[00:06:34]
[00:06:38]
I DON'T THINK SO.CAUSE DOESN'T THAT ENCOMPASS LIKE THE TECHNOLOGY REFRESHES AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
AND THAT'S CURRENTLY A CONVERSATION WE'RE HAVING, I THINK, TODAY ON OUR AGENDA.
I JUST WONDER WHAT THE TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE SCOPE.
IT SEEMED TO ME THAT THAT WOULD BE ON THE TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE.
SO MAYBE WE LEAVE IT IN THERE UNTIL THE TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE MEETS.
AND THEN WE COULD PROBABLY MAKE A RECOMMENDATION THAT IT BE INCLUDED IN THEIR SCOPE ONCE THEY'RE, ONCE THAT'S ALL SET.
UM, THE ONLY THING I WOULD COMMENT ON, I DON'T KNOW IF IT NECESSARILY NEEDS TO BE INCLUDED AS WHERE IT SAYS UNDER FEDERAL PROGRAMS. UM, I KNOW THAT, YOU KNOW, SR AND CARES AND AARP AND ALL OF THOSE, UM, DIFFERENT FUNDING SOURCES THAT CAME THROUGH, CAME DOWN FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.
SO I, I WOULD ASSUME THEY'D BE ENCOMPASSED UNDER FEDERAL PROGRAMS. UM, I DEFER TO TANYA ON THAT THOUGH, THEY ARE A PART OF FEDERAL PROGRAMS. UM, CURRENTLY WE HAVE SCHEDULED TO DO AN UPDATE ON THE SECOND BOARD MEETING OF EACH MONTH.
UM, PERHAPS THOSE NEED TO COME THROUGH THE FINANCE COMMITTEE FIRST AND THEN COME OUT THROUGH, UH, I, I'M NOT SURE IF THAT'S YOUR PREFERENCE OR IF YOU'D RATHER JUST TAKE THEM STRAIGHT TO THE FULL BOARD.
I WOULD THINK IT MAKES SENSE FOR THEM TO COME TO THE FINANCE COMMITTEE, UM, BEFORE THE FULL BOARD, BECAUSE WE DO THE QUARTERLY REPORTS AS WELL.
SO THAT KIND OF FLOWS ALONG THE SAME VEIN.
SO I WAS JUST GOING TO SET YOUR THIRD BULLET ABOUT, WELL, THE BULLET RIGHT ABOVE MEETINGS JUST HAS TO BE CHANGED TO OPERATIONAL EXPECTATIONS.
SO LET'S, UH, LET'S JUST LEAVE IT AS FEDERAL PROGRAMS. IS THAT ALL RIGHT? THAT'S FINE.
ADMINISTRATIVE TECHNOLOGY WILL LEAVE, UH, PROCUREMENT.
I WOULD IMAGINE WE WOULD CONTINUE TO KEEP THAT IN THE SCOPE.
THERE MAY BE SOME, UM, EXCUSE ME, UH, AND COMMITTEE, UH, WE MAY HAVE SOME CHANGES FROM THROUGH PROCUREMENT THAT ARE COMING DOWN FROM THE STATE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, UM, IN, WITHIN THE NEXT YEAR.
SO WE'LL BRING THOSE TO THIS COMMITTEE FIRST UNDER THAT.
NOW HOW ABOUT FOOD SERVICE? I MEAN, WE ARE INTERESTED IN THE COST AND THE CONTRACT AND EVERYTHING HARVEST.
THAT DOESN'T MEAN THE QUALITY, WHAT KIND OF COMMENTS WE GET FROM THE STUDENTS, THE TYPE OF FOOD AND EVERYTHING ELSE IS THAT IN OUR PURVIEW, THIS FOOD SERVICE HERE MEAN.
[00:10:01]
MY RESPONSIBILITY AS THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER ARE FINANCE ADMINISTRATIVE TECHNOLOGY AND FOOD SERVICE.SO THOSE THREE AREAS ALL REPORT TO ME.
SO I MANAGE NOT ONLY THE FINANCIAL ASPECTS OF THOSE THREE AREAS, BUT THE OPERATIONAL ASPECTS OF THEM AS WELL.
SO ANY EASE, UH, OPERATIONAL EXPECTATIONS THAT WOULD BE, WE WOULD PROVIDE MONITORING REPORTS ONTO THE BOARD WOULD COME THROUGH MY STAFF.
UM, SO I THINK I HELPED DEVELOP THOSE OES AND THE INTERPRETATIONS AND I WORKED ON OPERATIONS WITH THOSE STAFF MEMBERS DAILY.
UM, SO I THINK THAT IT'S APPROPRIATE TO KEEP IT HERE, UM, DUE TO THAT, HAVING THAT OPERATIONAL ASPECT, UM, AS WELL, BUT, YOU KNOW, UM, I THINK IT WORKS WELL FOR ME AND I I'M GUILD TO THE COMMITTEE FOR THEIR INPUT ON THAT EARL OR RACHEL, ANY COMMENT.
I DON'T REALLY HAVE A COMMENT BEYOND, I KNOW THAT ALI, IT TALKS ABOUT VARIOUS DIFFERENT THINGS THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, WOULD BE LOOKED FOR BY THE BOARD, UM, FOR WHETHER OR NOT THE OES OR THE, YOU KNOW, THE EXPECTATION WAS BEING MET.
SO I THINK ONCE THAT FOOD SERVICE, UM, REVIEW DOES COME TO US AS THE FINANCE COMMITTEE, IF THERE'S ANYTHING IN THERE THAT WE THINK IS OUTSIDE OF OUR STRATEGIC FINANCIAL OVERSIGHT, UM, THEN I THINK MAYBE WE COULD MAKE A RECOMMENDATION AT THAT POINT THAT, YOU KNOW, MAYBE ANOTHER COMMITTEE ALSO LOOK AT IT.
WHAT DO YOU THINK? THAT'S FINE.
I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THEM.
WE'LL KEEP IT IN THERE FOR NOW AND SEE, SEE WHERE IT GOES.
ANY CHANGES, OBVIOUSLY I'LL CHANGE THE MEMBERSHIP.
AND DID YOU HEAR WHAT I SAID THE, YEAH, EXACTLY.
SO THERE'S NOTHING MISSING TANYA FROM, UM, THOSE THINGS THAT ARE UNDER THE PURVIEW OF THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT THAT ENCOMPASSES EVERYTHING THAT'S THAT YOU KNOW OF.
SO CAN I ASK SOMETHING ELSE? YES, GO AHEAD.
SO THAT, UM, AFTER THOSE, UH, THE, YOU KNOW, THOSE FIVE BULLETS UNDER THE, UNDER THE PURVIEW OF THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT, WE JUST TALKED ABOUT THE NEXT SENTENCE.
ADDITIONALLY, THE FINANCE COMMITTEE WILL REVIEW INFORMATION REQUESTS FROM CONSTITUENTS, WHICH DO NOT REQUIRE A FORMAL FOYA RE DOES THAT EVEN NEED TO BE THERE? I THINK THAT CAME ABOUT, UM, BECAUSE WE WERE GETTING, OR I THINK STAFF WAS GETTING A LOT OF REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION, UM, THAT DIDN'T NECESSARILY MEET FOYA.
AND SO I THINK THAT WAS AN ATTEMPT TO ANSWER THAT IN A TIMELY MANNER AND TO GO THROUGH THAT AND MAKE SURE THAT THEY WEREN'T, YOU KNOW, NOT BEING ANSWERED OR, OR JUST TO REVIEW THEM FOR WHAT, YOU KNOW, MAYBE CONSTITUENTS WERE SEEING AS, UM, THINGS THAT WE NEEDED TO PUT OUR EYE ON.
UM, AND ALSO MAYBE MAKE IT MORE MANAGEABLE RATHER THAN, OKAY, IT'S GOING TO ALL RIGHT.
AS YOU RECALL, THERE USED TO BE A LOT OF, UH, SPURIOUS REQUESTS, MINOR THINGS THAT WERE REALLY DRIVING THE FINANCE DEPARTMENT CRAZY.
AND, AND SOME OF IT BOARD MEMBERS COULD REFER THE INDIVIDUAL TO THE FINANCE COMMITTEE AND THE FINANCE COMMITTEE COULD ANSWER SIMPLE QUESTIONS.
UH, WE HAD A LOT OF QUESTIONS ABOUT, UH, I'M THINKING THE, UH, PETE CARDS, CARDS LEADER IN ME PROGRAM, WHAT THE FUNDING WAS.
THERE WERE OTHER LITTLE, LITTLE THINGS, AND IT WAS JUST ONE OR TWO INDIVIDUALS ASKING THOSE QUESTIONS.
AND THIS WAS A WAY TO HAVE THE FINANCE OFFICE REFER THAT CONSTITUENT TO A BOARD MEMBER IF THEY DIDN'T WANT TO THE FIRM TO THEIR OWN INDIVIDUAL BOARD MEMBER OVER THERE, WHOEVER REPRESENTS THEIR DISTRICT.
AND WE ANSWERED A LOT OF QUESTIONS THAT WAY, AS I RECALL.
SO TANYA HAS JUST BEEN HELPFUL TO YOU AND YOUR DEPARTMENT.
UM, I WOULDN'T SAY I, I WOULD SAY THAT THIS
[00:15:01]
REQUIREMENT DIDN'T SEEM TO MODIFY THE WORKLOAD AT THE TIME.UM, BUT IN SENSE THAT TIME PERIOD, THOSE, UM, THAT LINE OF QUESTIONING HAS CEASED.
SO WE HAVEN'T SEEN THAT SORT OF, UM, VOLUME IN A FEW YEARS.
SO MAYBE WE GOTTA JUST DO DO AWAY WITH THAT SENTENCE, WHAT I WAS THINKING, BUT I'M NOT ON THE COMMITTEE.
WHAT DO YOU THINK ERROL? YEAH, WE COULD GET RID OF THAT.
I MEAN, I WOULD JUST SAY IF WE GET RID OF IT, I WOULD WANT, YOU KNOW, TANYA TO KNOW, AND LIKE HER STAFF TO KNOW THAT IF IT DOES EVER, YOU KNOW, SPUR BACK UP, UM, THAT PERSONALLY MYSELF, I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THEM REFERRING THINGS TO, TO US.
I DON'T, I DON'T THINK THAT'S OUTSIDE OF WHAT THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO DO, UM, THAT WE CAN KEEP IT OR LEAVE IT.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT SHE KNOWS IF SHE, IF THAT EVER DOES HAPPEN AGAIN OR THINGS DO SQUARE BACK UP THAT SHE COULD DO THAT.
SO LET'S GO AHEAD AND TAKE THAT, UH, THAT SENTENCE OUT OF THERE, ROBIN.
AND THE INSPECTION OF VARIANTS REPORTS, THE QUARTERLY AND ANNUALLY, THE REVIEW OF THE PROCUREMENT CARD PROGRAM CONTROLS AND YOU'RE INTO FINANCE DEPARTMENTS, PERFORMANCE, OPERATIONAL EXPECTATIONS, AND KEEP THAT AS, UH, AS WRITTEN.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THIS? OKAY.
LET'S MOVE ON TO THE NEXT AGENDA ITEM.
WE WENT THROUGH THAT LAST MEETING.
WE WENT THROUGH, OH, WE FIVE AND WE GOT TO ALWAYS SIX GOING INTO IT, LOOKING AT IT RIGHT NOW.
HE WANTED TO DEAL WITH, UM, ROLL ALL UNUSED 8% FUNDS AND NUMBER 16, RIGHT? NUMBER 16, UNUSED 8% FUNDS FORWARD TO THE CURRENT BOBBING CYCLE AND REDUCE THE CURRENT BOND ISSUANCE ACCORDINGLY.
AND THAT WAS BASED ON BOARD ACTION TAKEN ON 5 21, 2019.
AND THE OPERATIONS COMMITTEE HAS COME UP WITH A DIFFERENT WAY OF DEALING WITH UNUSED 8% FUNDS FOR PRIORITY LIST.
AND INSTEAD OF IT BASICALLY DOES THE SAME THING BECAUSE IT REALLY ROLLS THEM FORWARD TO A NEW PROJECT THAT WON'T HAVE TO COME UP FOR 8% THE NEXT YEAR.
SO IT IS A REALLY ROLL FORWARD, BUT IT'S ROLLING FORWARD ON THIS PRIORITY LIST.
AND I BELIEVE THE OPERATIONS COMMITTEE TALKED ABOUT THIS AND AS I UNDERSTAND IT, UH, THAT WAS THEIR RECOMMENDATION THAT WE USE THEIR PRIORITY LIST TO, UH, HANDLE THE NEXT SHOCK THAT IN THAT PRIORITY LIST, IF WE HAVE UNUSED 8% FUNDS, ANY COMMENTS? YES.
UM, SO I MUST ADMIT I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH EXACTLY WHAT THE OPERATION COMMITTEE'S RECOMMENDATION WAS, AND I HAVEN'T SEEN THE CONVERSATION.
UM, I DID ASK, UM, MS. FREDERICK
UM, I'M NOT SURE FROM A, UM, FROM THE STANDPOINT OF HOW EXACTLY WE UNDO BOARD ACTION, CAUSE I BELIEVE WOULDN'T, WE NEED TO, THE PREVAILING SEVEN FROM THE FAILING SIDE WOULD NEED TO BASICALLY RESCIND THIS.
UM, AND THEN WE WOULD NEED TO REPLACE IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING OF HOW FROM A, UH, YOU KNOW, OPERATING STANDPOINT, HOW THAT WOULD HAVE TO HAPPEN.
UM, BUT THAT, THOSE ARE MY MAIN COMMENTS.
I DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE ANY, UM, PERSPECTIVE ON WHETHER OR NOT WE SHOULD KEEP IT OR, OR RETHINK.
[00:20:01]
WHETHER WE SHOULD ACTUALLY COME DOWN AND NEXT MEETING.I MEAN, SO EXPLAIN THIS CAUSE I KNOW THEY HAD A LOT OF DAMAGE DOWN IN POOL LAST WEEK, SO THAT'S PROBABLY THE REASON WHY SHE DIDN'T.
SO I DON'T KNOW IF WE SHOULD TABLE THIS TO SEE IF SHE COULD ATTEND NEXT TIME OR, AND I DON'T KNOW IF THEY HAD MAYBE SOME PROPOSED LANGUAGE THAT THEY WERE LOOKING AT FOR US TO CHANGE, BUT I THINK WE SHOULD DEFINITELY CROSS OUR T'S DOT OUR I'S FOR WHATEVER WE ARE GOING TO PROPOSE.
AND UH, I'LL TALK TO TRICIA AND THEN ASK HER TO, TO ATTEND OUR NEXT MEETING.
AND THERE'S NO REAL RUSH TO DO THIS.
THIS ISN'T ANYTHING THAT'S IMMEDIATE, SO.
DO YOU NEED, DO YOU NEED A MOTION TO TABLE IT NEXT MEETING? ALL RIGHT.
HOWEVER, UH, I SUPPOSE IT WOULDN'T BE A BAD IDEA.
THE MOTION TO TABLE THE ACTION UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING, WE'LL GET A SECOND TO TAKE ITEM NUMBER 16 OF THIS WEEK AND A TABLE IT TILL OUR NEXT, OUR NEXT MEETING.
ANY DISCUSSION HEARING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING, AYE, LET'S MOVE TO THE NEXT ITEM.
UM, WHERE DID YOU WANT ME TO GO? THERE? IT IS.
IS THAT THE RIGHT ONE 17 DASH 18? I DON'T SEE THAT 17 THROUGH 18, 17, 17 THROUGH 18.
IT'S BOTH 17 AND 18 THAT THE CHANGES WERE MADE ON.
SO YOU'VE GOT THEM WRITTEN IN RED THERE, RIGHT? YES, THAT'S RIGHT.
SO NUMBER ONE, IT'S THE RESULTS OF 90% OR GREATER NEXT ONE DOWN IS OKAY.
THAT WAS EVERYTHING ON THAT ONE.
WASN'T IT? IT IS TRYING TO SAY SOMETHING.
UM, THE ONLY CHANGE THAT WAS OFFERED ON THIS DOCUMENT, UH, ALWAYS 17.
I BELIEVE MR. EARL, MEL CAMPBELL BROUGHT UP THE, UM, IDEA OF MAKING A DEFINITIVE PERCENTAGE THAT WE COULD WOULD COMPLY WITH WITH REGARD TO THE SURVEYS OF CUSTOMER SERVICE IN THE TECHNOLOGY AREA.
SO ON THE WEB DESK, WHEN A WEB TICKET IS PUT IN, UH, FOR ASSISTANCE WITH TECHNOLOGY, UH, THERE IS AN AUTOMATIC SURVEY THAT GOES BACK TO THE END USER AFTER THE, UH, THE TICKET IS CLOSED OUT.
AND, UH, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE SERVICE AND THE EXPERIENCE THAT THEY, UM, RECEIVED HAD A RESULT WITH A SATISFACTION OF 90% OR GREATER.
SO THAT WAS THE ONLY EDIT ON THIS ONE 17.
SO I JUST ADDED THOSE THREE FEW WORDS TO THE VERY END OF THAT SURVEY TO, UH, COMPLY WITH HOPEFULLY, UH, COMPLY WITH WHAT MR. CAMPBELL, MEL CAMPBELL'S, UM, REQUEST WAS.
ANY COMMENTS EARL? I HAVE A QUESTION.
SO, UM, WITHOUT SEEING THE SURVEY, I'M ASSUMING THAT THE FOUR AREAS FROM WHERE THE PERCENTAGE IS COMING FROM ARE THE PROFESSIONALISM OF THE TECHNICIAN
[00:25:01]
RESOLUTION OF THE PROBLEM OVERALL TIMELINESS AND OVERALL EXPERIENCE AT TWENTY-FIVE TWENTY-FIVE TWENTY-FIVE TWENTY-FIVE IS THAT CORRECT? YES.MAKING SURE I UNDERSTAND HOW THAT FELT BEING COMPUTED.
SO IS THERE ANY OBJECTION TO ADOPTING THESE, UH, THESE WORDS INTO THAT? ARE WE, YOU'RE A NUN THAT'S DONE NOW, WHAT DO WE DO TO GET THESE ALWAYS DONE? I WOULD HATE TO HAVE THE FULL BOARD GO OVER 39 PAGES OF THIS.
I MEAN, WE HAVE SPENT A LOT OF TIME SAYING WHAT WE EXPECTED, AND THEN NOW IT'S UP TO THE SUPERINTENDENT TO INTERPRET THAT AND SAY WHAT THE MONITORING, WHAT THE INDICATORS ARE.
I THINK WE SHOULD PERSONALLY, I THINK WE SHOULD ACCEPT THEM AS IS, AND THEN GO THROUGH A EVALUATION CYCLE TO SEE IF, BECAUSE RIGHT NOW WE'RE JUST WRITING SOMETHING AND WE'RE GOING TO TRY IT OUT FOR THE FIRST TIME ON HIS EVALUATION.
AND SOME OF THE THINGS WE MAY SAY, WELL, NOW THAT WE'RE, NOW THAT WE'RE REALLY EVALUATING HIM, THAT WE MIGHT WANT TO TWEAK IT, DO A WHOLE LOT OF EFFORT TO TRY TO GET IT PERFECT RIGHT NOW SEEMS TO BE OF MARGINAL UTILITY.
THAT'S JUST MY, MY BELIEF EARL GO.
DICK JUST LET'S ACCEPT THEM AND GO THROUGH A CYCLE AND SEE, YOU KNOW, THEN START TWEAKING THEM IF WE NEED TO TWEAK THEM MORE.
BUT I THINK WE'RE GETTING TOO BOGGED DOWN IN THE DETAILS.
YOU KNOW, WE'VE SET THE PARAMETERS OF WHAT WE EXPECT AND IT IS HIS, HIS, UM, YOU KNOW, JOB DR.
RODRIGUEZ IS TO DETERMINE, UH, YOU KNOW, WHAT THOSE PARAMETERS ARE IN TERMS OF, YOU KNOW, THE OPERATIONAL ASPECTS.
I HAVE JETS FLYING OVER, SO I MUTE OCCASIONALLY.
OH, WE ONLY HAD ONE MINOR CHANGE.
I JUST WANTED TO BRING THAT UP.
UM, AND IT WAS TO ADD THE PARENT SURVEYS IN THEM.
SO THERE'S SOME RED LANGUAGE ON THE, UM, ABOUT FOUR PAGE FOUR OR FIVE PAGES IN TO JUST ADD WHAT WAS RECOMMENDED.
I BELIEVE MR. SMITH RECOMMENDED THAT.
SO THOSE WERE THE ONLY EDITS THAT WERE MADE ON THIS ONE.
AND THAT'S, I JUST WANTED TO POINT THAT ONE THING OUT, OTHER THAN THAT, UH, THESE TWO OES ARE READY FOR ACCEPTANCE AND TO MOVE FORWARD WHENEVER AT THE WILL OF THE COMMITTEE, DR.
HARRISON ASKED YOU, WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THE PROCESS OF APPROVING? UM, I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY, I ACTUALLY GOT AN, AN EMAIL THAT, UM, I THINK A FEW BOARD MEMBERS ARE WANTING THE POLICY COMMITTEE TO LOOK AT, UM, THESE INTERPRETATIONS AND ALSO MAYBE TO DETERMINE WHETHER THEY FUNNEL THROUGH POLICY COMMITTEE THEN FOR RECOMMENDATION TO THE FULL BOARD.
UM, SO I'M NOT REALLY SURE WHAT THE FULL BOARDS WILL, WOULD BE ON HOW TO, UM, MOVE FORWARD WITH THESE I'M I KIND OF FALL IN THE MIDDLE.
I AGREE WITH YOU THAT I DEFINITELY DON'T WANT TO SLOW THINGS DOWN.
RODRIGUEZ HAS DONE A LOT OF WORK AND HIS INTERPRETATION OF THESE POLICIES.
I ALSO WOULD HATE FOR US A YEAR FROM NOW TO REALIZE SOME LARGE GAP AND IT BE TO THE DETRIMENT OF LORD, KNOWS WHAT? UM, SO I, I DO FEEL THAT OUR REVIEW OF THEM IS IMPORTANT TO GIVE FEEDBACK, BUT I ALSO DON'T WANT US TO GET BOGGED DOWN IN THE MINUTIA OF THINGS.
UM, SO I KIND OF FALL ON THE LINE.
IT SEEMS TO ME IT'S TRUST OR TRUST THE COMMITTEE TO SAY, HEY, IT LOOKS GOOD.
AND IF NOT, WE DON'T NEED A COMMITTEE.
NO, WE DON'T NEED TO REVIEW IT.
I MEAN, WE, WE SHOULD USE CONSENT AGENDA SO MUCH MORE THAN WE DO.
AND IF YOU HAVE AN OBJECTION, IF THAT'S WHY I DIDN'T WANT TO ACT ON IT AT THE LAST MEETING SAYING THIS 39 PAGES YOU'VE GOT FROM NOW TO THE NEXT MEETING
[00:30:01]
TO REVIEW THE 39 PAGES.IF YOU SEE SOMETHING THAT YOU OBJECT TO THEN OBJECT TO IT AND TELL US WHAT YOU OBJECT TO, AND THEN WE CAN DISCUSS WHETHER OR NOT WE ACCEPT THAT, BUT WE CAN FOLLOW THIS RABBIT DOWN THE HOLE FOREVER.
YEAH, I THINK IF THEY, I THINK IF THEY DID COME TO POLICY COMMITTEE, IT WOULD BE BENEFICIAL THAT THE POLICY COMMITTEE LOOKED AT THEM, UM, HAD OUR REVIEW OF THEM AND THEN BROUGHT THEM FORWARD TO THE FULL BOARD FOR, FOR ACCEPTANCE.
UM, BUT I ALSO THINK THAT MAYBE SOME TYPE OF GUIDANCE FROM THE BOARD CHAIR TO OTHERS IN THEIR REVIEW OF THEM PRIOR TO COMING TO THE FULL BOARD, THAT IF THERE'S GOING TO BE CHANGES THAT THEY BE SUBMITTED, YOU KNOW, AS A MOTION, EVERYTHING BE READY SO THAT THERE'S NOT SO MUCH BACK AND FORTH AND VOLLEYING OF IT.
UM, IF YOU HAVE A CHANGE THAT YOU STAND FIRMLY ON, YOU KNOW, BE PREPARED WITH EMOTION TO MAKE IT, IT JUST SEEMS TO ME THAT WE HAVE SOME BOARD MEMBERS THAT DON'T DO THEIR HOMEWORK.
SO THEY WANT TO DO THEIR HOMEWORK DURING BOARD MEETINGS.
AND THOSE OF US THAT DO THE HOMEWORK ARE BORED TO TEARS GOING THROUGH IT OVER AND OVER AGAIN.
I WOULD JUST, I DON'T REALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT THE POLICY COMMITTEE THAT THIS DOESN'T, THIS DOESN'T JEOPARDIZE POLICY.
THIS IS SIMPLY AN EVALUATION TOOL FOR THE SUPERINTENDENT.
WELL, MY ONLY COMMENT ON THAT, IT'S NOT NECESSARILY THAT I THINK THE POLICY COMMITTEE KNOWS THE HISTORICAL CONTEXT OF THE POLICIES AS THEY WERE CREATED AND WHAT THE, THE BOARD'S INTENTION WAS, UM, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THINGS THAT CAME OUT OF A FULL BOARD ACTION.
SO THEM LOOKING AT THE SUPERINTENDENTS INTERPRETATION, IF, IF THEY SAW SOMETHING GLARING THAT, YOU KNOW, WE SHOWED, OOH, THAT'S NOT REALLY EXACTLY WHAT WE WERE LOOKING FOR WHEN WE WROTE IT LIKE THAT.
OR, UM, I THINK THEIR EYES ON IT MAKES SENSE FROM A HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE OF HOW THE POLICIES WERE DEVELOPED.
BUT, UM, THAT'S JUST MY COMMENT ON THAT.
UH, OR CHAIR, I'M GONNA KICK THIS FOOTBALL TO YOU BECAUSE I, I REALLY DON'T THINK THE POLICY COMMITTEE HAS GOT ENOUGH TO DO ON WITHOUT GOING THROUGH.
AND WE LOOKING INTERPRETATIONS AND MONITORING INDICATORS, YOU KNOW, THAT'S, IT'S NOT THE POLICIES COMMITTEE TO INTERPRET AFTER THEY'VE GONE THROUGH ALL THAT TIME AND EFFORT TO DEVELOP THE POLICY.
AND WE DID ALL THESE SMILE TO GRIN EDITS SO THAT EVERYBODY LIKED EVERY WORD.
AND THEN WE'RE GOING TO DO IT AGAIN ON THE INTERPRETATION THAT JUST DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO ME.
I DON'T THINK IT NEEDS TO GO TO POLICY COMMITTEE, UM, FOR THE, EXACTLY WHAT YOU'VE JUST SAID.
UM, AND IT'S THE SUPERINTENDENT'S INTERPRETATION AND HE'S, SO HE'S HAVING EACH OF HIS, UH, SENIOR STAFF MEMBERS, YOU KNOW, HELP WITH THE, WITH THE, UM, WITH THE OES.
AND I THINK THEY'RE REALLY GOOD PERSONALLY.
AND I THINK WE JUST GOT TO MOVE FORWARD AND USE THEM.
AND I W I WOULD PUT THEM ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.
ANY SINGLE BOARD MEMBER CAN REMOVE THEM FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA, UM, FOR APPROVAL, IF THEY FEEL THAT IT NEEDS TO BE DISCUSSED.
WILLIAM'S HANDS UP, DICK WILLIAM.
WHY WOULD YOU SAY THAT? I, I AGREE WITH DR.
THEN I THINK MADAM CHAIR, THAT WHAT WE MAY HAVE TO DO IN MY FINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT IS TO BRING THIS UP FOR BOARD ACTION, AS FAR AS WHAT IS THE ROLE OF THE POLICY COMMITTEE IN DOING THE OES AND ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.
EVENTUALLY WE GOT TO GET THE WILL OF THE BOARD.
THAT SOUNDS THAT'S THE QUESTION.
SO THE FINANCE ONES CAME THROUGH FINANCE COMMITTEE FOR REVIEW BEFORE THEY CAME TO THE FULL BOARD.
SO I THINK WHAT THE CONCERN WAS LAST TIME WHEN WE, WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THEM AT FULL BOARD, WAS
[00:35:01]
THAT IT WAS OBVIOUSLY TAKING A LOT OF TIME.UM, SO I THINK SOME BOARD MEMBERS THAT THERE WAS AN EMAIL, I DON'T KNOW IF EVERYBODY WAS ON IT OR NOT, UM, WHERE IT WAS ASKING THAT INSTEAD OF THEM GOING THROUGH INDIVIDUAL COMMITTEES, THAT ALL OF THEM WENT THROUGH ONE COMMITTEE AND THEN THEY CAME TO THE FULL BOARD FOR APPROVAL.
UM, SO I MEAN, I THINK THAT WE GOT SOME GOOD, UM, SUGGESTIONS HERE BY BRINGING THIS FORWARD TO THE FULL BOARD.
UM, BUT IT OBVIOUSLY DID TAKE UP A LOT OF TIME.
SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE APPROPRIATE ANSWER IS, BUT I'LL WELL, UNLESS THERE'S AN OBJECTION WHEN THE BOARD MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE, I WOULD LIKE TO BRING IT UP AT THE, AT THE NEXT BOARD MEETING DURING THE FINANCE COMMITTEE REPORT, WE WOULD LIKE TO GET THE WILL OF THE BOARD ON THE PROCESS OR APPROVAL INTERPRETATION MONITORING INDICATORS OF THE OES.
AND I WILL THEN GO AND THEN BILLET AND HAVE A DISCUSSION AND GET EMOTION AND WE'LL HAVE THE WILL OF THE BOARD.
IT WILL BE A DOCUMENTED THROUGH THE, UH, THROUGH THE MOTION.
LET'S MOVE TO THE NEXT ITEM DISCUSSION OF A POLICY RELATING TO DISTRICT LEVEL STUDENT ACTIVITY FUNDS.
WISNIEWSKI I BELIEVE THIS WAS YOUR, SO, UM, THIS CAME ABOUT OVER SOME OF OUR REVIEWS THAT WE HAD QUARTERLY FINANCIAL REPORTS.
UM, THERE WAS AT ONE POINT IN TIME, THERE WAS A LARGE BALANCE THAT WAS ACCUMULATING IN THE DISTRICT LEVEL STUDENT ACTIVITIES FUND.
UM, I BELIEVE IN TANYA, PLEASE, CORRECT ME IF ANY OF THIS IS WRONG, UM, THAT IT WAS STATED THAT THE MAJORITY OF THAT WAS COMING FROM TECHNOLOGY USAGE FEES.
UM, AND SO WITH THAT, IT MADE SENSE TO ME THAT THERE BE A POLICY BECAUSE THERE DOESN'T SEEM TO BE ONE THAT THOSE TECHNOLOGY USES USAGE FEES, UM, ARE PUT TOWARDS TECHNOLOGY REFRESHES.
UM, SOME OF Y'ALL PROBABLY RECALL RECENTLY WE DID SOME REFRESHES, UM, JUST IN THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, AND THOSE ARE USUALLY A PRETTY LARGE CHUNK OF MONEY.
AND IT ONLY MAKES SENSE THAT IF THE PARENTS ARE PAYING THESE TECHNOLOGY USAGE FEES, UM, THAT IT GO TOWARDS, UH, THE REFRESH OF THE TECHNOLOGY DEVICES.
UM, SO THAT WAS KIND OF SOME OF THE CONVERSATION THAT STARTED A LITTLE BIT EARLIER AT ONE OF OUR PREVIOUS MEETINGS.
AND, UM, I BELIEVE THERE'S A DOCUMENT IN THE IMD BOARD DOCS ABOUT THIS AS WELL ON THE SCREEN.
I HAVEN'T, I, MY OTHER SCREEN, THE PROPOSED MOTIONS IS, IS THAT, UH, DO YOU HAVE ANY OBJECTION TO THAT? UH, NO, I DON'T EITHER.
UM, DO I HEAR A MOTION THAT WE RECOMMEND THAT, UH, THAT THE PROPOSED MOTION BE SUBMITTED TO THE FULL BOARD ACTION AT THE NEXT BOARD MEETING? I'LL SECOND FOR CONVERSATION.
I JUST WANTED TO ASK TANYA QUESTION FOR DISCUSSION.
UM, TONYA, CAN YOU JUST GIVE US A LITTLE SYNOPSIS OR OVERVIEW? I KNOW IT'S ALREADY, IT'S PRETTY CLEAR HERE, BUT, UM, THE EMOTION STATES THAT I MOVED THAT THE FINANCE COMMITTEE RECOMMEND TO THE FULL BOARD OF POLICY AUTHORIZING AN ANNUAL CARRY OVER, UH, DISTRICT OFFICE, STUDENT ACTIVITY FUNDS NOT EXCEEDING THE AMOUNT OF THE PRIOR YEAR'S REVENUES.
UM, UM, BUT IT DOESN'T SPEAK NECESSARILY TO THE TECHNOLOGY REFRESH PART OF IT.
SO I JUST WANTED TO SEE IF THE INTENTION BEHIND THE PROPOSED MOTION WAS FOR THAT.
UM, I WASN'T CERTAIN AS TO EXACT, UM, THE DIRECTION YOU WERE HEADED WITH THIS, UH, TOPIC.
SO I TOOK A STAB AT, UM, FIRST I THINK THEIR INTENTION IS TO SORT OF LIMIT, TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT ACCUMULATING THESE FUNDS AT A, AT A LEVEL WITH THAT WE'RE USING THEM AT A REGULAR AMOUNT EACH YEAR.
AND SECOND IS THE, WHAT THAT WE'RE, UH, THAT WHAT WE'RE USING THEM ON IS SPECIFIC TO STUDENT DEVICES AND RELATING TO THOSE DEVICES, WHETHER IT'S REPAIRS OR THE DEVICES THEMSELVES, OR EVEN PROTECTIVE COVERINGS OF THE DEVICES.
[00:40:01]
A SET, ANOTHER MOTION THAT I ABANDONED, WHICH HAD ACTUALLY HAD A SECOND SENTENCE THAT SAID, UH, FOR THE TECHNOLOGY USE, NOT ONLY WOULD WE, UM, THE BOARD CREATE A POLICY, AUTHORIZING THE ANNUAL USE OF THE FUNDS SO THAT WE WOULD LIMIT HOW MUCH WE CARRIED OVER FROM ONE YEAR TO THE OTHER.UM, BUT WE WOULD ALSO, WE COULD ALSO STATE THAT TECHNOLOGY USAGE FEES MUST BE USED FOR TECHNOLOGY REPAIRS, STUDENT DEVICES, AND PROTECTIVE COVERINGS OF THOSE DEVICES.
SO, UH, I'M NOT SURE IF A SECOND, UM, SENTENCE OF THAT MOTION MIGHT ENCOMPASS BOTH ASPECTS OF WHAT YOU OR YOUR THOUGHTS WERE.
UM, BUT I'M HOPING THAT PERHAPS MAKING THAT ONE ADDITION MIGHT SATISFY, UH, OR, UH, BE IN LINE WITH WHAT YOU WERE THINKING.
I THINK THE ONLY QUESTION, UM, FROM THAT IS, IS THAT, UM, IS THAT, WOULD THAT BE A NEW FUND OR A NEW, HOW WOULD THAT BE ALLOCATED OR WHERE WOULD IT BE HOUSED, I GUESS? UM, THERE'S NO NEW FUND.
UM, SO THE TECHNOLOGY, THE DISTRICT, UH, IF WE COULD SCROLL DOWN JUST A TEAR TO SEE THE HISTORY OF THE TECHNOLOGY USAGE FEES, UM, THESE, UH, TECHNOLOGY FEES HAVE A SEPARATE, UM, CODE TO IDENTIFY THEM WITHIN THE STUDENT ACTIVITIES ACCOUNT AT THE DISTRICT OFFICE.
UM, SO IT'S IN, IT'S IN THE STUDENT ACTIVITIES FUND DISTRICT OFFICE LOCATION, AND A MODIFIER CODE CALLED TECHNOLOGY USE FEES.
AND SO IT HAS THREE DIFFERENT IDENTIFIERS THAT PUT THEM IN THAT SPECIFIC ACCOUNT.
AND SO THE REVENUES HAVE BEEN A STEADY 300 TO $400,000 PER YEAR FOR THE LAST FOUR YEARS.
SO THAT, THAT WOULD SAY THAT THE BALANCE SHOULD NOT BE MORE THAN, UM, THE PRIOR YEARS.
SO WE WOULD NEED TO SPEND AT LEAST $435,000 NEXT YEAR, BECAUSE, UM, THAT IS THE REVENUES FOR THE CURRENT YEAR.
SO, UM, THAT WOULD LIMIT THE BALANCE THAT WE'RE CARRYING FORWARD, BUT THEN IT WOULD ALLOW US SOME SPENDING AUTHORITY, UM, FOR WHAT EXACTLY WE SPEND THOSE FUNDS ON.
AND WE SPEND THEM PRIMARILY FOR REPAIRS.
UM, WE HAVE WE'VE HAVE USED THEM ON THE PROTECTIVE COVERINGS, BUT IF THERE ARE ANY REMAINING FUNDS, UH, AND WE DIDN'T USE AT ALL, WE WOULD ACTUALLY REDUCE WHAT WE'RE BORROWING IN 8% FUNDS TO UTILIZE THESE FUNDS FIRST.
SO IT WOULD LIMIT IT TO THOSE THREE AREAS.
DO SO, DO WE HAVE, UM, A HISTORY OF, UM, TECHNOLOGY REPAIRS? LIKE HOW MUCH IS THAT TYPICALLY COSTING US A YEAR AND WHERE'S THAT BEING PULLED FROM NOW? UM, THEY ARE WITHIN THE LAST TWO YEARS, THEY'VE BEGUN TO BE CODED DIRECTLY HERE.
THEY WERE BEING CHARGED TO THE GENERAL FUND PRIOR TO 2020.
SO THERE WAS VERY SMALL AMOUNT OF EXPENSES IN THE TECHNOLOGY FEE.
IF YOU SEE UNDER 2018, YOU SEE $332, THEN THE NEXT YEAR WAS $9,290.
THEN AS I BEGAN TO BRING ATTENTION TO THE, UM, TO THE TECHNOLOGY DIVISION TO MAKE SURE WE'RE SPENDING THESE FUNDS FIRST, WE BEGAN TO SPEND THEM FOR THE REPAIRS.
I WOULD ESTIMATE THAT WE'RE SPENDING ABOUT $200,000 A YEAR ON JUST REPAIRS AND REPLACEMENTS OF DAMAGED DEVICES.
UM, SO ANYTHING ABOVE AND BEYOND THAT WOULD BE, UH, THE BAGS AND ANY ADDITIONAL DEVICES FOR STUDENTS.
LAST QUESTION, MR. CHAIR, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE MY INTENTION HERE WITH DOING ANY OF THIS IS NUMBER ONE, JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT THE ACCUMULATION DOESN'T OCCUR TO THE EXTENT THAT IT HAD BEFORE AND ALSO TO, YOU KNOW, REDUCE THE REQUEST AND THE FUTURE FOR LARGE, UM, TECHNOLOGY REFRESHES, IF WE CAN MAKE THAT NOT BE, UM, AS MUCH OF A LARGE EXPENSE AT ONE TIME TO THE DISTRICT.
UM, I THINK THAT IS MUCH A MUCH MORE RESPONSIBLE USE OF THAT FEE.
SO IF TANYA, YOU THINK THAT MEETS THAT INTENTION AND ADDING THAT OTHER SENTENCE WOULD, WOULD DO THAT THEN, UM, I'D LOVE TO ADD THAT SENTENCE IN AND FOR SURE, YES.
I THINK, I THINK IT FALLS IN LINE WITH WHAT WE'RE, WHAT OUR PLANS ARE AND IT HELPS IT WOULD HELP US ACTUALLY TO BUDGET AT A MORE EVEN, UM, STEADY AMOUNT.
SO WHEN THEY LOOK AT ACTUALLY ESTABLISHED BUDGETS IN THESE AREAS OF ABOUT $400,000 A YEAR FOR REVENUES AND FOR EXPENSES, AND THEN WE CAN PLAN ACCORDINGLY.
SO I THINK IT WORKS WELL WITH WHAT WE'RE, UM, WHAT, WITH WHAT WE'RE DOING.
AND WE CAN ABSORB SOME OF THOSE COSTS WITHIN STUDENT ACTIVITIES, UH, AT LEAST A COUPLE OF HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS AND NOT HAVE TO
[00:45:01]
REQUIRE BORROWING IN 8% FUNDS FOR THOSE.UM, CAN YOU SEND ROBIN THAT OTHER SENTENCE? YES.
I'M TRYING TO FIND IT RIGHT NOW, STRUGGLING A LITTLE BIT TECHNOLOGY COMMITTEE.
UH, I HOPE WE'LL LOOK AT IS REFRESH STRATEGY.
IT IS, IT IS MY EXPERIENCE, UH, BUT I, IN A PREVIOUS LIFE IS WE TRIED TO REFRESH ONE-THIRD OF OUR, OUR INVENTORY EVERY YEAR.
SO BECAUSE MOST OF THE TIME WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE DIFFERENT SPEEDS OF THE DIFFERENT CHIPS THAT COME IN AND THE DIFFERENT SOFTWARE THAT IS BUILT TO THOSE SPEEDS THE THREE YEARS ABOUT YOUR EFFECTIVE THREE YEARS IS ABOUT YOUR EFFECTIVE LIFE OF ANY COMPUTER TO STAY CURRENT.
AND SO WE HAD THAT POLICY AND, AND DO THAT FOR ALL THE UNIVERSITY.
UM, AUTOMATION WAS ONE-THIRD TURNOVER EVERY YEAR, AND YOU COULD BUDGET THAT REALLY PRETTY EASILY.
UH, AND YOU WOULDN'T GET THE, YOU WOULDN'T HAVE AS MUCH OF THE MASSIVE TURNOVER LIKE WE DID IN THE LAST TIME WHEN WE HAD COMPUTERS SITTING OUT IN THE HALLWAY, CAUSE THEY HAD SO MANY, THEY DIDN'T HAVE ANY PLACE TO STORE THEM.
UH, SO, BUT THAT WOULD, I THINK WILL BE SOMETHING THAT TECHNOLOGY CAN MAYBE YOU CAN GET INTO AS TO THAT BEACHES, BUT BY THE LANGUAGE THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, I THINK PUT A GOOD PARAMETERS OUT THERE TO FILL IN THE MIDDLE.
AND THAT GIVES THE TECHNOLOGY PEOPLE, I THINK ENOUGH FLEXIBILITY TO NOT, TO BE HAMPERED IN HOW THEY CONDUCT THEIR BUSINESS, BUT YET GET DOWN WHAT YOU'RE REALLY YOU'RE REALLY ISSUE IS IS THAT THE BALANCE THAT WE HAVE SEEMS EXCESSIVE.
SO, UM, I THINK THE ONLY COMMENT I HAVE ALSO REMAINING IS THAT, UM, I, THERE PROBABLY WILL BE A CONVERSATION WHEN IT DOES COME TO THE FULL BOARD OUT OF RECOMMENDATIONS FROM FINANCE COMMITTEE OF WHETHER OR NOT THIS GETS MOVED OVER TO THE POLICY COMMITTEE CHAIR, PUT IT INTO A SPECIFIC AREA OF SYDNEY ANNUAL WISH.
THE ONLY THING, THE POLICY COMMITTEE SPECIFIC AREA DO YOU HAVE THERE? DO YOU HAVE THE REST OF THAT? YOU CAN SHOW ON THE MOTION.
I'M JUST GOING TO TYPE IT HERE.
ARE YOU TYPING IT IN CHAT? NO, BUT I CAN TYPE IT IN CHAT.
EARL, DO YOU ACCEPT THIS EDITION? OKAY.
WHAT DO WE USE THOSE FEES FOR? UM, THE FACILITIES USED TO BE, HAVE BEEN USED FOR THE PART-TIME SALARY AND BENEFIT OF A STAFF MEMBER TO, UM, ADMINISTER THAT PROGRAM.
SO SHE MONITORED ALL OF THE FACILITIES, USE CONTRACTS, THE AGREEMENTS THAT CAME FROM OUTSIDE VENDORS TO, TO OUR SCHOOLS AND SHE, UM, APPROVED OR CALCULATED THAT HE STRUCTURE, UH, FEE AMOUNTS BASED ON THE STRUCTURE THAT'S IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE RULES AND THEN GOT, UM, SOUGHT, UM, AND RECEIVED APPROVAL FOR IT AND THEN COMMUNICATED BACK WITH THE SCHOOLS.
SO SHE ADMINISTERED THE ENTIRE PROGRAM, UM, THAT WAS MARY GILLIES AND THE FACILITIES OFFICE, UM, AND MARY RETIRED LAST YEAR.
SO YOU DON'T SEE AS MUCH SPENDING, UH, IN THE CURRENT, UH, AND THE MOST RECENT SCHOOL YEAR.
UH, I BELIEVE THAT THERE ARE PLANS FOR,
[00:50:01]
UM, AND, AND WE HAVE NOT HAD MUCH, UH, ACTIVITY IN FACILITIES USE BEES IN THE LAST YEAR BECAUSE OF THE PANDEMIC.SO I BELIEVE THERE'S SOME, UH, PLANS TO, YOU KNOW, GET SOME ASSISTANCE AS WE BEGIN TO OPEN OUR DOORS AND ALLOW THOSE FACILITIES TO BE USED AGAIN.
SO IT'S BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED TO MOVE IT.
THE FINANCE COMMITTEE RECOMMEND TO THE FULL BOARD OF POLICY AUTHORIZING THE ANNUAL CARRY OVER OF DISTRICT OFFICE, STUDENT ACTIVITY FUNDS NOT TO EXCEED THE AMOUNT OF THE PRIOR YEAR'S REVENUE TECHNOLOGY USE FEES SHALL BE USED FOR TECHNOLOGY REPAIRS, STUDENT DEVICES, AND PROTECTIVE COVERS.
IS THERE ANY MORE DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
OH, SHE CARES DEBT REFUNDING OPPORTUNITIES FROM BRIAN.
WOULD YOU LIKE ME TO GO OVER THAT? OKAY.
UM, SO ON JUST A FEW DAYS AGO, UH, WE RECEIVED INFORMATION FROM THE COMPASS MUNICIPAL ADVISORS.
OUR REPRESENTATIVE IS BRIAN NARUC ON TWO POTENTIAL REFUNDING, ALSO KNOWN AS REFINANCING OPPORTUNITIES, UM, THAT WOULD ACHIEVE A COST SAVINGS TO THE DISTRICT.
SO THIS WOULD MEAN, SO TODAY IS JUST AN INTRODUCTORY CONVERSATION.
UM, I'M NOT RECOMMENDING ANY, ANY PARTICULAR ACTION TODAY OR MOTIONS, UM, JUST AN INTRODUCTORY, UM, PURVIEW OF IT, UH, OR A PREVIEW OF IT TO THE COMMITTEE.
AND THEN WE CAN HAVE A BRIEF CONVERSATION TO INTRODUCE IT AT, UH, TUESDAY'S BOARD MEETING, UH, FOR POTENTIAL ACTION, UM, POSSIBLY IN AUGUST.
SO THERE ARE TWO REFUNDING OPPORTUNITIES THAT WOULD BE FOR THE BOND SERIES 2014, B AND 2012 B.
SO THOSE WERE, UM, SEVERAL YEARS OLD.
AND ON THE 2000 B ISSUE, UM, WOULD ACTUALLY, UH, THERE IS A FIXED INTEREST RATE, UH, ESTIMATED AT 1.9, SEVEN, 5%.
UM, THIS, IF WE, UH, ACHIEVED A RATE OF ONE THAT IF WE ACHIEVE THAT RATE, THERE COULD BE A POTENTIAL SAVINGS OF OVER A MILLION DOLLARS.
UM, SO THEY, HE IS RECOMMENDING THAT WE MOVE FORWARD WITH REFUNDING BONDS IN THE AUGUST TIMEFRAME OF THIS YEAR, AND THERE WILL LIKELY BE CHANGES IN INTEREST RATES.
UM, I RECEIVED AN EMAIL TODAY INDICATING THE INTEREST RATE ENVIRONMENT HAS IMPROVED EVEN FURTHER AND COULD BE AS, UH, A RECENT BOND IN SPARTANBURG SOLD FOR 1.5, 8%.
UM, SO THAT WOULD EVEN ACHIEVE A GREATER, UH, NET SAVINGS FOR THE SCHOOL DISTRICT A LONG TIME AND, UM, WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD SERIOUSLY CONSIDER.
SO WE WOULD'VE REDUCED INTEREST COSTS GOING OUT FOR THE 13 YEARS, UM, FUTURE 13 YEAR PERIOD.
UM, AND THEN THE SECOND BOND IS A 2012 B AND IT IS ELIGIBLE TO ME ALSO REFINANCED.
AND, UM, THERE IS, UH, A POTENTIAL NET SAVINGS OF $137,000 IN THIS BOND ISSUE.
AND SO, UM, IT HAS TWO YEARS REMAINING AND WOULD ALSO BE RECOMMENDED TO BE REFINANCED, UM, AND, UM, WOULD ALSO BE SUBJECT TO CHANGES IN INTEREST RATES THAT THEY'RE ASSUMING A 1% INTEREST RATE ON THIS TWO-YEAR TERM BOND.
AND SO, UM, THERE ARE SOME SCHEDULES THAT ARE ATTACHED THAT WOULD BREAK OUT THE DETAILS OF THAT WITH THE PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST PAYMENTS, BUT THE FAR RIGHT-HAND SIDE IS THE GOOD STUFF AND THAT'S THE SNIP SAVINGS, UM, BY, IN, BY ANNUAL YEAR FISCAL YEAR.
AND SO, YOU KNOW, WITH THE MILLION DOLLARS ON THE FIRST, UM, REPORT AND THE 137 ON THE LAST.
AND SO, UM, IT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT WE'RE BRINGING FORWARD FOR THE BOARD TO CONSIDER.
[00:55:01]
IS THE FIRST GLANCE AT IT.UM, AND THEN OUT OF COMMITTEE, IT WOULD BE INTRODUCED TO THE FULL BOARD, JUST AS A BRIEF OVERVIEW AND THEN IF THE BOARD WISHES TO PROCEED WITH THE SOLUTIONS, UM, AND THEN WE WOULD ESTABLISH, UM, THE ACTUAL RATES COULD BE LOCKED IN AT LEAST THREE WEEKS, UM, AFTER THAT BOND RESOLUTION DATE.
SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I JUST WANTED TO BRING FORWARD AND, UM, THE RIGHT WILL BE PRESENT AT THE, UM, AUGUST 3RD MEETINGS FOR DISCUSSION, UH, ON THIS TOPIC.
AND I WANTED TO JUST GIVE THE FINANCE COMMITTEE FIRST GLANCE AT IT.
STEVE DISCUSSION, NO DOCTOR WAS ASKING ANYTHING.
THE ONLY THING I WAS WONDERING WAS WHETHER OR NOT WE HAD ANY POLICIES SURROUNDING, UM, USAGE OF THOSE REFUND AMOUNTS, IT LOOKS LIKE IT WOULD BE AROUND 80,000 PER YEAR FOR THE FIRST ONE.
IS THAT ACCURATE? UM, AND ANY POLICIES SURROUNDING THAT, THAT BOARD NEEDS TO ALSO KNOW OR CONSIDER THE ONLY POLICY I'M AWARE OF IS THAT I BELIEVE IT'S UNDER THE FA FINANCIAL PLANNING, OPERATIONAL EXPECTATION, IS THAT A R AND, UM, ACTUALLY A PART OF THE CONTRACT OF THE FINANCIAL ADVISOR THAT WE ARE MADE AWARE OF REFUNDING OPPORTUNITIES THROUGHOUT THE COURSE OF THE CONTRACT.
UM, THROUGH ANY TIME ONE IS AVAILABLE TO THE DISTRICT THAT THEY ARE BROUGHT FORWARD AS, AS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR CONSIDERATION.
YOU KNOW, YOU HAD YOUR HAND UP, IT'S A NO BRAINER.
HOWEVER, WE DO HAVE TO MAKE SURE PEOPLE UNDERSTAND WHAT THIS DOES IS IT MEANS THAT WE PAY LESS PER YEAR AS IT'S BROKEN OUT HOW MUCH LESS, BUT THAT'S JUST MEANS THAT OUR MILLAGE RATE CAN GO DOWN.
AND WHAT WE'VE, WHAT WE REALLY WANT TO MAKE SURE WE CAN DO IS KEEP PAYING DOWN OUR PRINCIPAL AND INTEREST BOTH IN OUR LONG-TERM DEBT AND OUR SHORT-TERM DEBT, SO THAT WE HAVE THAT FLEXIBILITY OR A FUTURE BOND, UH, ISSUE FOR FUTURE RANDOM, TO BE ABLE TO HAVE IT WITHOUT A TAX INCREASE.
AND THAT'S, THAT'S, THAT'S WHAT REALLY WE ULTIMATELY WANT TO DO IS WE, WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE TO RAISE TAXES ON OUR DEBT SERVICE IF WE CAN LOWER THEM FINE, BUT REALLY WE STILL HAVE A LOT OF UNFUNDED THINGS THAT OUR COMMITTEE LOOKED AT VERSUS OVER $600 MILLION WORTH OF PROJECTS THAT NEEDED TO BE DONE ON HEALTH MED.
AND OTHERS WOULD SURE BE NICE IF WE COULD DO THIS REFERENDUM, GET IT DONE ON TIME ON BUDGET, AND THEN SAY, OKAY, WE GOT ANOTHER ONE.
THAT WILL BE AN AWFUL LOT EASIER TO PASS THAT REFERENDUM IF WE COULD SAY THAT.
SO THESE KINDS OF OPPORTUNITIES SHOULD TAKE ADVANTAGE OF ANYTHING ELSE, TANYA.
UM, ALSO MR. MERRICK, AND I'M GOING TO MENTION THIS AT THE BOARD MEETING AS WELL.
MR. ERIC HAS OFFERED A DATE FOR SOME EDUCATIONAL SESSIONS FOR BOARD MEMBERS THAT MIGHT BE INTERESTED IN IT AUGUST 2ND, FROM NINE TO 9:00 AM TO 5:00 PM THAT DAY.
UM, AND, UH, WE CAN HAVE IN-PERSON OR VIRTUAL, UM, MINI SESSIONS.
THEY ONE HOUR SESSIONS FOR ANY BOARD MEMBERS WHO ARE INTERESTED AND JUST KIND OF GETTING UP TO SPEED ON DEBT AND FINANCING AND, AND THAT SORT OF THING.
AND SO I'M GOING TO EXTEND THAT OPPORTUNITY TO THE FULL BOARD AND ASK THAT THEY CONTACT ROBIN.
AND IF THEY'RE AVAILABLE THAT DATE, UH, AND WOULD ARE INTERESTED AND, UM, THEN WE CAN SET UP A SCHEDULE AND WE'LL ENSURE THAT, UM, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T HAVE A QUORUM OF ANY SORT, SO WE CAN HAVE SMALL MINI SESSIONS TO JUST SORT OF AS AN EDUCATION, UM, OPPORTUNITY FOR, FOR BOARD MEMBERS WHO ARE LOOKING FOR THAT.
SO, AND THEN, UH, WE'LL HAVE A FULL, UM, PRESENTATION
[01:00:01]
ON AUGUST 27TH THAT WILL BE AT WORK SESSION, UH, AT LEAST A ONE HOUR PRESENTATION FROM THIS GENERIC THAT WILL REITERATE SOME OF THE SAME THINGS FROM NEW, ALL THE SECOND MINI SESSIONS.AND SO WE'LL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SORT OF GET SOME GOOD INFORMATION, UM, IN A VERY UNDERSTANDABLE MANNER, UH, ON OUR PROGRAM.
SO THAT'S ALL I HAVE FOR TODAY.
UH, ARE THERE ANY FUTURE TOPICS THAT PEOPLE WOULD LIKE TO, UH, ADD BROUGHT UP BEFORE THE COMMITTEE? NOT AT THIS TIME, I HAVE A MOTION TO ADJOURN.
SO MOVING YOUR SECOND TO ADJOURN ALL IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.