total time: 4.31 minutes
total words: 665
total time: 3.98 minutes
total words: 619
total time: 2.35 minutes
total words: 415
total time: 1.69 minutes
total words: 258
total time: 0.15 minutes
total words: 15
[Graham]: I think we're still waiting for Member Mustone and Member McLaughlin. So we can just give them another minute or two.
[4thVVEd7zdo_SPEAKER_02]: Member McLaughlin said she'll be right on. Okay.
[Graham]: I'm going to go ahead and start reading our meeting notice so that we can get that out of the way. Please be advised that on Wednesday, May 25 2022 at 7 15pm there will be a special school committee meeting held for remote participation to join the zoom meeting, you can dial into HTTPS colon. The meeting can be viewed through YouTube as well as Medford Community Media and on Comcast channel 15 and Verizon channel 45 at 715. Additionally, questions or comments can be submitted during the meeting by emailing medfordschoolcommittee at medford.k12.ma.us. Those submitting must include the following, your first and last name, your Medford street address, and your question or comment. The agenda is as follows. Presentation regarding the fiscal year 23 Medford public schools operating budget and recommendations to the Medford school committee for FY23 funding requests and FY23 ESSER funding priorities. Um, member. So you call the roll.
[Ruseau]: I sure will. Never Graham here. Number of days here. Democrats here. Remember Crawford here.
[Graham]: Do we want to give Member Mustone another minute or should we get started?
[McLaughlin]: Member Mustone let folks know that she was going to be running behind tonight because she was at the high school. So she will be checking in later. Thank you.
[Graham]: Okay. So why don't we go ahead and get started? I am going to turn it over to the Assistant Superintendent of Finance and Operations, David Murphy.
[Murphy]: Thank you, Member Graham. Good evening, everyone. This is our fourth formal presentation of the developing FY23 Medford Public Schools operating budget for the committee and for members of the community that have been following along over the last four gatherings of the school committee in public session, four of the last five public sessions, I should say. We have been articulating the, in response to the feedback that we received from all members of the school administration, as well as members of the school committee, the funding priorities for fiscal year 23. And so in the last couple of times that we've met to discuss the budget, I've sort of tried to move quickly through some of the process elements as this, I imagine may well constitute the culmination of one phase of our budgeting process. I'm going to go through those process points a little more methodically tonight, We'll also try to move as efficiently as possible so that we can get to the decision making that it's my understanding and hope that the committee is positioned to make tonight. And with respect to exactly what those decisions are and what the objectives of tonight's meeting, I'll try to cover those up front. I'm going to share my screen. I did want to also say that As is always the case this time of year in a school district, there are lots of events and lots of things that are taking place. And so members of our team are sort of scattered tonight throughout various district community and school events. And so there may be times if I'm bouncing questions off of other team members that people would just need a second to get in a place where they can contribute. So we as a team appreciate the committee's indulgence in that respect. Okay, so tonight, we're going to go over the budget process and next steps. We're going to review our category system as everyone knows, throughout this we've had six budget categories that are not necessarily in a hierarchical order. But they, there's some overlap with and what the categories are really designed to do are help us to think through the strategic implications of the use of operating funds versus our one-time grant-related funding that is available specifically to the school district, which we refer to as our ESSER funding priorities. And then if the committee is prepared to, we would recommend that a vote be taken so that we can begin to actually construct the proposed budget, which will then be sent to the municipal government by way of the school committee's requests for FY23 operating funds. Much of this presentation, a lot of these slides are repetitive. And so for time purposes, I will try to, again, move as quickly as I can through them. But I do want to call attention to the second and third bullet points on this slide. Again, for people that have been watching each meeting, you've heard me say this before, but I don't think it can be stressed enough that one, when you are then the vast majority of the operating budget is for personnel expenses and the vast majority of the personnel are in collective bargaining units that have open CBAs. That results in a lot of budgetary uncertainty. And so everything we're doing, we have to keep in mind that variable with regard to where the contracts will ultimately settle and that will have an impact on our budgetary flexibility. The third bullet, and again, I think there were some great questions from members of the committee in earlier meetings as to sort of the underlying objectives of each of this process. And I think the sort of two pillars are one, to be as transparent as possible so that the Medford community understands how our budgetary priorities are tied to our strategic planning and our strategic thinking around how to move the district forward. And at the same time, we wanna make sure that as we develop these priorities, we're driving toward as coherent a budget as possible. There isn't anything that I think anyway that we've discussed over the course of these last four meetings that in a vacuum is not or at least does not sound like a good idea. And certainly I can tell you as each of the priorities that we've discussed from the various stakeholders who have contributed to this dialogue to a to a priority are meant to help students. And if there was a priority that was discussed at some point in our internal deliberations as an administration, if there wasn't a nexus between the priority and the potential impact it could have on student outcomes and student wellbeing, you as a committee and as a Medford community, I'd like to think we'll not hear about it, at least from us. But that means that our job though at this point is collecting those priorities together and making sure that we are, that they are complimentary to one another so that we can put together a coherent budget that advances our strategic goals and serve students well. So again, with regard to process, this is sort of the step-by-step process that in the slide that you've seen several times, particularly over the last, at least for the last two years, And I do think sometimes there's some confusion and I think it's been, there's been some healthy discussion about this piece of it on this committee and in this forum, which is that what exactly is the role of the school committee? Because oftentimes we talk about the three pillars of establishing policy, appointing a superintendent and approving a budget. And those pillars to some degree predate some of the more modern school governance laws in Massachusetts. And it's not the case that the school committee can determine what the revenue is or what the overall funding picture looks like. That's authority that rests within the municipal government and the school committee's responsibility is multifaceted. And it includes both advocating for the priorities and the needs of the district. And then ultimately adopting a budget that addresses those priorities and moves it forward based on the appropriation that is made from the municipal government. And you've heard me say several times that as a school administration, we have a dual responsibility, both to help flesh out those priorities and to make sure that the committee is fully informed as to how those priorities affect the operations of the school district, and also to be planning for any potential contingency so that we're able to operate the school district and move our strategic objectives forward based on whatever appropriation is there. But I think as many school districts learn, if we don't have a clear articulation of those priorities and the impact that those priorities can have, it would be unreasonable for a school department or a school committee to expect that appropriation to be consistent with the work that needs to be done. And so I think that's a big part of these forums and the public discussions we've had, and you've been able to hear from the administration and various members of the administration as to both the positive impact some of these funding priorities can have, and also how some pieces make more sense at certain times or within a certain sequence, and how things can complement one another. And then, as you know, there are some things, and particularly this is true for some of the priorities listed in category E, that, as I said before, in a vacuum would be very good and might be very good regardless. but might not fit into our current picture based on the anticipated capacity that we have. So that's where we are with regard to process. I imagine that could come up at some point during our discussion tonight and be happy to discuss that in greater detail at that time. This is their school funding 101 slide that as again, people that have followed along know, we're a largely local contribution funded school district. Um, that means that 80%, approximately 80% of our operating budget comes from the taxpayers of the city of Medford. Um, and about 20% or so comes from the taxpayers of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts across all the cities and towns in the state. And, uh, that we refer to as our chapter 70 funding. And then there is our external funding, um, that comes in the way of, uh, grant funding. Now, uh, we have more grant funding now than I imagine we've ever had. Uh, that that's true for most. school districts in light of the pandemic. But much of that grant funding is one-time funding. And that's when we get into some of the strategic thought processes that we need to engage in with regards to not committing or trying to avoid as best as possible, avoiding the commitment of one-time funds to recurring expenses. So on May 2nd, We discussed as part of our budgeting process where we are with respect to our collective bargaining negotiations. Our current budget is approximately $55 million out of 67.4 is devoted to personnel expenses and the vast, vast majority of our employees are part of our 10 bargaining units, nine of which have open CBAs and most of which we are currently in negotiations with. The only exceptions to that are units represented by other bargaining agents that we are at the table with. And it would be my expectation that when those negotiations reach an endpoint, we'll be finishing the negotiation, or we will begin and hopefully in short order negotiate successor agreements to the remaining units. We've said that one of our priorities, both from a budgeting perspective and from a collective bargaining perspective, is to maintain wage increases that are are both competitive and sustainable. That means we want them to be competitive enough where it's a place that we can recruit and retain the top teaching and educator talent in the state. And at the same time, it has to be sustainable because we can't commit resources that are too speculative and then have a situation in which we have a structural financial deficit that will inevitably have a disproportionate impact on our high need and most vulnerable student populations. And that really has to be a guiding pillar, both in our discussions in this forum, as well as at the bargaining table. The nature of school districts is that they are structured in a way that if we do not maintain sound fiscal stewardship, it will result in the staff positions that exist to help students who need the most support. those positions won't exist if we don't have that structural deficit. There are certain positions that we know we're always going to have as a school district. We're going to have classroom teachers, we're going to have principals, we're going to have some administrator roles that are necessities, and some of them are legal necessities, others are practical necessities. And so while there are always choices that a city and a school district can make, those choices are not unlimited. And that is why, well, most of us would prefer to focus our attention on establishing competitive wage increases so that we can make sure that students at Medford have the most talented and the most diverse staff that we can possibly put in front of them. At the same time, if we don't pay appropriate respect to the sustainability priority, we will end up in a situation in which our staffing structure is not commensurate with the needs of our students. And that is why that is a drum that you'll hear us continue to beat in this and other forums. And it's why that while most of us who work in education would like from a societal perspective education to be prioritized in a way where there aren't as many boundaries as we may find time to time, we have a responsibility to operate within the realm of reality and that will be the case going forward. So I said that our budgeting priorities have been cultivated over the course of the last several months and these are slides that again you've seen before but generally they fit into certain buckets around the critical priorities that we know are most urgent as a result of with how and where our students are currently situated coming out of the pandemic, hopefully coming completely out of the pandemic. There are personnel needs that we've talked about and the varying degrees of priority, but our budget is mostly personnel. And so when we talk about any budget, whether it's regardless of the nature of the funding, right, personnel is always gonna be a large component of it. Here's some other priorities, technology again, always going to be a cornerstone. Our professional learning is something that is emphasized within our strategic plan and keeping equity and student support at the center of all our decision making has been a guiding pillar throughout the superintendent's strategic planning process, as well as this process that we've engaged in over the last several weeks. Okay, so from fixed cost perspective, this is something that, again, for those that have watched every The ins and outs of every meeting, it's a little dry, it might get a little boring, but it's important to note that we're coming out of FY22 with a $67.4 million operating budget. It is the case, as it is always every year, that there are pre-existing obligations that we have or unavoidable realities that exist that result in what we generally refer to as our fixed cost increases. So these are the increases that even if there was no strategic thinking and no strategic decision making, these elements of our budget are going up in cost, meaning to maintain just a level services operation within the Medford Public Schools, there would be approximately $2.6 million increase to the budget. That includes as the sort of the headline number, the biggest number there, the $1.3 million that is represented in salary increases that are owed in FY22 as a result of existing contractual obligations. So that is separate and aside from anything that is done at the bargaining table and potential cost of living adjustments that we've said are a priority for us going into FY23. But that $1.3 million is just the natural growth. When I say natural growth, it is the steps, lanes, and other contractual obligations that will hit the budget in FY23. The highlighted numbers there, the subscription and contractual renewal piece, the special education fixed cost increase, and the math curriculum piece. Those are numbers that, as I've mentioned before, there is, to some degree, this is true for any of these numbers. All of these numbers, and this is true for every single number in your presentation, there could be some fluidity between now and as the budget is implemented. These three numbers are the ones that we're looking most closely at right now. to see if there is any way of essentially reducing those costs. There's no strategic thinking at the moment behind these costs. These are costs that have already been adopted previously within the school district. And so by restraining these costs and reducing them where possible, it gives us the potential for having greater flexibility and hopefully provides the municipal government greater flexibility as well. Right now we would still estimate that to be 2.6 but there is the prospect for those to be reduced as time goes on. Again, that slide you've seen before this is just the various structures of the budget that sort of specific piece that is different in FY 20, it has been different the last couple of fiscal years will be different for the next few fiscal years then. the way the operating budgets have run in school districts previously is we continue to have a significant injection of federal funding in response to the pandemic. So a lot of times there's confusion between the ARPA funding and the ESSER funding. ARPA funding, first of all, there's a significant amount of regulatory distinction between the two, but the ARPA funding of which our budget was funded through, a significant portion was funded through last year, That is the municipal government's COVID funds, essentially, coming from the federal government, with, again, significant restrictions and criteria around how that money can be appropriated. The ESSER funding is funding that is allocated through the Department of Education, of Elementary and Secondary Education at the state level here in Massachusetts. And so we anticipate that our ESSER funding expenditures for FY22 will be in the vicinity of a million to $1.4 million. You've heard multiple presentations as to some of the initiatives that we've been able to undertake as a result of that funding. That leaves us with approximately $6.2 million over the next three fiscal years. And so, again, we've talked a lot about this, but in thinking about the ESSER funding, there's sort of a few elements that we should think about. One, first and foremost, understanding that it's one-time funding. And so to the extent that we can avoid the creation of fiscal cliffs by using that funding toward either one time or temporary or fleeting expenses, that would be considered more prudent. At the same time, the most important criteria is that there is a nexus between this funding and the financial resources that are available and our efforts to combat and come out of the pandemic and to minimize the educational disruption that our students have experienced. And so as a result of that nexus, sometimes the things that we need to help our students recover from the pandemic are the most urgent priorities that we have. And that does at times mean that we need to essentially suspend the guiding principle that I just referenced a moment ago around trying to avoid committing one-time funds to recurring expenses. And you saw some of that last year in our FY22 budget, and that'll be true in the FY23 budget as well. And I think the way to think about that is if we're going to put it toward things like personnel expenses, which as you know, in category B, that's our recommendation in part, we should be putting them toward personnel expenses that either we will, that the need will dissipate to some degree as we get further away from the pandemic, or towards something in which we use the next couple of years to determine the extent to which it is a priority to absorb those priorities in our operating budget. And particularly with the ARPA funding, the rationale is hopefully you see the revenue landscape, at least as it was projected in FY22, improves to the point where there's the capacity to do that. At a state level, there's encouraging news about that at the moment, but with respect to revenues, and that's where you see the $1.6 million increase in Chapter 70 funding. I've mentioned before the sort of double-edged sword that we get into with that because our budget, as I mentioned a few minutes ago, is only 20% Chapter 70 funding, approximately 20%. And so there's only a proportional impact that is felt there, at least with regard to the state level. And then obviously the economic forecasts you know, we're not here to do economic forecasting, but for those of you that follow economic forecasting, it's not a particularly, there are not a lot of positive forecasts currently to be found with regards to the potential for a recession and the possibility of the erosion of revenue. So all of that is to say that these are the various components of our budget, some of which are specific to this COVID or hopefully soon to be post-COVID context. OK, so this slide is sort of just meant to indicate how the budget grows. As I said, we start at $67.4 million. If you factor in the fixed cost increases, you get to approximately $70 million. And then to address the priority around sustainable but competitive wage increases, that is estimated to be approximately $1.1 million. And so that's how we get to the $71.1 million figure. prior to addressing any of the strategic priorities that we'll discuss tonight in those categories. I've already mentioned that the hope is that we're still able to restrain to some degree the fixed cost increases that could give us some flexibility and or allow us to address priorities in the event of a Delta between what the school committee requests and what the municipal government can appropriate. And as I've said, as a school administration, we know that we have a dual responsibility both to articulate the priorities and to prepare for any eventuality to make sure that we implement the operating budget in a way that serves students well. This is how we're currently organized. All of these boxes represent personnel, and as I said, we, like every school district, are primarily a personnel-driven organization. So we get to our categories now. This is A through F. It's not a strict hierarchy from a priority perspective, but there's overlap.
[DnBk5C8-dFs_SPEAKER_09]: And again, strategic considerations to the operating budget versus the use of ESSER funding. This spells out a few priorities.
[Murphy]: And as we get to the end of the slides here, it'll spell it out in greater clarity. But essentially, these are the sort of the total numbers that we would be looking at depending on which of the categories are pursued. They don't go in ascending order here as you look left to right. So in retrospect, that could have been a little clearer, but there's a slide that says this exact same information at the end, but in a more clear fashion. So if you can hang tight for a minute, we'll get to that part. Again, our priorities here, category A are things that, from the school administration's perspective, are things that we have to do and we're prepared to do. but the most appropriate funding source is the operating budget. Category B are things that we also feel that we need to do, but because of the nature of the priority that would be pursuing, we would consider it to be ESSER appropriate in the event of the appropriation is not sufficient to absorb those priorities. Category C are things that we would strongly recommend stay within ESSER, and it would sort of, essentially, it would be a waste of the ESSER funds to not use toward those priorities in category C. Category D, very similar to category A, but the piece that doesn't apply there is what I said about it being hierarchical in a sense. The A and D are hierarchical in that A is considered the highest priorities. I would imagine, well, I know we've discussed this a lot over the last several weeks. In the event that we wanna discuss category D tonight in terms of what will ultimately make it into the request, and again, based on this sequence, once an appropriation is made or a recommended appropriation is identified, we're gonna have more time to sift through those and sort of make sure that we are putting together the most coherent budgetary picture possible. But just for purposes of tonight, I have divided category D up into D1, D2, and D3. And when we get to the category D, I'll explain a little bit how some of that works. It's not necessarily just one is more important than the other. but some of the pieces, as you know, if you've looked through and read through the category D priorities, are priorities that some of them are one-time expenses that we may be able to think about using one-time funds for, and others are just recurring expenses that if the needs of the district were different, or if the budgetary priorities were gonna fit in connection with one another differently, it would likely be that we would, that they could be moved into category A. but sometimes it's because of, for compliance purposes, sometimes because of the more urgent needs of students, whatever the case may be, that oftentimes is what will determine the categorization between a D and A. Category E are things that we've, this sort of speaks to the transparency piece that we want to be really open with the community about the things that we think the district needs, but they're not necessarily the things that we would recommend are included in this budget, either at this stage or at a later stage. That can change, and some things like this will change throughout the course of the fiscal year, but right now they wouldn't be at the top of the administration's recommendations. In category F, there's only one item, one that we've discussed a couple of times, and that we're in the process of preparing for further discussion with regard to trying to eliminate the burden of fee-based services, in this case, specifically school lunch and meals. These are the numbers, if we just take those priorities that are in those categories. Again, you'll see some fluctuation from the last time sometimes that there have been times and there's a personnel position that was identified late in the process that push the category D number up a bit. It's not something that would go into category A and I'll just use this as an example right now. So there's, there's a position and we think there's a need and we think that kids would be well served. But we also know that one way or another, there's going to be a limited capacity. And so, while it's, we will reference it tonight, we are actively exploring different staffing configurations that could eliminate the need for the newly funded position and again, That is just part of the fluidity of a $67 to $70 million budget. And it's just part of the work that we do day in and day out to manage the district. So again, we'll get back to this slide toward the end. But these are the overall numbers, depending on which of the categories the committee were to adopt in its request, assuming you want to vote this evening. And so just so everyone understands what would happen next in terms of the process, If once you've identified for the administration that you'd like to pursue one of these options or potentially a combination thereof, we will then go back and we will actually compile the sort of the concrete part of this, which is frequently referred to as the budget book. We've discussed previously that the budget book when you've got nine open CBAs has, I think, a slightly different degree of value with respect to accuracy if we were to publish it right now. it would essentially list out your FY 21 salaries for most positions because those those contracts are open, but at the same time. To make sure that you understand how the various pieces pieces fit together in leading up to some of the sizable numbers that you see here that's what that's the direction that we would go subsequent to this presumably subsequent to this meeting. I did see a hand there, Ms. Graham. I don't know if you want me to pause for a second or if you want me to keep moving and then take questions at the end. I'm guessing we've got 10 minutes left, but I'd be more than happy to take a breath if you'd like.
[Graham]: Member Ruseau, do you want to ask a question now or do you want to hold your question?
[Ruseau]: My question was how many more slides? 10 more minutes sounds like I can wait.
[Murphy]: Very few new slides, but just because it's been a few days since we've looked at all this, I just want to run through to make sure everybody remembers what's A, what's B, what's C, and so on and so forth.
[Ruseau]: Great.
[Unidentified]: I do also want to make a motion, but I will wait until you get to the end. Sure. So keep going.
[Murphy]: OK, so this is category A. Again, this lists out the priorities as they're in there. I don't know how the Curtis Tufts nurse position didn't make it into this slide the first time. but in my draft, it didn't. So the total amount was correct in the last one, but the getting up to a 1.0 nurse at the Curtis Tufts would be considered category A at this time. Category B, again, this is stuff that it would be great to have in the operating budget, but we're prepared to use the ESSER funding and think the ESSER funding is appropriate. Category C, again, these are not so much personnel items and corresponding, monetary impact is lower, obviously. These are things that we would strongly recommend be charged to the ESSER budget going into FY23. And I should say, if you remember last year, we did the full operating budget, and then at the end in June, we presented you with the ESSER priorities. Although we knew all along there would be, we knew that there were some items that we were discussing that were going to land in the ESSER budget. Slight difference this year, we've gained more familiarity with the ESSER criteria, with the eligibility. There's not money coming in the door, new money coming in the door every few weeks as there was last year. And so we have these now. They don't need and shouldn't necessarily be part of your requests to the municipal government because the ESSER funding is the school committee's COVID-related funding to spend. Some of this is a continuation of programming we had last year. last year we projected to spend $2 million and we ended up spending close, we'll end up spending around approximately $1.4 we think, maybe even a little bit less. Part of that is because, while it's not the case that there's a significant amount of new money coming in the door every few weeks, as was the case at the heart of the pandemic, there have been a lot of grant funding opportunities that have been made available through DESE and other funding sources. And so sometimes with the ESSER rolling over year to year until FY 25, we've availed ourselves of that other grant funding when that's been more time sensitive. So that's part of why we came under budget on ESSER this year and why, frankly, we would probably hope and expect it to be so next year as well. This is category D. I think I've explained this already, but with regard to categories D1, D2, and D3, some of it, I'm going to try to move through these to get to the end here. Category D, in part from the committee's feedback, the number grew somewhat significantly. That's an $850,000 package right now with everything in category D. We understand that I'm not going to go through the whole sort of song and dance about having to plan for every contingency, but from a strategic perspective, The school administration does not want the school committee asking for things that we're not ready to implement. And we have a responsibility to understand that we're one component of the municipal government and that there are going to be competing priorities that need to be addressed by the municipal government. And so what we're trying to do here is explain that. One, within the broad category of D, there are some things that for various reasons would be of a higher priority. But the other piece of this is that there are some priorities within here That it may be possible that we're able to find other funding sources for and so therefore we're able to advance those priorities without availing ourselves of the operating budget funds that we would otherwise need to do that. That an example of that could be CTE tuitions funded position within there that in that program it's also. and even more so some of the supplies and the one-time related expenses. Also, every year, typically with a budget of our size, we're looking to finish the fiscal year with some degree of a cushion. We can't finish in the red, as you know, so there has to be some degree of a cushion, and typically that's a surplus that we want to be in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. When we get to the Right now, we're in a partial spending freeze to make sure that we're positioned to both finish the year well and in the hope of finishing the contracts. But if there's surplus that we're going to finish with, something like the programming supplies for the CTE or the robotic supplies or the projectors, while we would pursue them if necessary in fiscal year 23, if there's a way to cross that off the list of things that we need to do in FY22, then we always sort of have our antennas up to be ready to do that. Category E, I think everyone understands where that sits. These are things that the community should know about, the committee should know about, but it is not the recommendation that they would be the things that we would pursue at this time.
[DnBk5C8-dFs_SPEAKER_09]: And you know about the lunch program, which we've discussed and we're looking forward to further conversations on that front.
[Murphy]: These are the subscriptions and platforms that we either are either up for renewal or need to be renewed. There's also a big part of this fills the hundred and $35,000 estimated fixed costs. That's a number that we're looking through partly through negotiations with some of these vendors and probably through the identification of platforms that potentially could be retired from service. That's one of the ways we try to bring that number down to the extent that we can.
[DnBk5C8-dFs_SPEAKER_09]: These are just referencing some of the variables and fluidity that go into every budget.
[Unidentified]: And this, I think, is the last slide. It repeats what I've already told you, so I will not.
[Graham]: Mr. Murphy, can you just go back to category D to the first slide? I think you moved too quickly through that for me to take that in. OK. I just wanted to make sure everyone had a chance to look at that.
[Unidentified]: Yeah.
[Graham]: Okay, thank you, Mr. Murphy for that presentation. Are there questions on the floor? If you guys just want to raise your hands, we can move through it that way. Member Ruseau?
[Ruseau]: Thank you. Since we have seen this a few times, I have a motion that I'd like to make, and I'll put it in the chat. But I'd like to move that we submit a request for A, B, and D to the municipal government in the sum of $72.4 million. Further, in the event that the state of Massachusetts does not fund school meals as they are presently considering, the district will proceed with free meals nonetheless and make a request to the municipal government for supplemental funding to cover the costs of continuing our free meal policy.
[Graham]: And are you going to put that in the chat?
[DnBk5C8-dFs_SPEAKER_09]: I just did, yes. I just have one clarifying question or comment, Ms. Graham. Sure.
[McLaughlin]: I have information too. Can you put that slide back up on the proposals, the packaged, you know, each one, please? Thank you.
[Murphy]: That relates to the point that I didn't make quickly when you're ready.
[Graham]: You can go ahead, Mr. Murphy.
[Murphy]: So I just wanted to say that as part of Mr. Oso's motion, it's a $72.4 million request. It is possible that as we continue to work on those fixed costs and so on and so forth, that actual number could be lower. Theoretically, it's possible it could be higher, but we've sort of constructed this in a way to try to avoid that. And so the way I would interpret your motion is that we would build the budget proposal based on all of those priorities being included. And if the total cost of that ended up being a different number, that would not be inconsistent with the intent of the motion. It would just be the school committee has identified the priorities that you would expect the administration to pursue. That's what the request would be. And if it turns out to be 71.8 instead of 72.4, it still has the same legal effect. Is that fair interpretation, Mr. Rizzo?
[Ruseau]: I guess it depends how the number comes down.
[Murphy]: Sure. If it comes down to 69.9, which I don't think it's going to, we will convene again next week and give you the opportunity to take a look at category E.
[Ruseau]: That's not what I meant. I meant if it comes down because you're doing your analysis and you find ways to save money, I'm fine with the number getting smaller. If it comes down because you have conversations offline with other people and decide to move things into ESSER funds instead of part of the request, I'm not OK with that.
[Murphy]: Understood. And I think what we would do, similar to what we did last year, is come back to the committee in June with an articulation of exactly what at that stage is our anticipated ESSER funding priorities. And then you'll be able to see both of those sort of funding constructs. Does that make sense?
[Ruseau]: Makes sense to me.
[Murphy]: Yeah. Thank you. I do want to talk a little bit about how we go about identifying savings so that there is not the impression that we come to you with a big number and then we take a magic wand and reduce the number. But when that, well, I can fit that in when appropriate, but I just want to make sure that that point is referenced later.
[Graham]: Thank you, Mr. Murphy. Member McLaughlin.
[McLaughlin]: Thank you. I wanted to just clarify through the chair, Member Ruseau's motion, if I could. So if I understand correctly, with the 72.4 categories A, B, and D, Member Ruseau, that is because you're not including C because of the ESSER aspect of funding of that. Is that accurate?
[Ruseau]: That is correct.
[McLaughlin]: Okay. And so that's what I thought. Okay. ABD and then E the strong consideration, which is in the, in the 73, four is not being considered in the ABD. So I guess I would ask that if we can go back to the strong consideration page for a moment, if my colleagues will indulge me, I would like to do that. Thank you.
[Murphy]: If I could, Ms. McLaughlin or Ms. Graham, there are a couple of pieces here that I think it might be helpful as to if I explain why they're in category E, if that is helpful. Yes, please. Sure. So just the two bottom rows in particular, the DEI administrator and a registrar. Those are two administrative positions that the district could really benefit from. And at some point when we are confident about our capacity, I would imagine that it's their goals that we would pursue. However, at this point, with the uncertainty of our capacity, both on the city side and on the district side, part of the reason that they were lowered from the prioritization perspective is because Unlike some of the teaching positions, there's less of a priority to hire for those roles at this point in time. If midway through the fiscal year, we identify the capacity or the needs and dynamics of the district shift such that we say, this is something we really need to pursue right now. Frankly, it's a largely different perspective applicant pool. And that cycle that we have to be on is different and therefore, you know, we can pursue it at a different time. Sort of somewhat in the same vein, from the CTE personnel priorities, Media Tech landed in Category E and Metal Fab landed in Category D. Neither program at the moment has the, this is a little more complicated because as I said, with regard to D, there's a potential other funding source that we may want to pursue there. And so we may very well be able to do that separate and aside from the operating budget. But with neither having the enrollment that says this is a clear necessity, we have to do this right now, that's what kept it out of A as opposed to health assisting where that was pursued. But the other piece that sort of distinguishes Metal Fab from the Media Tech is that there's a safety component on the Metal Fab piece that, again, if it's a vital safety need, we're going to pursue it regardless of where the budget comes in, obviously. But that variable helped sort of distinguish between those two programs in that moment. With regard to the nurse registration piece, this is the purpose of that role, and I don't think we really, we may have discussed this in the first budget meeting, I can't remember. But the idea from that would be a position that we could more, expeditiously move, register students and get them into schools faster by clearing them and making sure that we've got qualified medical personnel, both reviewing records and working with families to get them where we need them to be to get them registered. That is a vital need. It is not necessarily a vital position. And so similar to what I said earlier about the position that landed in category D that wasn't there previously, we're exploring the other ways in which we can do that work more efficiently without having to fund another full FTE and eat into that limited capacity that we have. With regard to, I guess I'm just going to go through all of them because I've only got two more if you don't mind. The science position is something that based on enrollment trends we think may be necessary, but according to the science department and the administration at the high school, it's not necessary this year, but it's something that we're putting a pin in to make sure that we continue to have the broad array of elective programming that we want to have for our high school students. And with regards to the librarian program, that's one that we frankly have gone back and forth on. And I know there's been discussion here at the committee about it. It's something that we want to develop the curriculum for and make sure that when we go to invest in that personnel, we have the programming and the curriculum structure that we need to make that personnel investment to maximize that personnel investment. So that's sort of a very, very high level brief summary as to how things that are good ideas and could be good for kids landed in category E as opposed to category D. Thank you, Mr. Murphy.
[Graham]: Thank you. Member Kreatz?
[Kreatz]: Yes, I had a similar question about category E, which you answered the questions regarding the personnel. I did have another question on, because I had written down, and you were going pretty quickly on this, so I had written down that Highest priority was category A. B was recommends ESSER. Maybe I wrote that down wrong. And then C was definitely ESSER. So I think I need some clarification on in regards to category B, where that is part of Mr. Russo's motion. So is category B, is that a recommended ESSER or that's not, I get a little confused between the highest priority ESSER, the high priority ESSER, like why is C nodding? Like why are we counting on ESSER for all of the C priority needs and not for the category B? I guess I'm just getting confused about that.
[Murphy]: Thank you. That's a very, very good question. So I really do appreciate it. And I apologize if I was going too quickly this time. I want to, because it's a really important point, and I think your question helps illustrate it. So category B, which I'll just scroll through really quickly, it's three personnel-related priorities, okay? It's adjustment Councilors, a strand of newcomer teachers in our English language learner program, and a district-wide nurse. which helps support our health services in the event of continued COVID-related needs, okay? Given that they're personnel priorities, it would be our preference that the operating budget have a capacity that would allow us to absorb those priorities. In a perfect world, that would be the case. However, two things are true. One, we don't live in a perfect world, And we know that there will be some limitation wherever that ends up being, there will be a limitation on our budget capacity. Okay. And the second thing that is true is that we have to do these things anyway, because of the impact that the pandemic has had on our students. And so while it may be, it may be our preference to use the one time funding capacity through ESSER for only for one time funding expenses. In this case, the urgency of the need and the connection to the pandemic leaves us in a place where we would use the ESSER funding for this if the capacity is not there. And so the distinction between B and C is that in C, we're telling the committee we really don't want to use the operating budget for this. It's one-time related expenses. There's a strong nexus with the pandemic. And they're of a financial magnitude that they fit neatly within our overall ESSER prioritization and budgeting. With regard to category B, if it were the case that the operating budget could absorb these, then that's what we would use. What we're saying is, frankly, we don't think the capacity will be there. And we know that we have to do this anyway. So this is our way of saying that, essentially, with or without an appropriation that can handle this $560,000, this will need to land within our ESSER priorities. And it's not an inappropriate use of the ESSER funds, because there is a strong nexus between these things and the pandemic. I don't have a crystal ball, which is what one of the administrators responsible for helping us to establish these priorities has said on multiple occasions, and the person is correct, none of us do. There is a prospect, I'd like to say a likelihood, but a prospect at least, that the urgency of these funding priorities will dissipate the further we get away from the pandemic. We know we need right now as students are coming back into the school setting, based on the enrollment trends based on what we saw this year in terms of the numbers are going up significantly. We know that next year we need this strand of four positions. in the newcomer program. We know we're gonna need that for school year 22, 23. It is possible though, that we will not need those positions in school year 23, 24 or 24, 25. And so the ESSER gives us the capacity to do that, to fund those positions while we need them. And then one of two things are gonna happen. The need won't be there because we won't have, from an instructional perspective, it won't be necessary or it will be necessary. And then it will be incumbent upon the district to find within its operating budget the funding to continue the programming that students need. So it's about the sort of time-sensitive nature of it, the urgency of it, and the connection to the pandemic. And ultimately, what really distinguishes it is that, sure, if we could do it in operating, we would. But we're telegraphing to the committee and the community that this is something that we will have to resort to ESSER funding for if that capacity is not there. Is that helpful?
[Kreatz]: Yes, that was helpful. And then I just wanted to also note last week I did reach out to state rep Donato and he did tell me that the House of Representatives did vote to approve $110 million in their budget for free lunch for all students. So it's gone over to the Senate and then in likelihood like the Senate and the governor will approve hopefully. So, you know, really hoping that happens but I do agree with the language and Mr. Russo's motion that we would then submit supplemental fund, you know, for a request for supplemental funds, if that wasn't to pass, but I'm, I'm really hopeful that that it will pass.
[Murphy]: And I just would add, Miss Kreatz that the Superintendent's Association has made this a significant part of their legislative agenda, and our administration has added our voice to that and so that they know that in their lobbying efforts that this is something that we believe would be in the best interest of the Medford community as well. And so anyone out there has friends in the Senate, we would urge you to write those letters and make those phone calls, because I do think the state and federal government is the appropriate place to resolve this, and they're the entities with the capacity to do it, and I would say the responsibility to do it.
[Graham]: Thank you.
[Mustone]: Member McGill? I'd like to second Member Ruseau's motion for A, B, and D, please.
[Graham]: Okay, so the motion on the floor by Member Ruseau, seconded by Member Mustone, is I move that we submit a request for A, B, and D to the municipal government in the sum of $72.4 million. Further, in the event that the state of Massachusetts does not fund school meals as they are presently considering, the district will proceed with free meals nonetheless and make a request to the municipal government for supplemental funding to cover the cost of continuing our free meal policy. Are there other questions from the committee on the motion or on the deck?
[4thVVEd7zdo_SPEAKER_02]: Are we ready to move the question? Okay. Member Rossell, will you call the roll? One second.
[Unidentified]: Member Graham. Yes. Member Hays.
[4thVVEd7zdo_SPEAKER_02]: Yes.
[Ruseau]: Member Kreatz. Yes. Member McLaughlin.
[4thVVEd7zdo_SPEAKER_02]: Yes.
[Ruseau]: Member Mustone. Yes. Member Ruseau. Yes. Mayor Lungo-Koehn, absent.
[Graham]: Thank you. Six in the affirmative, one absent. The motion passes. Member McLaughlin.
[McLaughlin]: I just wanted to congratulate everyone on that process and thank Mr. Murphy for all of his hard work and putting this together and the presentation and giving us all an opportunity to try a new process. And I know this is arduous for all, but thank you guys, everyone for all your hard work.
[Murphy]: Thank you, Ms. McLaughlin. Ms. Graham, if I could just make that one point about the identification of savings that I alluded to earlier.
[Graham]: Yes, please do.
[Murphy]: I appreciate the committee's patience, forbearance, and willingness to work through this the way that we have over the last few weeks. I think that while this may have felt different, I actually think we essentially covered the same ground that we typically did, but I'd like to think we did it in a more efficient manner, and hopefully in a more transparent one as well. That was our goal last year. I think we advanced that even further this year. What I don't want to happen is, with the committee indicating this is the categorization, this is the priorities, this is the committee doing what the committee is supposed to do, identifying the high-level priorities, that it is incumbent upon the administration to now pursue. That being said, we're not doing our job if we pursue them without also looking to identify any potential efficiencies and flexibility that we have within our existing budget, right? And so the sort of three areas that we'll look to, and we've discussed this throughout these budget meetings, to see whether or not we can do what the committee has just charged us with doing, but for less than $72.4 million, will be one in the identification of positions. And Ms. Galussi spoke in the second budget meeting about how, as we look at enrollment trends, it may well be the case that that there are strands that we can potentially collapse. That's something we continue to look at. That doesn't mean we collapse them and we just put the money in our pocket. It means that we use that funding to hopefully pursue other priorities. But that is one piece. The second piece is, and I talked about this a little bit with category D, there are some one-time related expenses there that it's my hope they don't survive into FY23. They may or may not, but that would be another way in which that overall price tag could potentially be affected. And then the third way is I mentioned that we're in a spending freeze right now. That's typical. That's something we pretty much do every year. We have to make sure that we finish the fiscal year in the appropriate financial position. When we look at that, it may be the case that there are some savings that we can potentially roll over and bring down those fixed costs. And so 2% is 2%. is pretty well calculated, and I think it's pretty sturdy. The $2.6 million is the one where there is potential for flexibility there, and that's something that we'll look at and we'll keep the committee apprised of going forward. And to Mr. Rousseau's point earlier, Ultimately, I think we have tried to sort of be very clear about what is likely to land in the ESSER budget, either because it's highly appropriate use of ESSER funding or it's both highly appropriate ESSER funding and it's urgently needed and that we know we have to do it. And so the ESSER funding in that case, in that sense sort of serves as our backstop to make sure that we're able to address all of the various challenges that we have as an organization coming out of the pandemic.
[Graham]: Thank you for that. Member McLaughlin, did you have another question or is your hand?
[McLaughlin]: No, go ahead. I also wanted to ask that, and I'm assuming that this will be the case, but I just want to put it out there, ask that the deck that was presented tonight be shared on the website, as well as obviously the full budget proposal. So that, you know, in our budget books that I know that we'll be receiving, and I know there are some things pending, So I understand that, but as soon as those are ready, I would ask that they be published on the website, please. Thank you.
[Murphy]: The deck tonight will be published tomorrow and then as the book comes together, we'll have that as well.
[McLaughlin]: Thank you.
[Graham]: And Mr. Murphy, correct me if I have this wrong, but the next steps, this is our request to the municipal government, which effectively will go to the mayor's office. As the mayor works on her overall city budget to present to the city council, she will have a well-informed understanding of what this committee has deemed priority. And she has been part of those discussions all along. And then we will, await a budget approval from the city council to know what our allocation specifically will be come July 1st. And based on that allocation, which hopefully is everything we've asked for, we would adopt, we would have, convene another meeting, take a vote to adopt the municipal, to adopt the school committee budget based on the municipal appropriation. Is that correct?
[Murphy]: It is correct. The only sort of step that would proceed that final vote to adopt to be the budget hearing that under statute, you'll need to have. And so that will be at some point in the next in the next month.
[DnBk5C8-dFs_SPEAKER_09]: We'll do that. Great. Thank you.
[4thVVEd7zdo_SPEAKER_02]: Member McLaughlin.
[McLaughlin]: Right, so the public budget hearing. And then also, I guess, you know, I don't want to jinx anybody, but I guess, what is the process if the appropriation comes in less than the amount that the school committee has asked for? What do we do in that case?
[Murphy]: Yeah, and so I just want to be clear. And again, like, I think these are like, well founded priorities. And again, I appreciate the committee hearing us out on all of them. But like, That is my expectation. I just want to be candid about that. As I've said many times, our responsibility is to prepare for any eventual contingency and to also understand that there are competing priorities within the municipal government. And that is just a fact of life and something that while we advocate zealously and try to keep the committee as well-informed as possible, we have a responsibility to make sure that we can implement a budget that serves students well, regardless of what that number is. And so similar to last year, in the event of a Delta, one that I fully expect, we will come back and we will identify how we'll bridge that delta. We've tried to be as transparent as possible. So I think you probably can guess how we're going to recommend doing that. Category B, we're going to recommend goes to ESSER. Category A, we're going to recommend gets funded before category D. And then within category D, we're going to try to chop away that number through the use of other funding sources. And then if there are discrete decisions left to be made, That's what we would come back to the committee with and seek your feedback on so that ultimately we get to the number we need to.
[McLaughlin]: Member Graham, may I respond to that just or follow up on that? So just process-wise, though, if we don't get an appropriation until July 1, at what point will we be coming back to the table to figure out the reallocation, should that be the case?
[Murphy]: Yeah, it would be in the month of June. So I would imagine that we would come back to begin the work of bridging that Once the recommendation has gone to the council. Last year, if you remember, we, the council was not voting on a final appropriation until the, like June 27 June 28 right around there. And so you voted on June 24, a vote that was contingent upon the council making that appropriation had for some reason that not happen we'd have to go to a essentially a 112th budget. It gets more complicated, but essentially we'd have to come back and seek your guidance further. But that's what I would anticipate. At this point, I would expect you'd probably, I think you'd probably take that vote on June 13th. That's currently your final scheduled meeting for the year. If not, it could be a few days later for some reason, if there's something that is sort of up in the air. But right now, my expectation would be that it would be June 13th.
[Graham]: And Mr. Murphy, has the mayor advised you of the schedule of releasing her budget and the council's review of it? Has that been established yet? Are you aware?
[Murphy]: We're in continuous communication with the mayor's office and as usual, they've been good partners with us and strong dialogue and good communication, but I don't have this specific date. And if it's the date that's in my head, I'm not sure it's a public date nor is it necessarily my place to say it. I think it's very soon, as you can imagine, because fiscal year is coming up, but I think the month of June, as is the case in every city in town, will be heavily weighted by the budget.
[Graham]: Great, thank you.
[DnBk5C8-dFs_SPEAKER_09]: We'll know it in the earlier product, I think.
[Graham]: Awesome, thank you.
[Ruseau]: Thank you. I greatly appreciate Mr. Murphy's opinions, frankly, on everything. And he and I disagree vehemently on this point about, um, the need for the school committee to spend so much energy and concerns about the municipal situation. Um, I just, it's important to point out that the only communication we ever hear about competing priorities and municipality has is from Mr. Murphy. We don't hear it from any other. You know, it's not coming out of the mayor's office, it's not coming out of the city council, it's, it's as if the finance director for the school system is doing the job of explaining to the public, how complicated municipal finances are, and how there are competing priorities, and nobody else that I have seen in the city says that out loud. It's not a commentary on the staff at the city hall, but I do not believe that when I look at the statute on school committees, our responsibility does not say a thing about being concerned about the minute municipal financial situation. Our responsibility is on is the children. and their education and it begins and ends there. It doesn't have to do with whether or not the rec department can get more staff or the police department can get more staff. And I vehemently disagree that we should spend more than a minute thinking about it. We should figure out what we need for the students and we should ask for it. And then let the mayor's office deal with whatever communications are required when that office cannot give us the money because of competing priorities, which I think are real. I don't live in a bubble, I get it, that they're real, but I just think that we spend too much time talking about and being worried about the municipal government's finances. We did start earlier with, we have no capacity to raise a nickel. And you know who does? The municipal government can raise taxes if they see fit, and they don't. So as far as I'm concerned, It's not my concern whether they can afford our budget request. And I'm just tired of the conversation and I don't mean to berate you. I'm certainly not trying to berate you, Mr. Murphy.
[Murphy]: No, I don't. But Mr. Rousseau and Ms. Graham, if I could just respond very quickly. And I'd say this, as you know, as a former school committee chair, I actually don't think we vehemently disagree on that, Mr. Rousseau. I think you're correct. It is your job to zealously advocate for the needs of the school system. And I mean this sincerely, I appreciate that you do. And I think, I think this committee does its job and I think it does its job well. But I think what you've heard me say is not that I think the committee should spend its time balancing the needs of the municipality. It's at the school administration has to understand that we do have a nuanced function, not because we want to keep the municipal government happy as much as because we have to operate the district. And whatever that appropriation is, it is our responsibility to plan for any potential contingency. And I think it would be a disservice to the committee and to the community to not be very upfront about that with the community and say, that we're going to make this work regardless of where it lands. That's our responsibility. Now, am I saying we're going to make it work as well as we would? No, I'm not, because that's not true. But it is our responsibility to make it work at the end of the day. And that's just life in the administration. And I can tell you, when I was in your seat, that wasn't my problem. And I took very much a very simple stance. But it is different when the work is what it is. I will say just one last point. I promise then this is the last thing I'll say. The audience that I'm speaking to, frankly, is not the municipal government. Every community has members of the community who watch the school committee meetings, but don't have a direct stake as commonly defined in the school system. And those members of your community are the ones that have to know that we take our responsibility with respect to fiscal stewardship seriously, just like you take your responsibility for advocating zealously on behalf of the kids of Medford seriously. And I think we have a better chance at engendering the trust and confidence of those community members who don't have that direct stake if they know we're asking only for what we need and for what we know we can make work. And at the same time, we want to keep them informed about what we'll eventually need and how those priorities might develop. And that's the transparency pillar that goes along with the coherence. But I know that there are people in your community that want to know about transparency, and there are people in your community that want to know about coherence. And I think our responsibility is to speak to both so that when the time comes, and it will, that they're asked to invest more in their schools, they know that we've done everything we can to spend every nickel they've given us wisely. And I think that's sort of the context in which I go over that refrain. night in, night out of the contingency planning. Thank you.
[DnBk5C8-dFs_SPEAKER_09]: Thank you.
[Graham]: Thank you, Mr. Murphy. Member Mustone? Motion to adjourn. Motion adjourned by Member Mustone. Second. Seconded by Member McLaughlin. Member Rossell, will you call the roll?
[Ruseau]: I will. Member Graham?
[4thVVEd7zdo_SPEAKER_02]: Yes.
[Ruseau]: Member Hays?
[4thVVEd7zdo_SPEAKER_02]: Yes.
[Ruseau]: Member Kreatz?
[4thVVEd7zdo_SPEAKER_02]: Yes.
[Ruseau]: Member McLaughlin?
[4thVVEd7zdo_SPEAKER_02]: Yes.
[Ruseau]: Member Mustone? Yes. members. So yes, they're longer current.
[Graham]: Excellent. The affirmative one.
|
total time: 4.31 minutes total words: 665 |
total time: 3.98 minutes total words: 619 |
total time: 2.35 minutes total words: 415 |
total time: 1.69 minutes total words: 258 |
|
total time: 0.15 minutes total words: 15 |
|||