| BOE Minutes | BOE Home Page | |
| Previous: 2008-02-19 || Finance and Operations || | ||
| Madison Metropolitan School District Madison, Wisconsin Art Rainwater, Superintendent | ||
|---|---|---|
| BOARD OF EDUCATION Minutes for Finance and Operations March 11, 2008 |
Doyle Administration Building 545 West Dayton Street, Room 103 Madison, Wisconsin |
|
Finance and Operations Committee meeting was called to order by Chair Lucy Mathiak at 12 p.m.
MEMBERS PRESENT: Carol Carstensen, Maya Cole, Lucy Mathiak
MEMBERS ABSENT: None
OTHER BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: None
STUDENT REPRESENTATIVES PRESENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Mark Anderson, Lucy Chaffin, Steve Hartley, Doug Johnson, Art Rainwater, Howard Sampson, Ken Syke, Donna Williams, Ann Wilson-Recording Secretary
1. Approval of Minutes
It was moved by Carol Carstensen and seconded by Maya Cole to approve the minutes of the Finance and Operations Committee meeting dated February 19, 2008. Motion unanimously carried.
2. Public Appearances
There were no public appearances.
3. Announcements
There were no announcements.
4. 2008-09 Budget Process, Timeline, and Considerations
(Written materials provided in advance: 2008-09 Budget Timeline- attached to the original of these minutes.)
Donna Williams reviewed the revised 2008-09 Budget Timeline, noting that approval of the budget is now scheduled for May 12, 2008.
DISCUSSION:
· Individual meetings will be scheduled with each Board member for a briefing on budget highlights.
· Will be same-service budget with some changes to reflect enrollment, shifts of funds within departments. Anticipate "non-event."
· Budget assumes Board will pay off short-term debt and free up $400,000 under the Revenue Cap.
· Board candidates will be briefed. Going through comprehensive orientation process early, so will be well prepared regarding the budget.
· Common Council/Board of Education Liaison Committee is looking at unfunded mandates from the city that have large price tags (stop lights, roundabouts).
Ms. Mathiak asked whether the Citizens Budget would be released at the same time as the proposed budget. Donna Williams indicated there is a format for developing this document, but it is a manual process and she was not sure whether it could be completed by the same time. Superintendent Rainwater noted the Citizens Budget is organized differently and presents different numbers. Ms. Mathiak felt it would be good to prepare the Citizens Budget so it could be used as a reference point.
5. Process for Review and Approval of Community Service Fund Budget
Chair Mathiak proposed development of a process for review and approval of the Community Service Fund (Fund 80) budget because these funds affect property taxes and the total amount increases annually without review. Carol Carstensen indicated Fund 80 does receive annual review as part of the overall budget.
DISCUSSION:
· Fund 80 could be presented in more detail, with a presentation; treated independently during budget review process.
· Partnerships Committee sets the amount for projects that are funded without a formal process.
· Helpful for community understanding to refer to the fund as Community Service rather than Fund 80. Prefer separate budget discussion - brings out broader discussion. Process should lead toward educational goals.
· Approval is part of the overall budget, not specific to what is included in this fund. Prudent (especially as related to referendum) to discuss and make choices as a formal part of review.
· Fund is audited, not treated any differently than any other part of the budget. Subject to all accounting and there are specific rules about use of the Community Service funds.
Ms. Mathiak summarized the recommendation that there be specific attention during the budget review process to setting an amount for Fund 80. The Superintendent indicated that information will be presented so that this will be facilitated.
6. Process for Setting Funds Available for Community Service Grants
Steve Hartley indicated he is working on a process for awarding Community Service Grant funds and will have it ready for review at the next meeting. Chair Mathiak noted it would be helpful for reviewers to know the amount of money that will be available for the first round of competition, beginning in 2009-2010. The Superintendent recommended the process for awarding funds be included with review of Fund 80 during the budget review process. It was also recommended the administration submit a proposal for renovations for Doyle Room 103 (to make it an alternate meeting room for Board of Education meetings).
7. Follow-Up to MSCR Budget and Fees
(Written materials provided in advance: memorandum from Lucy Chaffin dated 3/4/08 re: MSCR Adult Program Fees, MSCR Fee Chart, MSCR Adult Program Fees - all attached to the original copy of these minutes.)
Lucy Chaffin shared information generated in response to the committee's request for a proposal for increasing select adult program fees by 5 percent annually. She noted MSCR does raise fees every year; the department would like to keep the flexibility to determine in which area(s) it makes most sense. Adult fees have already been set for 2009, but there could be discussion about other areas where the market might support an increase. She reminded that people who participate in MSCR programs are the voting public.
DISCUSSION:
· Need balance between charging fees and costs. Can cut, but would be reluctant to make any significant changes arbitrarily or across-the-board. Many cuts were made in the past. New programs developed in the last ten years, e.g. those attached to summer school. Could ask MSCR to look for other revenues or ways to cut costs.
· Offer wonderful, low-cost programs. Would be comfortable asking where cuts could be made or fees raised. Will be fiscal implications for every facet of the district; everybody will be making cuts.
· Could decrease the allowed growth for MSCR budget (currently 4-4.2%). Capped at growth of overall budget. Could set an amount for increase. District has placed burdens on MSCR budget - elementary school after school Safe Haven, summer school.
· Need to send message to the city that the program needs to be sustainable with opportunities for people to participate who cannot afford to.
· Nature of LTE jobs makes staffing difficult. Constant need for training. Labor intensive, community takes for granted, takes away from educational mission; district carrying the load for the city.
· Big expansion over the years in programming for children. Worry that the city is neither as able nor willing to provide the same level of programming for children.
· Some budget decisions are made across the MSCR/MMSD budget lines to provide services - e.g., all day summer school.
Chair Mathiak recommended there be more deliberative discussion of the issues raised during the budget review process. One item in particular is which programs may need to be protected in the MSCR budget in view of the level of support by the city. Lucy Chaffed noted there may be ways of dividing the budget that would provide more clarity, like services during the school day vs. after school.
8. Other Business
There was no other business.
9. Adjournment
It was moved by Maya Cole and seconded by Carol Carstensen to adjourn the meeting at 1:10 p.m. Motion unanimously carried.
aw