Portland School Committee

Finance Subcommittee

Tuesday, March 16, 2009

5:30 p.m. – 7:00 p.m.

Room 321 PATHS

MINUTES

In attendance:  Jaimey Caron, Sarah Thompson, Simon Thompson, Peter Eglinton,

Liz Holt, Robert O’Brien, Herb Hopkins, Jeanne Whynot-Vickers and

Kate Snyder 

 

  1. Presentation of Food Services Cost Center (Ron Adams)
    1. What is the long-term plan of central kitchen (i.e., renovation, extension, relocation)?  What are the costs associated with the plan?
    2. $800,000 – deficit in Food Services line – any anticipated change in revenue generating measures?  Need to careful about increasing the price without an increase in service. 

 

  1. Presentation of Facilities Cost Center (Doug Sherwood)
    1. Last year compared to this year, explain how the distribution to cost centers is being done.  How can particular budgets/expenses be seen after the distribution is done?  Some are lumped in together with custodial lines as well as maintenance.  But there are specific lines such as water and sewer.
    2. In FY 08, PPS started the HVAC contract with city.  As this was to be a cost saving measure, why are costs increasing?  Because of chart of accounts change, we cannot accurately see budget numbers yet.  The City invoices also do not give detail on their billing, but numbers are supposed to be coming from city.  PPS is also conducting an analysis to compare costs.
    3. Regarding maintenance supplies, can you elaborate on the work that will be done by the school department in lieu of an outside contractor or the city?  There is extensive work to be done, including rewiring for IT services.  Depending on work that is needed, the school department will work with either the city or an outside contractor. 
    4. Regarding grounds work, are there plans to offset the large increase in costs?  It is difficult to obtain backup data from the City on maintenance work done.  However, with new chart of accounts, a breakdown of services is needed.  It is difficult to invoice school-related expenses only (i.e., clearing of sidewalks – is it just for students to get to school?).  We continue to try to work with City to determine billing calculations. 

This is why it’s important to advocate for MOU’s with City.

    1. In the budget book, telephone line has increased while most other cost centers have decreased.  Why is this?  This is continued work with merging of accounts.
    2. Regarding the natural gas/oil line, is it zero due to allocating costs to schools?  Yes.
    3. Recycling services continue to increase, not significantly, but does increase.  Yes. About 2 years ago we starting to transition to single stream then we started to bolster recycling efforts.  Buildings are recycling more, which leads to additional equipment needed (bins) and additional pick up times.

 

  1. Laptop Initiative Update (Jeanne Whynot-Vickers)
    1. This morning there was a conference with all Superintendents to overview all stimulus streams that flow to LEA’s.  Curtailment monies will be reinstated. 

Finance Sub Committee                                Page Two                                March 17, 2009

 

    1. Stimulus will be coming in beginning in April (IDEA and Title I ) for an 8 month period.  The Commissioner has appealed to the federal government to relax guidelines on the use of Title I funds.  She is asking to use both IDEA and Title I stimulus to do district-wide initiatives.  The focus will be on staff development, technology, and interventions for students.
    2. It is agreed that schools need to get laptops to students and increase technology in schools.  In order to flow through funding formula schools receive $280 per student with $240 taken off the top to go to laptops.  Superintendents discussed paying for laptops in 2 years as opposed to 4.  This could save on interest (pay 50% one year and 50% 2nd year).  This would not need to follow the funding formula.  Commissioner is looking into details of this.

 

  1. Budget Deliberations
    1. FTE Comparison (tab 5)
      1. Revised as of March 9th
      2. Some differences were due to agency support staff (grant funded).  Some may have been errors made in old system (Pentamation). 
      3. In FY 09, the need to re hire key personnel made it difficult to compile accurate data for budget and staffing.  The City also came in and oversaw finances for half year.
      4. Questions:
        1. In looking at FY10, 1114.61 FTE’s is projected staff.  Transfer of 18 FTE’s happened last year, so looking at budget – not much difference.  This year includes revenues.  Was moved in Spring of FY 09.  FY 08 did not include this.  Should there be a $90,000 increase?  Costs were reallocated for PATHS.
        2. Did system change from FY 08 to FY 09?  It originally was in excel, then we looked at actual live data and double checked numbers.  We are now looking at another software that will encompass all.  This software is planned in this budget?  Yes.
        3. Can we be sure the FTE number are consistent in all documents?
        4. How was the decision made to change format (to more collapsed).  Driven by state agency clients data.
        5. Is there a way to project grant staff numbers?  Would like to see this so whole budget is transparent to be able to talk about with City.  Could this be a discussion with entire School Committee?
        6. How are classroom ratios determined?  It depends on the situation.  Some schools have large ESL populations, while others have blended classrooms (combined grades 4-5) or looped grades (grade 1 students and staff continue to grade 2).
        7. With respect to Ed. Tech’s, could there be data to reflect ALL, not just locally funded?  All elementary schools have 1 ½ Ed. Tech’s where one is generally in library.  The rest of the Ed. Tech’s in schools are mostly special education.  There are very few locally funded Ed Tech’s.
        8. Could there be clarification on the $35,000 increase in public services?  This is public works services (snow removal, grounds maintenance, etc.).  This is an increase from last year.

Finance Sub Committee                                Page Three                             March 17, 2009

 

        1. Explain the increase in CTS (Computer Technology Services) repair and equipment line.  This is due to the Technology Long Range Plan.  Major re-wiring needs to be done and will be done with in-house maintenance staff so there is an increase in facilities.  E-rate monies will be used where able.
        2. Why the increase in supplies and equipment?  Is it one particular area?  This is an equal increase across the board.
    1. Information Requests
      1. Include staffing projections with FTE documents.
      2. Need to establish baseline.
      3. Provide accurate numbers for the FY 09 approved budget, FY 09 revised budget and FY 10 projected budget including accurate FTE numbers in time for Wednesday’s workshop.

 

  1. Vote FY10 Budget out of Sub Committee

­

Jaimey Caron moved, Robert O’Brien seconded and it was voted unanimously to move the Superintendent’s proposed FY 10 budget with the following amendment out of Finance Sub Committee to the full School Committee for a first read.

 

Amendments:

A.        Additional Identified Savings

1.                  Health Insurance:  500,000

2.                  Error:  60,000

3.                  Adult Ed ABC:  75,000

4.                  Waste Management:  47,000

5.                  Additional Trimming:  150,000 (without affecting students and staffing)

TOTAL                        $832,000

 

                        B.         Move School Committee laptop budget of $9,000 to the

Administrative line for consultant services.

 

            Jaimey Caron moved, Robert O’Brien seconded and it was voted unanimously to move

the following priority items out of Finance Sub Committee to the full School Committee

for discussion at the next School Committee Workshop.

 

            Priorities

                        1.         Adding Secondary Assistant Superintendent to the budget.

                                    Option: 

Maintain budget, but not designating to particular position (possibly

use toward Grant writing position)

Discussion:

1.  Can a comparison of Central Office Team (COT) make up and duties

with other school districts be made?

2.  Get sense of entire COT duties and how could this be reorganized.

3.  Get high school principals to speak about the need for this position at

the School Committee Workshop.

 

Finance Sub Committee                                Page Four                              March 17, 2009

 

2.         Adding Grant writing position back into the budget. 

3.         Reducing legal budget line.

4.         Reinstate foreign language program in the elementary schools.

5.         City and school shared services as it relates to the sustainability plan

(MOU’s)

           

6.         Adjournment

1.         Meeting adjourned at 9:51 pm