the question again. Are there any other school districts? Do you know have I mean you talked to other superintendent? >> Yeah, I mean this was a common uh in our last legislative cycle. This was a common um ask for for many for many districts. Um, so what we what we've lifted, you know, from the five or so bullets that we had in the past, these were two that really resonated. Okay. >> You know, that carried over if we if we kept all things equal. >> Not look the same for other districts, but >> Right. I understand. And everything that I've talked to and scale obviously is very hot and heavy on no mandates and I think other counties, other commissioners are so at least we're putting our eggs more in one basket. I like that. Can you um whenever you finalize this, can you just do the same thing as you did last year and break out make sure that we have like how much everything costs y >> and then how much we could gain if the legislators to do this. >> Yeah. And uh last time we had some things with the mandates that we costed out and so that >> hopefully that's not an issue for us to to move forward because we we're not hearing about that anymore. But what we could gain, we could certainly try to net some of that out and what that would mean for us. >> And then similarly, we can give you some of those cliffnotee talking points. So when you're out, you know. Mhm. We can give you that as well. Like we did >> this on one side, all that on the back side. It was great talking points last year. >> And I think this is just short and to the point and obviously >> there will be others, but and you can expound upon too based upon the affiliations whether it's MSBA or etc. But you know this is where we were landing in terms of our our initial draft with you all. Um and the two of you right heard so so may and and and again just from what you're hearing if there's something from the local control that you think has better traction and it has meaning for us that we should put here instead. you know, maybe maybe the three of us should, you know, do a quick >> There's a couple in here that I think are they're really impactful and I don't know if we want to go through them now. I certainly can highlight them for our board. Um I mean, one of them that I thought was really awesome is to add fiscal notes for mandates. So, if like the legislature was going to pass a mandate, then they have to pass what's a fiscal note, which basically says like how much it's going to cost to fund that before it passes. The other thing, um, another one that was, um, presented by the Farmington School District is basically saying that if there are new laws passed that they have to give school districts like a year to implement them because if you remember in 25 there was a bunch of new laws passed and we had to implement them right away and they cost a lot of money. And so um, >> and then of course there is one in here about increasing the form the um, the funding formula. So like that I was a little surprised wasn't on ours because I would think at the end of the day that's the number one is like increasing the funding formula or fully funding education, right? >> Yeah. And in >> and there was a lot of there's a lot of them about PSO and I know we've had some conversations about that. So um yeah, so those are just kind of I don't know if you want to add I listen to this the pre-work on this. So, um >> yeah, the the um we can the funding formula was one. >> Um and if we had to go with what do we think will realistically get across the finish line, >> I think we're going to be in a few more sessions before that funding formula, >> but doesn't hurt to put it on there. Um but that was one of the that was the third that was under the local control because as we talked about in our last graphic that hasn't been touched since 1971 or 72. So, and we had, you know, graphs and all that kind of stuff. So, um, to to skinny this down, we just thought, yeah, why don't why don't I I mean, if there's, you know, one or two that you think we should add from, you know, that is going to be carried at the MSBA level, which is your association, um, that would benefit us, whether it's dollars and cents or if it's time. Um certainly you know this is this is the board's agenda to bring forward. So >> the I mean the assembly is the 5th and sixth and you know we should >> of December >> of December which is prior to our next >> our our meeting and I think we can definitely >> we could connect you after that and give you the highlights of what >> prior to um >> well it's our meeting is what? Oh the 8th I mean we can even >> I mean we'll connect the Monday morning. >> Yeah. of if we have to and >> I I think I mean this is I mean >> you know just letting you know what it is >> for for the eighth um I mean the board I I assume the board will be okay it's your document but this would might not get uploaded until after we meet after the delegate and it's not going to meet that one week requirement but it's not going to be substantively different than what you're already hearing in your circles. Yeah. >> So, >> okay. And if anybody wants to, you know, read the 10 pound book that we got that we're going through, >> they didn't give it to you digitally. >> Oh, it is digital, too. >> And there's online things you can listen to. It's it's been really interesting. Actually, >> reach out. >> All right. >> I have an additional question. Yeah. On the um I was wondering the same on the first point of provide flexibility to adaptive learning environments without the loss of average daily membership ADM funding. Um, is that I was curious about the cost of that to our district as well, but um, is that mostly PSO or is that like can you give an example of other things? >> That's the heaviest. >> Okay. So, the we're advocating to basically still get a full >> ADM even if a student's there's going to be some potential changes. You know, I was on a call um about PSO a couple of weeks ago with Mr. Thorb. Um, and it sounds like there's a huge appetite from MDE side to address that um, from a costneutral standpoint in the legislature. So there they might have some tighter controls that might get to this as well. >> Okay. >> So >> are there other are there other big chunks in there that we like do you have another example of like where we would lose ADM to other outside services? I'm just curious like or is it like 95%? I would say that's the that's the lion share. Okay. Of where we lose it. >> I think another example earlier was like the online. >> Yeah. Online, which is not a huge portion of of our kids, >> right? But I mean, if they're opting out of a something to take online, that other district is getting the funding. So, are we advocating they would pay both districts? I don't know. I was just trying to understand what what we're advocating for. So, I think it's helpful. Thank you. Well, without any there's no further discussion, that concludes. There's no um board policies to review at this time. Correct. >> Director Catherine. I got it. Um then we are adjourned. >> Thank you. >> Thank you.