Board of Education Meeting

• The meeting was called to order at 6:30 pm.

Mr. Crowl noted that the Eagle Examiner had a full page about the Levy and that it basically states that the District is on a cliff in that we would need to make cuts before November 2020 if it did not pass in March. He expressed that this was a different understanding than when it was discussed a year ago. He was under the impression that cuts would not need to be made unless it failed in November of 2020. He reiterated that he had suggested putting the levy on in November of 2019 so if it failed we would not be on the cliff.  Mr. Crowl also shared his perspective on the situation when the levy was passed in 2010 and how it took three levy votes.

There was discussion on how the levy collection worked regarding when they are approved and when the taxes are collected.

Mrs. Hamberg shared she recalled that there was the suggested to put the levy on in November, but the Board discussed it and decided not to because of the perception community would have that we had said it was a five-year levy and we were coming back to them in four years.

He was under the impression that cuts would not need to be made unless it failed in November of 2020 and Mrs. Hamberg said we would be able to start the next school year without cuts because we cannot start a new school year and not be able to pay people.

Mr. Crowl said he understood this and expressed that he thinks we should have discussed a cut list prior to Election Day so people know what is at stake.

Mr. Schneider shared a perspective that we could have had conversations about cuts last November, now, or after March and there are people in the community that will see this as we are threatening or trying to scare them with cuts.  He said he is not sure if there is a solution that makes people not feel threatened but still provides the real impact if it doesn’t pass.

Mrs. Hamberg stated that cuts have to be made prior to the 2020/2021 school year - that is why a levy is needed. In addition, our staff knows that if there is a levy that fails cuts will be made to balance the budget.  She shared that a lot of work and thought goes into cut lists and said that if that was the wish of the Board we could do that. She was concerned about scaring the newer teachers by stating positions? She is hopeful since this is a renewal it will pass.

Mrs. Hamberg, Mr. Schneider, and Mrs. Lee shared with him that the Board discussed and voted to wait until May as not to be during the current levy cycle

Mr. Fujii shared that he has gotten calls regarding what cuts would mean and while he has been in meetings he has heard not heard what the cuts would look like, but he does not have the historical perspective of what cuts would be.

Mr. Schneider said that there may not have been many detailed discussions by the board regarding cuts, but he believes that implied in the fact that we are asking is that we need or feel we need it and if it didn’t pass we would need to roll back what we offer.  He also encouraged everyone to consider the things that have changed since deciding to put the levy on in March and had we discussed and presented a cut list prior to November it would have looked different. Due to great work by the district, we saved money on insurance. We may have reported more cuts than would have been needed. He shared that he can appreciate the concern about cuts, but any levy discussion there is a layer of cut that exists there one way or the other.  If we are asking for a levy that losing would require no cut, you have to stop and think about that process. As a board, we are thinking about these types of things all the time. So, I can understand that someone from the public may not be thinking about them until they read it in the Eagle Examiner. It is a struggle to help everyone understand all the many moving pieces and changing variables. If we could find a way to consistently help people see what the risk of not having the levy in a way that people don’t feel like they are being threatened or scared in supporting, he would be all for it, but he shared he was not sure what that way is.

Mr. Crowl, also, noted that it is stated the levy is 12% of our budget and shared the increase in the forecasted expenditures noted for next year and questioned whether they should go up as much as it shows.

Mrs. Hamberg shared that we didn’t add any new teachers this year because we don’t have the money and class sizes are going up.  She noted that at some point we need to be able to add teachers as we continue to grow. Mrs. Hamberg shared that she, Mr. Buskirk and Mr. Cooper are compiling a ten-year analysis and look forward to reviewing it with the board during the work session in February. She noted that it is hard to discuss all of the numbers when we aren’t able to have them in front of us.

Mr. Crowl noted what the district went through in 2009 and said he was concerned with voters walking into a ballet with an or else situation.

It was noted by Mrs. Hamberg that unfortunately, this is the reality of a levy because these are dollars that pay for our current staff.

Mr. Crowl asked whether our current levy effectively lasted four years for collections but it was a five-year levy.

Mr. Schneider indicated that it actually felt it has lasted ten years due to us coming up on our second renewal of a five-year cycle, and in that time, our enrollment has increased over 30%. He cannot think of another district or even a company that has absorbed the growth that we have and not asked for more money.  He noted that in this time other districts around us have had to ask for new money.

Mrs. Hamberg shared that she was concerned that putting out a specific cut list now could cause panic and scare our newer staff that don’t have seniority, but if the levy didn’t pass, we know we would have to start talking about that.  She noted that this would not be her recommendation, but the administration would be willing to do this if the board wished.

Mr. Fujii asked if this is what we would be looking at in February.

Mrs. Hamberg shared that at this time the focus of our February work session is looking at planning our long-range finances.  We want to look at where we have been, where we are, and where we are heading. We plan to bring in a consultant to help us look at this and provide some recommendations.  Mrs. Hamberg shared the district’s growth challenges and shared that we are not getting much additional help from the state. We looked at a long-range plan last year, and we want to make sure that our new board members are up to speed.  We want to dive into what we are seeing and what we are projecting so we can decide what we want to do about it. She explained that we have two ways to look at it. We reduce services and expenses or you increase revenue. We want to be thinking about our long-range plan.

Mr. Schneider shared that based on what we have looked at before; it should be pretty understandable what the impact is even if the focus isn’t on if it doesn’t pass.

Mr. Fujii shared that he thought this information would be helpful as we interact with these issues.  He noted that he didn’t recall talking about this issue but realized that there is a lot to get up to speed on.

Mrs. Hamberg shared that communicating to the public this information was not meant to be the specifics but helping people understand this is a significant amount of our money and if we do not have this money to pay people then we have to take action.

Mr. Crowl clarified then that there would have to be severe cuts.  He shared that if the board had an option to reduce the severity of the cuts it should do so.  He noted that we don’t know the outcome in March, and if there is an avenue to take where cuts in July and August are not as severe, we should take that avenue.

Mr. Schneider asked if what he was saying was the assumption that if there was an asked last November it would have done this?

Mr. Crowl said he felt there was an action that could be taken and moved that commencing on February 1, 2020, and continuing until June 2021 that the district implement a one-year fiscal year spending freeze at the 2020 spending levels (so the services remained the same for the kids) and a moratorium on hiring and employee replacement without prior Board approval. Mr. Crowl shared how he felt the numbers would break down if we went with the freeze with a 3% increase along with a 3% increase for the cost of inflation.  He shared that he felt this approach would allow us to save from next year’s projected amount that we may not have if the levy didn’t pass. He reiterated that it would be this year’s spending limits plus whatever we needed to cover contractual obligations and an increase in the cost of living.

Mrs. Hamberg noted our salaries are our major increase and are not being suggested to freeze since they are contractually bound and costs like utilities are not completely within our control.  She suggested that it seemed that the situation was being oversimplified.

Mr. Schneider then asked that Mr. Crowl repeat the motion.  After this, he asked if there was a second.

Mr. Fujii questioned if a second had to be made in order for a discussion. He is prepared for the second in February.

Mr. Schneider stated he is pretty much where Mr. Fujii but there was a lot to it.  He was not willing to make a second at this time.

Mr. Crowl stated that he felt it was a pretty simple motion.  It is a spending freeze to 2020 levels and a moratorium on new hires and replacement hires and both are conditioned with the qualification of prior to board approval.

Mr. Schneider expressed that the budget process has essentially already taken place and been approved for the current fiscal year.  He shared that there shouldn’t be any major changes for hires, and it seemed like what Mr. Crowl is talking about is really more relevant to July 1 and further.

Mrs. Hamberg agreed that we would only be replacing positions for the remainder of the year. The only reason a hire would be made is if a special needs student would move into the district that requires a one-on-one aide. In this case, we may need to hire this person prior to the board meeting so we are not out of compliance with federal law for meeting the student’s needs.

Mr. Cooper shared more from the HR side of hiring and stated that this is the track record that has been set.  Both he and Mrs. Hamberg expressed we have always brought hires before the board for approval and are not just randomly make hires. 

Mr. Schneider restated that he is not against the discussion or the thought process but would rather not vote for something like this tonight trying to guess at the impact and not being able to analyze it first.

There was no second.

Mr. Crowl questioned if it was common practice for our district to let any employee of the district interview another employee or student about any non-threatening social media posts on non-school platforms.

Mr. Cooper responded in his role as the HR director that if there is a violation of a staff member’s First Amendment Rights there is a conversation that is had from an HR perspective.

Mr. Crowl asked how many times a year and why.

Mr. Cooper indicated it occurs a few times a year for staff and a lot more often for students.  If a student post is causing disruption to the school having a safe and productive environment, it is addressed.  For staff members, there is a limit to First Amendment Rights. If a staff member is talking about a public matter it is one piece that is okay, but they should not be doing it on work time.  If a staff member is speaking as an employee about a private matter related to the employee it is a violation of First Amendment Rights.

Mr. Fujii shared he was happy to see that winter-homecoming was well attended and a nice event. He wanted to congratulate the boy’s basketball program.  He also was thankful for the fog delay - he cautioned all drivers during school hours. He also shared that he will be attending OSBA's new board orientation and was looking forward to learning more as a board member.

Mrs. Dorsch stated that she understands the concerns of people regarding real estate taxes going up and that it can be a budgetary concern.  She shared that one thing she tries to keep in mind as a perspective is in the State of Ohio our income taxes have decreased over the last few years. She expressed that she felt we can make sure our dollars are being used better locally with local control.  While the levy on the ballot in March is not going to raise taxes, she shared that it is good to be reminded of this and keep this perspective in mind.

Mrs.  Lee attended two really good meetings this week a levy speaker meeting that she attended as a community member and Neighborhood Bridge group that is coming together.  She shared that she is excited to see where this goes.

Mr. Edwards shared:

•    The students had their winter homecoming and it was a nice event.

•    The students are discussing a solution to homecoming decoration problems that they had in the fall.

•    The School Play (Complete History of America: Abridged) is in 2 weeks

•    Musical (Urinetown) auditions tomorrow and next week

•    Bryan Mengel (senior) bowled a game of 244

•    Boys Basketball has a positive record (7-5)

•    Girls basketball, also, has a positive record at 10-2

•    We are getting a new football coach

•    Spring sports start at the end of February

•    Scheduling for classes begins soon and there are going to be some new offerings.  For example, there are some new English offerings. Also, Mr. Robinson is making a financial literacy curriculum.

•    8th-grade orientation is coming up soon

•    The last parent-teacher conferences are on February 6th

•    Ski Club has started up

•    There are two new clubs that have started recently: Coloring Club and the Feminist Club

• Ms. Sarah Dominguez from Sunbury, OH asked if the levy in March passed if there is still going to be a need for additional money with the growth we are experiencing.
  • Mr. Schneider indicated the Board will be diving deeper into the forecast at the work session, but he could not envision a scenario where we would not need to ask for new money in the next few years.  When and how much is still up for debate.

• Mr. Shelton was asked to come up and share about the head football.

• The Board exited Executive Session and adjourned at 10:38 pm.