State of Wyoming ) County of Sweetwater ) July 18, 2017 ... · PDF filenot everything gets put into the Board booklet or in the emails, ... Lincoln Middle School did interview a Science

1

State of Wyoming )

County of Sweetwater ) July 18, 2017

School District No. Two )

The Board of Trustees of School District No. Two, in the County of Sweetwater and the State of

Wyoming, met in regular session on July 18, 2017 at the Central Administration Building, Green

River, Wyoming pursuant to notice and due call given each member of the Board of Trustees of

said District. Brenda Roosa, Chairman of the Board and a member thereof called the meeting to

order at 7:00 p.m. The following members of the Board were present:

Brenda Roosa Absent: John Malone

Steve Core

Corina Tynsky

Mark Sanders

Ann Rudoff

Robin Steiss

Others present were: Donna Little-Kaumo, Jamie Christensen, Tony Beardsley, Doug Hamel,

Chris Dean, Pete Brandjord, David Martin, JR Williams, Ann Jantz, Jason Fuss, Stacey Davenport,

Kelly Pearson and Mary Flom.

1. OPENING ITEMS

1.01 Call to Order

The meeting was called to order by Chairman Roosa at 7:00PM.

1.02 Roll Call/Pledge of Allegiance

2. VISITORS, DELEGATIONS, CORRESPONDENCE

2.01 Public Comments

None were taken.

3. APPROVAL OF AGENDA

3.01 Approval of Agenda

Robin Steiss moved, seconded by Ann Rudoff to approve the agenda.

2

Chairman Roosa stated that she does need to have an amendment to the agenda to add the e-session

at 11.01 for personnel. Chairman Roosa asked for a motion to add the e-session.

Ann Rudoff moved, seconded by Robin Steiss to amend the agenda and add the e-session. Motion

carried unanimously.

All of those in favor of the agenda; motion carried unanimously.

4. CONSENT AGENDA ITEMS

4.01 Approval of Consent Agenda Items 4.01 through 4.08

Corina Tynsky moved, seconded by Ann Rudoff to approve the consent agenda items 4.01 through

4.08. Motion carried unanimously.

5. DISTRICT GOALS AND LEADERSHIP ACTIVITIES

5.01 Board Governance Training (Roosa)

Chairman Roosa stated that Superintendent Little-Kaumo had already put it onto the Board

calendar; but next month on August 29th, there will be a Wyoming School Board Association

dinner for the Legislative Roundup. Chairman Roosa also passed out a little pamphlet that

Chairman Roosa felt would be really informative.

Chairman Roosa also wanted to remind all Board members that if they do have questions, please

make sure that the Board members get with Superintendent Little-Kaumo as she is the conduit to

the District. “We” are on the same team and “we” need to be united. If the Board has questions,

not everything gets put into the Board booklet or in the emails, so please make sure that “we” are

communicating with Superintendent Little-Kaumo on any questions that a Board member may

have.

6. PERSONNEL

6.01 Consider Approval of 2017-2018 New Certified Contracts (Fuss)

Jason Fuss, Human Resources Director, commented happy middle of July, it’s going fast. Just a

quick update, Lincoln Middle School did interview a Science applicant yesterday and had a

gentlemen who “we” liked and offered the position too, but he needed a day to think about it, so

he is not on the list tonight, so he will be a month out. Franklin “Trey” Bailey is not a new member

to the District, but Bailey wanted to move up to the secondary ranks, so Bailey will be moving

over and replacing Mike Aimone at Lincoln Middle School. Adam Hayes who student taught at

both Sweetwater #1 and #2 is highly recommended out of South Dakota, as well as by Nancy

Eklund and his professors. Hayes will be new out of student teaching and he is the new contract

to the District and will be located at Washington Elementary School. Fuss is bringing Hayes

forward for the Board’s consideration and approval.

3

Teacher Position Location

Adam Hayes Physical Education Washington Elementary School

Corina Tynsky moved, seconded by Mark Sanders to approve the certified contract of Adam

Hayes. Motion carried unanimously.

Chairman Roosa asked Fuss if the Science position will be approved in time for the school year,

which Fuss responded that it should and “we” worked pretty hard but just couldn’t quite get it

there and the gentlemen needed a day to think about. “We” may be in a situation where the District

would have to do a long term substitute if he declined the position, but “we” will be able to approve

that in time for the start of the school year.

7. CURRICULUM, INSTRUCTION AND ASSESSMENT

7.01 Nothing to Report

8. BID REQUESTS AND SUMMER MAINTENANCE ITEMS

8.01 Consider Approval of Bid for Gas, Oil and Fluids (Brandjord)

Pete Brandjord, Business Manager, stated that every year the District goes out for oil, gas and

fluids and the recommendation for this year is to go with the following:

1) Diesel and gas to Homax for $1.64 for unleaded and $1.69 for the diesel or $.015 over

rack price;

2) Oil bid to Homax for the entire inventory based on the price;

3) DEF Fluid to Homax for $79.75 for each drum of diesel exhaust fluid;

4) Nutech for windshield washer fluid at $90.20 per drum;

5) Anti-freeze to Homax for 50/50 anti-freeze for $345.95 per drum and extended life for

$329.45 per drum; and

6) Transmission fluid to Homax for $1,155.55 per drum as the lowest bidder.

Ann Rudoff moved, seconded by Robin Steiss for the gas, oil and fluids.

Ann Rudoff commented that Homax didn’t want to bid on the windshield washer fluid as it is a

little weird that there is one little pull out for Nutech. Which both Steve Core and Brandjord

commented that Homax did bid on the fluid. Both Steve Core and Mark Sanders stated that Nutech

was the lower bid. Rudoff commented that that was weird and thought that transportation would

have worked with them.

Motion carried unanimously.

4

8.02 Consider Approval to Go Out to Bid for District Paper (Brandjord)

Pete Brandjord, Business Manager, stated that the District would like to go out to bid for the 8 ½

x 11 paper. The challenge is more the distribution of the paper, as the District wants the paper

delivered to the schools so there isn’t District personnel taking it out to the schools. The District

has identified another vendor other than the one that the District currently has as there is a local

vendor that is interested and Brandjord would like to see how competitive it is.

Mark Sanders moved, seconded by Corina Tynsky to approve going out to bid for District paper.

Chairman Roosa asked Brandjord if the District had ever participated in a co-op for the paper

purchase, which Brandjord stated that it has been a while. Chairman Roosa commented then that

there would still be the delivery issue. Brandjord stated that he knew that it was done at the City

of Green River, but didn’t think that the District was involved with the City and County. There is

so much of a volume of paper being used at the buildings that it is really imperative that the delivery

be done right to the buildings.

Motion carried unanimously.

9. OTHER BUSINESS

9.01 Hear Information on Enrolled Act No. 93 – Chapter 2; School Safety and

Security (Little-Kaumo)

Superintendent Little-Kaumo stated that she would like to present some information because as

the Board knows, with this last legislative session, Enrolled Act No. 93 was passed and is to be

implemented after July 1, 2017; so that date has come and gone and now it is time for the Board

to talk about this. For the last several Wyoming legislative sessions a variety of bills have been

proposed to allow for firearms in school as a strategy for providing safety to students in the case

of an active shooter. During the 2017 session Enrolled Act 93 was passed allowing individual

school districts to make decisions for their community schools if firearms carried by school

employees was a safety strategy that the local school boards wanted to support. Enrolled Act 93

provides local school boards the authority to adopt rules and regulations in consultation with local

law enforcement to allow the possession of firearms by employees possessing a valid concealed

carry permit.

The rules required under this act is the following:

Establish an application and approval process for employees possessing a valid

concealed carry permit;

Require any person carrying to maintain the firearm on his/her person at all times

or in a biometric container or lock box;

Establish ongoing training requirements, curricula and instructor qualifications,

subject to approval by local law enforcement including:

5

o An initial course of training for not less than 16 hours of live fire training

and 8 hours of scenario based training using nonlethal training, firearms and

ammunition;

Provide for a process of revocation or suspension of the authorization;

So if the Board did go this direction there would have to be some type of a remark in there that

the Board could suspend it if it was decided to not have that person carry a weapon anymore.

The Board of Trustees may waive all or part of the training requirements for

isolated rural schools;

One thing that Superintendent Little-Kaumo did not see in the act and there is supposed to be some

guidance coming out from the Wyoming Department of Education; is how they are defining an

isolated rural school. Superintendent Little-Kaumo thinks that the District has some that could be

described that way, but Superintendent Little-Kaumo hasn’t seen a definition on that.

Chairman Roosa asked if there is anything in that Act that says who pays for the individuals who

take the training. Superintendent Little-Kaumo responded that it is part of the employee’s

responsibilities.

The Superintendent for the District shall notify the parents of students attending

school in the District of the ability of employees to carry firearms and the rules and

regulations governing possession.

If the District did do this, “we” need to make sure that the parents understand what those rules are

and what the authority is that has been given.

The Superintendent of the District shall notify all law enforcement agencies with

jurisdiction over the area and names of all employees who receive permission to

carry firearms.

The other items that the Board and District would need to remember is:

Develop an application;

Develop a Sweetwater District #2 policy that include these statutory requirements;

Consider as part of a policy the type of firearm and ammunition.

Including frangible ammunition, which Superintendent Little-Kaumo just learned about; which is

designed to shatter and disintegrate upon impact on a target. One of the things, like with the hollow

point bullets, what is wanted is the type of ammunition that if it was to hit a wall it would

disintegrate on impact rather than going through the wall and hitting somebody, which is a safety

measure there.

On the PowerPoint tonight are some Potential Liability Scenarios that Tracy J. Copenhaver, the

Wyoming School Board Association (WSBA) Attorney, and because the Board is a member of

the WSBA, they give us a lot of sample policies when new legislation comes out. The WSBA has

6

drafted up a potential sample policy for the Board to review that covered this new statute. This is

not an exhaustive list but these are a few of the potential liabilities that Copenhaver mentioned:

The employee carrying shoots a student, co-worker or innocent member of the

public;

A student or co-worker engages in a physical confrontation with the employee that

has a firearm, manages to take the firearm and shoots others in the school;

The employee exercises poor judgement, fire the weapon in a situation where lethal

force is unwarranted.

Tracy Copenhaver suggested that it is really important for school boards to weigh the risks and has

the following to say:

“If the school board authorizes an employee to carry a firearm, and that employee

accidentally shoots a student, co-worker or innocent member of the public…in all

likelihood the school district would face one or multiple lawsuits.”

Superintendent Little-Kaumo shared the following insurance comment with the Board earlier, but

this is the comment from the District’s current insurance carrier, Gary Bowers of HUB

International who had a phone conversation with Pete Brandjord, Business Manager, regarding the

“Guns in Schools” legislation:

“I’m writing to confirm our telephone conversation this afternoon regarding the “Guns in

Schools” legislation. As I mentioned, I had a telephone conversation with not only our

underwriter, but the Vice President of Underwriting for Glatfelter. Their position is they are not a

fan of guns in schools. The only exception is for trained full time security officers, like school

resource officers. If the district were to permit non-security type people (people who do not do

this full time) to carry guns in schools then the district’s coverage would be threated and most like

be non-renewed. It would be a coverage jeopardizing decision.”

Superintendent Little-Kaumo went on to state that the insurance carrier did mention that they are

aware of two other national insurance companies that write school coverage throughout the country

– Liberty Mutual and EMC – that have taken the same position.

Superintendent Little-Kaumo thinks that there is a fear about this because it is so new and there

are not that many states with these policies, but there are more and more that are looking at this

idea, because school shootings are a disaster. Superintendent Little-Kaumo thinks that the insurers

are not clear on what would happen if someone who has a concealed carry were in a stressful

situation and would the person be calm enough to do what they needed to do; have they ever shot

a human being before, and all of those kinds of things. “We” just don’t have the data yet on

whether this is a strategy that really is a deterrent, really would save lives and would be a good

thing to do. Superintendent Little-Kaumo thinks that the insurer’s hesitation here is just because

this is new.

Superintendent Little-Kaumo went on to state that “our” commitment for student safety is critical

and must be evaluated frequently. This District does do this, as the Board talked at McKinnon

7

recently about those glass doors and Doug Hamel, Facilities Manager, is looking into the price of

what a storefront with bullet proof glass would look like as well as metal doors. The District

recently has added additional radios through the School Facilities Department security money, so

that the District had better communication with police. “We” now have channels where “we” can

talk to all agencies if or when “we” are in a crisis. The District has also added camera’s every year

at schools as well. This is something that the District needs to look at frequently and with guidance

as people start to learn more about safety, as it frequently changes. It used to be said to use code

words and now they say don’t use code words; so the District needs to be able to respond as to

what the best research is on keeping our schools safe and it is important that the District looks at

the frequently.

The strategies “we” choose are very important and sometimes are not easy decisions.

Superintendent Little-Kaumo thinks that a lot of the school boards this month in Wyoming are

talking about this piece of legislation. Superintendent Little-Kaumo wanted to share this

information with the Board as well and entertain any questions or any guidance that the Board may

have for Superintendent Little-Kaumo on what the Board would like her to do going forward. Such

as, if the Board is interested in pursuing this, look at other insurance companies, if the Board would

just like to put this on hold for now; Superintendent Little-Kaumo would just like some guidance

on what to do regarding this piece of legislation.

Chairman Roosa asked Superintendent Little-Kaumo how soon would the Board have to adopt a

policy; which Superintendent Little-Kaumo responded that the Board wouldn’t necessarily ever

have to. The timeframe is up to the Board.

Robin Steiss commented that she is not a fan and thinks that the more guns that are around the

more opportunity there is for something to happen.

Mark Sanders is pretty “ok” with gun carrying as Sanders is a gun carrying advocate; but it is all

about training. Policeman are trained and you talk about people who do it all of the time, it is all

about training. We do have data because Utah is a carry in school state, so the data is out there.

You can go across the border here and find out all the data that you would need on concealed carry

in schools. Sanders doesn’t like guns where they don’t belong but Sanders also believes that it is

a training thing and if people are trained and appropriately trained to handle situations and they go

through that extra effort to do that, then Sanders is pretty “ok” with it.

Superintendent Little-Kaumo asked Sanders if he is aware of any data where there has been an

incident in a school; as that is the data that Superintendent Little-Kaumo was talking about; and

Superintendent Little-Kaumo doesn’t know of any yet. Sanders stated there is data in the schools

that allow weapon carrying; and there are people that insure them too. So Sanders thinks that a lot

of these things that are coming out is just what Superintendent Little-Kaumo said, it is new and

everybody is kind of scared of it and Sanders is not an advocate of arming to the teeth everything,

but if there is an active shooter in my kids classroom and there is somebody there that is trained to

deal with them, Sanders would prefer that they would deal with them.

Ann Rudoff commented that both of her daughters have carry permits so Rudoff is a gun supporter,

but Rudoff doesn’t want to put them into the classrooms until people are trained. Guns don’t kill

8

people on their own, it is the people that are handling them that do, so until somebody really knows

how to handle them, Rudoff has enough issues.

Steve Core stated that after reading Tracy Copenhaver’s documents, Core says “no” as there are

too many downside risks here. People need to remember that “we” have a built in security system

in the State of Wyoming right now, and why the Legislature doesn’t consider an SRO officer in

school buildings as a deterrent Core doesn’t know. Core can guarantee you that if there is an active

shooter that goes to Green River High School and sees a Green River Police Department vehicle

out front, which you will see out there all of the time, that person ain’t going in there. Core’s

biggest fear is the elementary schools, as Core thinks that the SRO’s need to be more active or the

Green River Police Department needs to be more active and that is where the District needs to

work with the Green River Police Department as that is the biggest deterrent. Core is shocked that

the Legislature didn’t see that SRO thing. Core has a concealed permit and Core is a big gun

advocate but Core just doesn’t want his little Cadence to be in a 1st grade classroom where a gun

incident happens or an accident or whatever, Core just doesn’t want to see that and Core doesn’t

want to be on this Board if that ever happens, Core will tell you that.

Superintendent Little-Kaumo stated that she knows and has thought about that as she moved in to

education and whether you are a principal or a central administration person or whatever;

Superintendent Little-Kaumo thinks that it would be your worst nightmare if something happened

to somebody’s child, you don’t get them back. One of the things, and Superintendent Little-Kaumo

thinks that Core is right, that car sitting out front is an obvious deterrent and most of the shootings

that we have had in this country, they either end up taking their own life or the police does, so we

haven’t even been able to assess what they might do or if that deterrent really works or not, “we”

don’t know. Superintendent Little-Kaumo thinks that one of the things that she has been proud of

here and the Board has really spoken this, the Board has spoken with Legislators, local

representatives and down in Cheyenne, Wyoming about the power of SRO’s and it is unfortunate

that “we” don’t have more of them, as the SRO’s do amazing work. Superintendent Little-Kaumo

thinks that training is always the key and both Superintendent Little-Kaumo and her husband Brian

have a concealed and carry permit and Superintendent Little-Kaumo understands that, but it is just

scary around schools as you just don’t know what might happen if someone is in a stressful

situation. The life of a child is ultimately what “we” need to be focused on and do the best work

with that.

Corina Tynsky commented that she really doesn’t think that there is anything more that she could

add. Tynsky is not a fan of it and Tysnky would much rather have SRO’s than just anybody with

a concealed weapon permit to be able to have guns in the schools. Tynsky thinks that it creates a

bigger risk and agrees wholeheartedly with Robin Steiss, the more guns you have in schools the

higher the chances are to having a gun incident.

Steve Core would also like to add that he has not had one patron of this District say that the District

should do this, not one person has said this. Core doesn’t know if anybody else has had anyone,

but Core has not. Robin Steiss commented that she hasn’t had anyone either.

9

Chairman Roosa commented that it might be worth investigating if there are insurance carriers out

there that would cover the District because Chairman Roosa is not a fan if the District can’t get

insurance. Chairman Roosa is also not a fan of having guns around children.

Superintendent Little-Kaumo knows that a lot of the conversation that happened in Cheyenne; and

there were several gun bills that were being looked at this legislative session, but one of the things

that kept coming up was something at these rural schools where the sheriff departments couldn’t

get there quick enough. In Green River, they are here lickety split.

Steve Core commented that he thinks that he agrees with that and Core brought that up at the

McKinnon meeting, but the McKinnon people need to bring that to the Board. If that is a concern

of theirs, the Board talked to them out there and Core hasn’t heard anything from them. Core

would consider McKinnon, Core really would, and he would consider even Granger for that

matter; but Core believes that there is a sheriff officer that lives out at Granger and one at

McKinnon as well.

Mark Sanders commented that that kind of contradicts what “we” are saying, no guns in schools;

Core stated that he doesn’t think so. Sanders then asked how is somebody going to protect

somebody out there and not hurt a kid and then not hurt a kid here, it’s in fact a contradiction.

Core stated that he doesn’t agree. Sanders then went on and said the he is not saying that everybody

with conceal permits get to carry in schools, this is after 16 hours of training and 8 hours of active

shooter training; “we’re” not talking about get a concealed weapons permit and carrying your gun

into school. To Sanders it is all about training and people who go the extra 20 miles that it takes

to do it, so if you allow them at McKinnon a kid can be killed there by an accident just like a kid

could be killed here; it is a contradiction of terms. Core replied that an active shooter in Green

River can be gunned down in two minutes and an active shooter in McKinnon it is going to take

30 to 45 minutes and that is a big difference. Sanders went on to say what about the accidental

shooting of the person carrying a gun; which Core commented that he gets that.

Chairman Roosa stated that maybe some additional information at this point might help.

Superintendent Little-Kaumo commented that one of the things that “we” have noticed about the

insurance companies is that the bigger ones that insure school districts are further East and out

East there is a different appreciation or tolerance for guns and out West people are more

comfortable, but out East people are not so much. So “we” can certainly look to see if there are

other insurance companies and Superintendent Little-Kaumo doesn’t know what their rates are,

but “we” can get Pete Brandjord to look at that and do a little research and come back with some

information.

Chairman Roosa responded that what she is hearing right now from the Board is that Chairman

Roosa doesn’t think that the Board is interested in pursuing a policy for the District, but at least

get some information that if “our” insurance carriers aren’t going to carry the District, then if the

Board changes their minds, do “we” have coverage. At this point, Chairman Roosa doesn’t think

that this is an option unless we have a different carrier, which Superintendent Little-Kaumo agrees

the District has to have the liability insurance and the District wouldn’t want to start a day of school

without that.

10

Superintendent Little-Kaumo felt like it was something that the Board needed to talk about because

this bill did pass and is to be implemented after July 1, 2017 if the Board is interested. The beauty

of this enrolled act again is, and it wasn’t so much the case with ones being introduced, is that the

Board is in full control of whether “you” want to entertain this idea or not. So leaving this up to

local school boards was certainly the right thing to do.

9.02 Hear Update on Wilson Construction Project (Little-Kaumo)

Superintendent Little-Kaumo wanted to give the Board a quick update on the Wilson Construction

Project. The project remains to be on track and the final clearance date should be August 5, 2017,

which is a Saturday, so the construction company should be doing all of the remaining checks to

make sure that things pass. Central Office is still scheduled to move in the week of August 7, 2017

unless something changes. The August board meeting has been moved, and Superintendent Little-

Kaumo appreciates the Board for doing that, to August 15, 2017. The ribbon cutting will be held

on August 15, 2017 to avoid another day for the Board. The ribbon cutting is tentatively scheduled

for 5:30PM and if that doesn’t work for the Board please let Superintendent Little-Kaumo know

as “we” haven’t sent out invitations yet, but “we” need to do that in the next few days. The ribbon

cutting will be at 5:30PM, a workshop with Directors at 6:00PM and then a Board meeting at

7:00PM.

Superintendent Little-Kaumo wanted to let the Board know that Groathouse Construction

continues to be an awesome company to work with and this is the second time that the District has

done a C-MAR approach on a project, as the District did that when the pool was bonded with

Groathouse and the District couldn’t ask for more collaboration and sharing and Lynn the

Superintendent over there is wonderful and if you ever want to stop in, he has a hard hat ready for

you and will take you around on a tour. Lynn has been very good to work with as well as CTA

Architects. The District has had a long relationship with CTA and this project has been going very

smoothly.

The District does believe that the Wilson building will provide a nice central office for years to

come and again it is a testament to you all that “we” reuse buildings here and “we” haven’t been

building new things and “we’ve” tried to make the things that “we” have better and live longer.

So Superintendent Little-Kaumo is so proud that the Board has supported that premise and

Superintendent Little-Kaumo can still tell the Board that she still hears compliments on this

particular project from what happened at the last legislative session when this money was

appropriated. Remember, the District gave a little bit of money back when the District wanted to

do this new piece and there are still legislators that talk about how proud they are of Sweetwater

School District #2 for thinking about saving money for the State. As soon as central office vacates

this side of the building, the demolition is going to start like the next day after “we” get out of here

as Groathouse doesn’t want this project to get behind, so Groathouse wants to make sure that they

get started while they get mobilized here. “We” are hoping that things go smoothly, so the Board’s

next board meeting should happen across the street.

11

9.03 Consider Approval of BOCES Expedition Academy Child Care and Breakfast

Grants (Little-Kaumo)

Superintendent Little-Kaumo stated that as the Board knows that in the past there has been a day

care situation that the Board has supported and it has been partly funded through BOCES money.

Then there was a decline in babies happening at Expedition Academy, so the District did close the

day care because the subsidy was increasing to provide that day care. The other thing that is

happening is; and recently in Green River, is that there are more opportunities for day care as the

Child Development Center is now going to be providing day care in addition to the day cares that

are already present here. So, the District does have three new babies scheduled to be born from

Expedition Academy students in the Fall and as the Board knows the District has been passionate

that these kids have the opportunity to graduate and that is going to be those students the best

successes. So Superintendent Little-Kaumo would like to ask for the Board’s consideration for a

child care voucher grant from BOCES and what BOCES would be asked is to supplement what

the Department of Family Services (DFS) doesn’t pay so that the students aren’t out any money to

have proper day care for their children. This grant request is for $4,226.00; and again the DFS

would be paying for some of it and then the District has a little bit of cost involved in getting the

students over to apply at the DFS in regards to transportation. This is a pretty small grant but it is

a very important $4,226.00.

Robin Steiss moved, seconded by Corina Tynsky to approve the submission of this grant to

BOCES.

Corina Tynsky asked if Superintendent Little-Kaumo stated that the District will help with taking

the students over to DFS and will help them apply and make sure that the students do apply for

this help; Superintendent Little-Kaumo stated that the District will do this as it will be beneficial

as the District is only asking $4,226.00 from BOCES. Superintendent Little-Kaumo stated that

these students will qualify and the District will want to make sure that the students will get the

training for this. One of the nice things is that several day cares have offered also to do some

additional parent training with those parents and to invite them in for some volunteer time. The

District would like to work with Mr. Obray, Principal of Expedition Academy, to provide some

type of credit for that because in the long run, what the District would like the student to be is good

caregivers and finish school.

Steve Core asked what would be the District’s general fund obligation on this one, which

Superintendent Little-Kaumo stated that the cost provided by the District would be $1,042.94.

Core then went on to ask who would cover the $14,085.75, which Superintendent Little-Kaumo

responded that that would be DFS. Core stated then that DFS would do $14,085.75, BOCES

$4,226.00 and the District is giving $1,042.94, if that what Core is hearing, which Superintendent

Little-Kaumo responded in the affirmative.

Chairman Roosa stated that there is a motion and a second on the floor, the votes are Corina

Tysnky, Brenda Roosa, Ann Rudoff, Mark Sanders and Robin Steiss “Aye” and Steve Core voting

“Nay”. Motion carried.

12

Superintendent Little-Kaumo stated that the other grant for Expedition Academy has to do with

breakfast. In the past, the District has been serving breakfast for the students using Title monies

and that is no longer an allowable expense, but the District would like to provide a meal for these

students, as the students come and they have not eaten when they get to school. So in working

with these students, the poverty level of these students is 47% and if the students get to 50% or

over then the meals are fully covered by the Fed’s; but because it is not at 50%, the meals that the

District would have to pay for and the amount of this grant is for a request for $11,550. It costs

$20,562.50 to provide the breakfast and the District would provide $6,125.00, which is the cost of

the staff over and above the cost of the meal, which is outlined in the details in the budget section

of the grant. Superintendent Little-Kaumo would like to ask for the Board’s consideration to apply

for this grant as well.

Chairman Roosa asked then if BOCES would provide the $11,550, which Superintendent Little-

Kaumo replied in the affirmative.

Robin Steiss moved, seconded by Corina Tynsky to approve the application for the BOCES grant

for the breakfast program at Expedition Academy.

Ann Rudoff commented that this might be a stretch getting this much money from BOCES as there

has been a lot of discussions over the last meetings about these huge amounts. Rudoff commented

that this was talked about over the last couple of discussions at the BOCES meeting.

Robin Steiss asked if this grant goes to BOCES and it is not approved, then it comes back to the

Board, which Superintendent Little-Kaumo responded that that is correct; the grant would come

back as a denial.

Chairman Roosa asked if Linda Martin, Nutrition Services Director, has any of her magic for what

Martin is doing right now for the elementary school kids during the summer that is fully funded

by Federal dollars, and is there anything available there that the District might be able to receive.

Superintendent Little-Kaumo responded that that is a different program and it is only available in

the summer. Martin has been providing the breakfast at Expedition Academy in the past, it was

just funded out of Title money and the District just isn’t allowed to do that anymore.

Chairman Roosa commented that she thinks that it is worth going for the grant; which Ann Rudoff

responded that she isn’t saying don’t go for the grant, Rudoff just knows that the discussions that

the BOCES board has had at the last two or three meetings, BOCES has been tightening down

because of monies and balancing. Rudoff just wanted to throw that out as it might not come back

totally funded.

Steve Core stated that he was going to vote against this as it is just another obligation to the

District’s General Fund.

Chairman Roosa stated that there is a motion and a second on the floor, the votes are Corina

Tysnky, Brenda Roosa, Ann Rudoff, Mark Sanders and Robin Steiss “Aye” and Steve Core voting

“Nay”. Motion carried.

13

9.04 Open Hearing on District Budgets (Brandjord)

Pete Brandjord, Business Manager, stated that this has been a long process and if at any time

anybody has any questions, please just stop me. Brandjord will go through each of these amounts

individually unless there is a question regarding them.

Budget Appropriations:

1. General Fund $40,621,388 2. Special Revenue Fund $2,512,290 3. Debt Service Fund $1,763,400 4. Food Service Fund $1,381,466 5. Pupil Activity Fund $1,031,042 6. Major Maintenance $4,400,099 7. Capital Projects Fund $6,177,054 8. SD#2 Recreation Board $713,419

This budget represents a collaborative effort of the Board, each school and department to

implement a financial plan reflecting the long term goals of the District to maximize the alignment

of resources with student achievement. Especially this year, Brandjord commented that this has

been a challenging process and there has been a lot of collaboration and a lot of work has gone

into this and Brandjord thinks that it was done pretty successfully.

Total Appropriations for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2018:

$58,600,787;

$5,600,332 or a 8.686 decrease from prior year’s original budget;

Largely caused by planned reductions in the General Fund to adjust for the trend of

reduced revenues from the State of Wyoming and pretty significant reduction of

expenditures in Capital Projects Fund due to the completion of projects.

Budget Highlights: One of the biggest things affecting this budget is that the 64th Wyoming

Legislature passed Enrolled Act 125, the Omnibus Education Funding Bill late in the evening on

March 3rd, 2017, the final day of the session. Some of the low lights of this are:

Transportation funding frozen at 3 year average;

o Eliminated funding for new buses except in emergencies;

Reduced funding for Instructional Facilitators (IF’s) to 81% in FYE18 and 45% in

FYE 19;

Reduced “Schedule A” funding for non-salary model components;

o Career, Tech, Activities, assessments, instructional materials and supplies

(this is the biggest amount) and utilities;

Moved IF’s, extended day and summer school from categorical grants to the block

grant funding model, which inflated the amount of the guarantee with these

amounts coming into the Guarantee;

Rolled back External Cost Adjustments granted in prior years.

14

What that means for the District is a $1.6 million dollar reduction at the end of the Legislative

session.

The chart below shows the percentage increase in the model funding over the last several years

and it is important to look at that “Y” axis as that 2% line is about where most of these increases

have been; so this has not been a huge increase except for those couple of years 10 years ago. The

one thing that has really guided the District in this process is looking at the fiscal year in 2019 and

what the District is anticipating there. The first bar is Enrolled Act 125 when it is fully

implemented and the second bar is some speculation, which Brandjord doesn’t think is

ungrounded, but the District is probably looking at a 18 to 1 teacher to student ratio at the

elementary level. So this takes the District down to a 6% reduction in 2019, so a lot of this budget

is preparing for 2019 and the District looks pretty good in 2018, but the District wants to make

sure that the District doesn’t stutter step in 2019.

The Foundation Guarantee and Entitlement Payment

The funding formula computes the amount of the Foundation Guarantee, and the Entitlement

Payment equals the amount paid to districts by the State if the Guarantee exceeds the local

resources, which include property taxes that the County pays directly to the District. (W.S. 21-13-

311(a)).

General Fund Revenues:

Total Foundation Guarantee determined by the WDE100=$40,171,038

Foundation Entitlement=$11,215,314; this is up pretty significantly from the prior

year because of decreased local revenues and also because of some increased

reimbursables, primarily transportation. That number last year was:

o Prior Year Foundation Entitlement=$9,784,612.

So lower local revenues equals higher foundation entitlement.

15

The Total General Fund budgeted revenues increased by $446,306 or 1.10% from the prior year’s

budget. Going through the different components they are:

Local (District sources decreased due to lower oil and gas valuations at 2.81% or

$692,284;

County sources decreased $199,891 or 3.84%;

State Foundation Entitlement payment increased by $944,095 or 9.19% to offset

the decreased local revenues and attain the Foundation Guarantee total. Bus

purchases and as the Board probably remembers, there were some budget

amendments a few months ago to get ahead of that March 15th deadline in EA125,

so that the District could get buses. The District purchased 7 buses for almost

$700,000 and Brandjord appreciates the Boards support on that particular item

because it is efficiency and safety for the District’s students to have better buses

and the District was able to get in under the wire on that. Think back to the timeline,

the Legislature passed EA 125 on March 3rd, 2017 and the District was able to get

the buses ordered prior to the March 15th, 2017 deadline, thank you again for the

assistance on that. That increased the reimbursables significantly in the model, so

the District paid off leases of $1,137,769, which will be reimbursed in FYE2018.

The bus purchases of $687,372 will be reimbursed at 20% per year or $137,474 for

the next five years. What was discussed when the District was doing that is, it is

money in the bank. It did two things, it increased the guarantee for this year, which

allowed the District to have more in reserves because the District is capped at 15%.

Timeline of Events: EA 125 passed by the Legislature on March 3rd, 2017 with an estimated $1.6

million shortfall for “our” District. A Budget Task Force was established and began meetings in

March to address the shortfalls and began analyzing options.

Prior to Interest Based Negotiations (IBN) on May 6th, 2017, 12 certified positions were reduced

through attrition. The IBN team provided step increases and one-time payment for increases in

employee retirement contributions at a cost of $370,000.

After IBN, five additional certified staff positions and one central administration position were

reduced through attrition for a total personnel savings of $1.7 million. Non-salary reductions

totaled $575,000. So the District well exceeded the $1.6 million, which is great and the District is

ahead of where the District needs to be and Brandjord doesn’t need to tell anybody that there is a

lot of political uncertainty right now in Cheyenne, Wyoming as to what is going to happen with

the funding models. The District has savings ahead of what the expenditures are at this point.

Steve Core commented, help me remember the central administration position that is gone; which

Brandjord responded that it was the curriculum director position. Core stated then that there really

wasn’t a cost savings there; which Brandjord responded that it is one less position at central. Core

responded that she was moved over to the principal position at Jackson Elementary; which

Brandjord responded that the District has a net reduction of one position. Core stated that the

central administration position is one that the District didn’t necessarily have, which Brandjord

responded that it is one less position at central. Core then stated that it is one position in terms of

costs, anyway move on. Brandjord stated not immediately.

16

Chairman Roosa stated that the District is not filling the additional principal position, which

Brandjord responded in the affirmative.

The chart below shows the funding guarantee history and projection going forward with EA125

being implemented, so as the Board can see, the District looks pretty good in 2018 and in 2019

there is a drop off. A lot of that is the leases in 2019 and the District doesn’t have a lease

reimbursement of over a million dollars.

The chart below shows the same history as above, but shows the 18 to 1 teacher to student ratio

plus the EA 125.

The chart below shows the percentage comparison from year to year and it is a chart that was

looked at earlier and if the Board would look at the far right, it looks kind of dismal but the

17

challenge here is that “we” need to right size the operating budgets to meet where this is headed

and it is doable.

The chart below shows the projection for the ongoing General Fund Budget, which is non-salaries,

salaries, no capital or transfers in from the Rec Mill and all of that and this chart is assuming that

it stays the same. This is looking at salaries and non-salaries going forward starting with the

ongoing budget of 2018, projected funding for 2018 and again the District has a big cash infusion

because of the bus transactions, which is the difference there and there are some commitment

initiatives that will direct the District and will fill that area in. The District also has the same issue

and that is that the guarantee goes down in the following year and the allowable fund balance drops

as well. The District does need to employ those cash reserves during this year to the best benefit

for “our” students in the District. Fiscal year 2019, again the predictable quality of the numbers

there is a lot that is going to change between now and then. There is a recalibration going on, as

there is a Legislative budget session that will be convened in February of 2019, but to the best of

“our” knowledge this is where the District is at, at this point. “We” will monitor this a lot more

than the budgets have been in the past, and this is a 12 month job anymore. The good news is that

it is close.

18

Fund Balance Commitments: Brandjord would just like to review the policy on this which the

District enacted this policy in 2011.

Governmental Accounts Standard Boards Number 54 (GASB54) is about stratify what is in a fund

balance so that the governing bodies and the public know what is exactly in there, what it is going

to be used for and at one point it was regarded as cash. Brandjord thinks that the Board and the

administration have done a good job with funding future initiatives, curriculum adoptions, building

openings and setting up savings accounts within those reserves and stating that publically. It is a

lot like an appropriation, when “you” put a commitment in place the Board can put it in and the

Board can change it, the Board can remove it, but while it is in there it is a commitment of those

funds that is just as legal as an appropriation. GASB54 increased the reporting requirement of

fund balances for financial statement purposes since fund balances has a direct influence on state

funding and it is the intention of the Board of Trustees to clarify how fund balances will be

reported. The Board has done a good job of that ever since then.

There are five different categories within the fund balance commitments and they are:

1. Nonspendable Fund Balances – which is helpful because it is regarded as

cash, but it is not cash, it is net current assets. So there is inventory, prepaid

assets and liabilities that offset that. An example of a nonspendable fund

balance is an inventory item, that can’t be spent;

2. Restricted Fund Balances – Legal obligation that the Board has and an

example of that would be a bond obligation, grant match obligation, or

settlement of a lawsuit;

3. Committed Fund Balance – Balances that are imposed by a formal action

taken by the Board of Trustees. Once the Board of Trustees has taken formal

action, the assets cannot be used for other purposes unless the Board of Trustees

removes or changes the specified used by taking the same action it employed

previously to commit those balances.;

4. Assigned Fund Balance – Administration would assign the fund balance and

it is a lot weaker commitment than the one above it;

5. Unassigned Fund Balance – Whatever isn’t listed above.

Steve Core stated that he has got to talk about the reserves of $8 million, 15% is $6 million, so the

District is $2 million over on the reserve, when does the State of Wyoming take that from the

District and can the Board commit those funds in a committed fund balance to protect “ourselves”

and not lose any of that money. Brandjord responded that that is a good question, and to clarify

that $8 million; first because the District has a Pre-1977 reserve that is not subject; Core interrupted

and stated that the $1.2 million is in that number; which Brandjord responded that the Pre-1977

number is $2.321 million. Core then stated that the District is sitting at $5.9 million, which

Brandjord responded in the affirmative, but the commitments the State includes them in the fund

balances because it is imposed by the Board and can be removed by the Board and it is still the

fund balance.

19

Core stated then that the State cannot take the Pre-1977 dollars and Core understands that, but

where are “we” at with the reserves and non-Pre-1995 that the District can lose to the State; which

Brandjord responded that the District is under at the end of this fiscal year. Core then commented

that the District is under the 15% of the $39 million, which Brandjord responded in the affirmative

and not by a big amount, but it is a tricky game and balancing act as the District wanted to get as

close as possible, but the District didn’t want to exceed it.

Core asked if the State can come and take that Pre-1977 money, which Brandjord responded that

“they” have done it, but not to “us”, but did it to one of our neighbors to the North. Core then

asked what is the District’s recourse? Brandjord responded that he is not aware of anything that

the District would have as a recourse.

Superintendent Little-Kaumo stated that the recourse would be to go to court.

Core stated then getting back to his original question, if “we” take the $1.2 million of pre-1977

dollars and commit it to whatever, is that considered untouchable at that point because the Board

has committed it or can the State still touch it? Brandjord responded that the State could still touch

it. Core then commented then that the District has to spend it or “we” are going to lose it, which

Brandjord responded in the affirmative. Brandjord stated that on one hand that is one of the reasons

that “we” wanted to do the bus transactions because it gives the District a year instead of a month

or two. Core stated but the District is going to get that money back so “we” are still going to have

that problem next year, which Brandjord stated that that is why “we” wanted to propose some fund

balance commitments and that is a good question and that is what a lot of this planning was as

“we” didn’t want to try and do this in six weeks at the end of the last fiscal year and “we” wanted

a full year to be able to put that to the best use for the students in the District. Brandjord stated

that he will get into the commitments that Brandjord would like to recommend on items such as

curriculum adoption and those types of things that have been deferred and deferred, so the District

is in a good position.

Core commented that the committed things that Brandjord is going to propose tonight are in this

budget, which Brandjord responded in the affirmative. Core then asked where would he find them,

which Brandjord stated that part of those, like the $350,000 that is the reserve for insurance and

rate stabilization is listed on the General Fund and some of the other ones are going to be discussed

are actually in the operating budget as “we” have backfilled some areas that those amounts would

be used in. There would still be a restriction as to their use.

Core stated then just for saving time here, if Core understands Brandjord right, if the Board

approves this budget tonight; the Board can change those commitments as individual items, which

Brandjord responded in the affirmative. Core would recommend that he would personally like to

see a breakout of what those committed dollars are and where they are going too before the August

meeting. Brandjord stated that those numbers are on an upcoming slide. Core stated that he didn’t

want to waste a bunch of time tonight because Core thinks that “we’ve” got to get to approving

this budget, but Core wants to make sure that the committed funds can be changed, which

Brandjord responded “right”. Brandjord stated just like “we” can with an appropriation as it is the

same process, it is just at a higher level. The nice thing about commitments are that they can be

carried forward from year to year, where an appropriation lapses at the end of the year.

20

Fund Balance Commitments

Recommendations for commitments of General Fund balance to save for planned major initiatives

in this budget and future years ahead:

Science K-12 Curriculum Adoption: the State finally came out with the Science Standards

and it has been deferred for years so the recommendation is for K-12 curriculum adoption

of $650,000; there is already $150,000 in the curriculum budget and $800,000 is a

reasonable estimate at this point going forward with the Science;

Technology upgrades to support curriculum adoption, the new assessments that are coming

out and instruction: $250,000; in consulting with the Technology Director, the District

needs to upgrade the wireless access, some more devices need to be purchased as the

Chromebooks have been working really well as well as the management for those;

Health Insurance Rate Stabilization: $350,000; this has been gone over several times and

the volatility of the State premium fluctuations that the District gets reimbursed on has

been all over the place, so this has been a nice thing to have in case “we” do have a shock

of a premium rate increase;

Building Opening & Improvements: $300,000 (less $98,471 currently encumbered for the

Wilson reopening);

Bus purchases: $300,000; the District bought seven buses this year and will buy between

four to seven buses every year. While the District is waiting to see what is going on with

EA125 and the recalibration of the funding model, it is imperative for the safety of the

students to have good buses and “we” may need to have a reserve for buses should the

Legislature strip that funding out permanently;

FYE2017 Encumbrances: $14,193 (Greenhouse match);

Total ending fund balances will be maintained at a maximum amount allowable to prepare

for potential cuts from model recalibration and the upcoming Legislative budget session

that will affect FYE2019 and beyond.

Mark Sanders asked when Brandjord says $650,000 to adopt the curriculum, what is the District

buying, is that positions? Brandjord responded that it would be non-salary purchases and training

for professional development and either Superintendent Little-Kaumo or Assistant Superintendent

Christensen could get a lot more depth in that, but it is not just textbooks, it is the technology that

comes with it.

Superintendent Little-Kaumo stated that Science is one of the more pricey ones because of the

technology that goes with it such as the microscopes and those kinds of things. Typically a reading,

math or science adoption in this District with the associated professional development to train the

teachers in the new curriculum materials is about $1 million. It sounds like a big number, but it

just costs a lot. One of the things that “we” want to do and Superintendent Little-Kaumo really

appreciates Steve Core’s questions, because with the reimbursements coming back in, that is going

to put the District in the position next year where the 15% is going to be skewed and it is not going

to be reduced at the amount the guarantee will be, but yet the District is going to get those

reimbursables back. So if the District doesn’t spend it on something that is important for the

District to do and try to continue on with education, then the District is going to be left with trying

to figure out what to do. Because with the District’s regular budget, “we” want to have at least

1% of that left at the end of the year, this is a budget and “you” just don’t know exactly what the

21

utilities are going to be and that kind of thing, so that is another $400,000 out of $40 million that

“you” need to worry about. So these are just recommendations of ways in which “we” can use

that $1 million dollars, so to speak, that “we” know the District is going to be needing to keep up

on important things that the District needs to do. That health stabilization was a wonderful idea

because the rates go from a 14% increase to a 0% increase or whatever with the guarantee, so that

has been very volatile. So these are really just outlines and some of them like the building

improvements, remember that that $300,000, with $98,000 just being encumbered for Wilson, so

there is still some of that left and Brandjord’s discussion on the bus purchases is really important

as the District really doesn’t know where the Legislature is going to go with that. The greenhouse,

remember the Board matched that as it was a BOCES grant, so that is in the budget. But if the

Board wants “us” to do something different with it, like Superintendent Little-Kaumo said, the

Board can change it at any time, but just to move forward with this budget, Superintendent Little-

Kaumo would love the Board’s ideas of what the Board would want to do as these are just “our”

recommendations for the Board’s consideration, but “we” can certainly do something different.

Core commented, let me ask you this, if the Board came up with something and in Core’s head it

is saying technology, if “we” came up and said alright “we” want to spend $1 million on

technology, “you” could come up with something like that. Core thinks that “we” are a little bit

behind the eight ball on technology in Core’s opinion. Superintendent Little-Kaumo stated that

“we” delayed purchases on that earlier on and “we” are behind and that is absolutely true. What

the Board could do is that the Board would have to reconfigure some of these to come up with that

amount.

Core stated that all he is saying is that the District is going to get $1.3 million back on school

buses; which both Superintendent Little-Kaumo and Brandjord responded in the affirmative, “we”

are going to get that back and “we” know that it is going to come back. Brandjord responded that

it will come back during this next year. Core went on to state that “we” are already sitting at the

15%, plus there is the $1.2 million Pre-1977 dollars; Core thinks that it is something that needs to

be looked at. Superintendent Little-Kaumo responded that anything that benefits the education of

our students, which Core responded that he would rather do that than give it back. Superintendent

Little-Kaumo stated “ya”.

Brandjord wanted to interject that “we” did consult with the Technology Director towards the end

of last year, the District pulled some things out of last year’s budget that the Technology Director

anticipated and there was a budget amendment with that as well and there were some technology

infrastructures purchased.

JR Williams, Network Administrator, commented that there was the firewall and nimble storage

purchased. Brandjord stated a bunch of Chromebooks were also purchased. “We” looked at these

commitments of what would “we’ need to faithfully implement this curriculum and the

Technology Director is pretty comfortable with this number at this point. “We” can go into more

detail on this area as well. Core stated that the Board could always make it bigger; just as long as

it is not a reoccurring cost.

Brandjord commented that what is exciting about this budget is that Brandjord doubts that there

are that many district in the State that are in this position. Core commented that there are some

22

district’s tonight that aren’t having fun. Brandjord stated that this is an exciting place to be in and

thinks that it is really important for “us” to take a long view of where “we” are headed with this

because “we” have to anticipate what is going to happen in 2019 and 2020 and there is a great deal

of uncertainty about what is going to happen in Cheyenne, Wyoming, but the District does have

resources and “we” can benefit the students of this District a great deal over this next year. This

is a tribute to the whole organization.

Brandjord stated that the Board can adopt the budget tonight with these commitments, move

forward and finesse them as “we” go too.

Special Revenue Funds

Revenues:

Local Sources $661,340

o Includes BOCES and other grantor agencies with Tesoro being a big part of this;

State Sources $199,891

o This amount went down quite a bit because it no longer includes Bridges Summer

School and After School programs and Instructional Facilitators, these are now

inside the Block Grant;

Federal Sources $1,895,348

o Includes Consolidated Grant, Title programs, VIB programs and Perkins

Vocational grants.

The caveat that the District has every year is that the grant timelines do not necessarily coincide

with the budget calendar, more grants are currently in the application and approval stage, and final

amounts are not yet available.

Food Service Funds

There is a 10% reduction from the amount budgeted for the prior fiscal year out of the subsidy for

the Food Service Fund and it is now down to $236,000. Core stated that this amount was confusing

to him as he had gotten one book that tells him one number and has another book that tells him a

different number, and that different number is what is shown on the graph right there. Brandjord

stated that that was his mistake, which both Brandjord and Core commented that it should be

$236,000 and $260,000 was what was done last year. Brandjord stated that the amount came down

$26,000.

Core commented that he was ready to battle the food service thing and then when Core saw two

different numbers, Core was like whoa wait a minute. Brandjord stated that that was his mistake

and Brandjord apologizes as it should be $236,000.

The chart below shows the amount of subsidies that Nutrition Services has received over the years.

23

Pupil Activity Funds

This is a fund that accounts for student activity programs that have student participation in the

activity, student and parent involvement in fund raising and student involvement in the

management of the programs. There are approximately 130 individual activities in the fund. The

fundraising has gone up and the District has done better with the fundraising this year.

Major Maintenance Fund

State facilities funding for District major maintenance projects, based on allowable District

building square footage and ADM.

Beginning fund balance: $2,556,860

Revenues: $1,843,239

Expenditures: $4,400,009

Everything is budgeted in this account, just so that the District can be reactive if necessary.

Brandjord doesn’t need to warn the Board on this, but this is the same revenue source as Capital

Construction and it is in peril as the coal lease bonuses do not look good going forward.

Capital Projects Fund

Funding from State Facilities Division (SFD), bond proceeds and recreation mill for major District

projects.

Beginning fund balance: $736,428

Revenues: $5,440,625

o School Facilities Division: $5,301,310

o Transfers from recreation mill proceeds: $139,315

Major Projects: Lincoln and Wilson renovations

Debt Service Fund

Legal debt margin is $84,153,187 prior year’s margin was $85,102,523. This amount went down

because the assessed valuation went down.

24

District assessed valuation: $904,831,874

General Obligation Building Bonds, Series 2013, authorized by District voters on November 6th,

2012. Bonds issues on March 1st, 2013 for a principal amount of $11,475,000. This is kind of

exciting as the District is past the mid-way point. FYE2018 is year 5 of 8 for the issue. The final

bonds mature in 2021.

FYE2017 debt service requirement: $1,764,900

Remaining debt principal: $6,330,000

Mill levy for FYE2018: 1.797 and this was an original error with the books that

went out and what was on Board Docs, as it was the prior year that was in there and

Brandjord apologizes.

Steve Core asked Brandjord if there is a double edged sword on paying the principal of the debt

of the bonds off early, which Brandjord responded that the District can’t do it. Brandjord stated

that there is no call feature in these bonds and it is different than like if Brandjord wanted to pay

off his mortgage early, you can do that; but in a bond, since you are selling the bonds to individuals;

Core interrupted and stated that the bonds were sold as eight year bonds and the bond holders

stated that they want the bonds for eight years. Brandjord stated that it was such a short issue, the

District didn’t build a call feature in because if a call feature is built in, the bonds aren’t as attractive

and “you” don’t get as much back for them. If it was a 30 year bond, “you” want a call feature.

The other factor that was analyzed before going ahead with the bonds was that the bond markets

were at a historical low and the average interest rates on these bonds were 1.47% and “you” can’t

get much lower. So a call feature that “we” would want to have is 4% to 6%, “we” would want to

exercise that option if the interest rates were to go down. So there really wasn’t many reasons to

have a call feature in there. Core was thinking that if the District could invest money, “we” could

invest it into the bond debt and lower the taxes, everybody wins that way, but “we” can’t do that.

Brandjord commented that that is a good question and it is a common thought of let’s just pay it

off and the District has done that in the past and have done bond refunding on the high school.

Core stated that he remembered that. Brandjord thought that that was done a little over 10 years

ago and in that one there was actually some wiggle room where the District was able to give some

benefit to the taxpayers, but on this one the interest rate was so good and such a short issue that

the District didn’t put a call feature in.

Below is a chart that shows the County and District Valuation History and if a person would look

back a few years, the trend was trending downwards, but it looks like it is stabilizing somewhat.

The District is the lower blue column and the County is the higher one. The District is down

roughly 2.5% this year on the valuations, so it is better than it has been. The original projections

were for 8%.

25

So this year’s mill levy is the following:

General Obligation Building Bonds, Series 2013

o Principal levy: 1.531 mills

o Interest levy: 0.266 mills

o Total mill levy for FYE2018: 1.797 mills, which is up from the 1.673 mills

from last year

Increase from prior year due to decreased assessed valuation and

planned decrease in redemption accounts on the principal and

interest and there are other ad valorem taxes that go in there that are

pretty unpredictable, like car taxes and railroad taxes and those

fluctuate a little bit.

o FYE2017 mill levy: 1.673 mills

o FYE2016 mill levy: 1.786 mills

o FYE2015 mill levy: 1.813 mills

When the District went to 1.673, the amount in the redemption accounts were $470,000 which is

getting kind of high and that means that the District is assessing a higher mill levy on the taxpayers

than the District needs to, so that brought the account down to $130,000. The 1.797 mills going

forward will hopefully be about static. If the District gets to the end of an issue and there is money

in those redemption accounts, it can be the District’s but it has to be used for the purpose of what

the bonds were issued for. Brandjord thinks that the District has an obligation to the taxpayers to

keep that mill levy as low as possible and not try and build that up. So the mill levy is a little bit

higher than the assessed valuation decrease would warrant in those redemption accounts.

Below is a chart that shows the mill levy history with the 1.797 being pretty consistent for the last

several years.

26

The mill levies that will be considered tonight are:

25 mill District mandatory levy, $22,620,797, a decrease of 8.18%;

6 mill County mandatory levy, $4,406,778, a decrease of 22.40%;

o Allocated between Sweetwater No. 1, Sweetwater No.2 and Carbon #1

(Bairoil) based on relative ADM – Sweetwater No. 2 represents 31.96% of

total County ADM down from 32.47% in the previous year. The current

number is the latest estimate from the Wyoming Department of Education

and may still change slightly.

Sweetwater BOCES voluntary levy;

o .5 mill requested: $452,516

BOCES Region V V=voluntary levy;

o .2 mill requested: $180,966

Proposed Recreation Board voluntary levy;

o Up to 1.0 mill, $904,832, allowed by W.S. 18-9-201.

Brandjord would like to thank the Board and the administration and the whole organization

because this was a huge effort this year and Brandjord thinks that “we” came up with a pretty nice

budget proposal.

Chairman Roosa stated that there needed to be a motion to approve the budget resolution,

appropriation and levy sheet on page 1 that includes 1.797 mills for debt service, a 0.2 mill

requested by BOCES Region V, including C Bar V and Roosevelt Learning Center locations, a

0.5 mill requested for Sweetwater BOCES and up to 1.0 mill for the Recreation Board.

Steve Core stated that he would make a motion that “we” approve the Region V Board levy at

.112.

Chairman Roosa stated that she thinks that the Board needs to make a motion to approve and then

the Board can amend, which Steve Core stated that “you” can’t approve the voluntary levy as

“you” have to approve those individually and then “you” approve the budget, that is Core’s

understanding and that is how the Board have always done it. Because if we approve the

27

resolution, the Board is approving the .2 and the .5 and the 1.0 that are voluntary, correct?

Chairman Roosa stated that it was her understanding that “you” would make an amendment to the

resolution to the level that the Board would want to fund it. Core stated that he thought the reason

that the agenda is set up the way that it is, is that the Board just heard the open hearing and then

the Board is going to vote on the Region V Board of Cooperative Education Services, the

Sweetwater BOCES, the mill levy and then the overall budget and that is Core’s understanding of

how the Board does this. If the Board approves the overall budget, then the Board has to go

through amendments which doesn’t make a lot of sense when the Board can do that.

Chairman Roosa stated then alright Mr. Core thank you for that clarification.

9.05 Consider Approval of Region V Board of Cooperative Education Services

“We” will consider approval at this point for Region V Board of Cooperative Education Services

mill of .112 and “they” have requested .2 mills. Do “we” have a motion to consider the approval

of the Region V BOCES mill levy?

Steve Core moved to approve .112, which is a revenue neutral reduction.

Chairman Roosa stated that there is a motion for a reduction from the .2 requested to the 0.112,

seconded by Mark Sanders.

Chairman Roosa asked if this was a revenue neutral amount at .112; which Rudoff responded in

the affirmative. Chairman Roosa then went on to state that the amount would be, Steve Core stated

that the amount is $101,139. Chairman Roosa stated then that that is what the District did last

year.

Chairman Roosa commented that sitting on that Region V BOCES Board, Chairman Roosa would

like to encourage “our” Board; and Chairman Roosa knows that everybody is taking a cut but the

District is servicing children that have special needs outside of “our” District. They have requested

a .2 mill, but by considering taking them to revenue neutral, it does affect the students that can be

serviced and this District does send them a lot of students.

Ann Rudoff asked how many of the District students are there; which Chairman Roosa stated that

the Region V BOCES Director reported to the Board last month of what the District had and also

gave the Board all of the documents that the District has been requesting for years, but Chairman

Roosa doesn’t have those numbers with her. Chairman Roosa does know that Roosevelt Learning

Center is pretty full with the District’s students. This District gets first treatment because the

District funds at the mill levy versus just sending them and paying for them individually.

Chairman Roosa stated that the other thing that is important to consider with the Sweetwater

BOCES is that they do not receive any state funding or federal funding, so it is all done through

the local boards.

28

Chairman Roosa stated that there is a motion and a second to fund the Sweetwater BOCES at .112,

Steve Core and Mark Sanders voting “Aye” with Brenda Roosa and Ann Rudoff and Robin Steiss

voting “Nay”.

Corina Tynsky stated that she is confused as Chairman Roosa stated to approve the Sweetwater

BOCES at .112, which Steve Core interrupted stating that that is his motion and it is for revenue

neutral.

Steve Core stated that the reason for his motion is: 1) that it is revenue neutral and 2) if the Board

goes to .20 the Board would be raising the taxes on the property for the people in this community

and Core is not in favor of that and 3) “we” all took hits and to give them more money while “we”

take hits and everybody else takes hits because the assessed valuation is down, Core doesn’t think

that it is fair. Core understands that they do great things for the District kids, but Core thinks the

school district does great things for “our” kids and “we” are taking less revenue.

Ann Rudoff stated that it is not the Sweetwater BOCES, this is the Region V BOCES.

Chairman Roosa stated that BOCES services the kids that are placed in other facilities.

Corina Tynsky stated that she was confused on Sweetwater BOCES versus Region V BOCES.

Ann Rudoff stated that this one right now is the Region V BOCES.

Corina Tynsky stated then that she is an “Aye”.

Chairman Roosa stated then by that there is three “Ayes” and three “Nays”. Motion failed.

Chairman Roosa then asked if there was a motion to reconsider a different amount for Region V

BOCES, as “they” have requested .2 and Steve Core proposed .112 and that motion has failed, do

“we” have another motion to approve funding for Region V BOCES.

Robin Steiss asked if “we” could go somewhere in between that, which Steve Core responded that

he would not support it, which Steiss responded that that is okay. Core then responded that he is

only one vote.

Ann Rudoff commented that she agrees that everyone needs to take less and like what Mark

Sanders and Rudoff was saying that “we” know that sitting on the Sweetwater BOCES Board

“we’re” taking cuts; but Rudoff agrees with Steiss that maybe somewhere in the middle. Rudoff

is not a numbers person as Rudoff is liberal arts and not math.

Steve Core commented then to maybe help the Board a little bit, Core took it upon himself and

thinking that the Board might go with this .20; if the Board goes with the .20 and the bond

indebtedness is increased in the property taxes, the Board is going to raise the property taxes by

about .32 in “our” District and that includes all of us and Core does not think that this District

should be raising taxes. Core understands the bond indebtedness because it is required, but the

29

Board has a say in this tax and Core thinks that the Board should make it revenue neutral and not

raise taxes.

Chairman Roosa stated that she thinks that the Board is supporting students and the Board needs

to support the Region V BOCES. The Board doesn’t have to go with a .20; but maybe the Board

could go with something in between there, like .15 or .16, just something to get “them” so that

they are funded and they are supporting the kids from “our” District in those three schools as well.

Steve Core commented then, okay I’ll work with you, I’ll make a motion that the Board approves

a .113 mill.

Robin Steiss commented that she thinks that she can live with that as long as the Board can give

Region V BOCES a little bit more. Chairman Roosa asked if that was a second to the motion,

which Steiss commented that that was a second.

Chairman Roosa stated that there is a motion for a .113 mill for BOCES Region V and a second,

Corina Tynsky, Brenda Roosa, Ann Rudoff, Mark Sanders and Robin Steiss voted “Aye” with

Steve Core voting “Nay”. Motion carried.

9.06 Consider Approval of Sweetwater Board of Cooperative Education Services

Robin Steiss moved, seconded by Corina Tynsky to approve the .5 mill for the Sweetwater Board

of Cooperative Education Services. Motion carried unanimously.

9.07 Consider Approval of Rec Mill Levy Budget for FY2018

Ann Rudoff moved, seconded by Steve Core to approve the Rec Mill levy of 1.0 mill as presented.

Ann Rudoff stated that the only discussion that she would say is that this goes right back to “our”

community and “we” can show that to “our” constituents.

Steve Core commented that “we” have done some good things with it.

Chairman Roosa stated that “we” have and it is also a tax that “we” pass on to “our” community

as well.

Motion carried unanimously.

9.08 Consider Approval of District 2017-2018 Budget

Corina Tynsky moved, seconded by Mark Sanders to consider the adoption of the 2017-2018

budget.

Chairman Roosa thanked Chris Dean and Pete Brandjord for the budget booklet as it was easy to

read and Chairman Roosa knows that the District as a whole worked with the committee to get to

where we are today, so thank you so much.

30

Motion carried unanimously.

10. BOARD AND SUPERINTENDENT COMMENTS

10.01 Superintendent and Board Comments

Robin Steiss: Steiss commented that she hopes that everyone is enjoying the summer and getting

relaxed because it is pretty much time to come back again, it is hard to believe. Steiss is hoping

that everyone is relaxing a bit.

Mark Sanders: Sanders commented the same from me.

Ann Rudoff: Ditto.

Corina Tysnky: Tynsky commented that communication to her is very important and especially

when it involves her kids. Tynsky’ s girls go to Jackson Elementary School and Tynsky received

a letter from the new principal and felt like it was the perfect timing of a month before school

started. It described who she was, where she came from, her education, how long she has been in

the District and what she plans on doing at Jackson and that she is really excited to be there. As a

parent, it was really cool to be able to receive that, as all of those unknowns out there about who

is going to be there and what is going to happen, and to have that letter and to have her background

was perfect timing. So Tynsky applauds her for doing this and is thankful that it is going in the

right direction.

Brenda Roosa: Roosa stated that she is thankful for having a supportive staff and as a Board we

can learn to work together as a team and support one another. I don’t like to be uncomfortable up

here and I know that I am not perfect at everything. While working together and going through

these things and talking about the Boards that the Board members serve on; it is important to the

Board member to not be criticized and we need to be working with a unity in mind as it is

important, so Steve, I would appreciate that in the future.

Steve Core: I will take that in to consideration.

Superintendent Little-Kaumo: Superintendent Little-Kaumo is again very excited that “we” are

almost ready for a new school year. A lot of compliments to the Central Staff and everybody who

has worked on the budget that was really started during the Legislative session and it has come out

pretty positive and the fact that “we” try to forecast ahead and plan for those other changes that

“we” know are going to come, even though they are unknown at the point, is really important.

Chris Dean, Pete Brandjord and the entire business team, human resources, Assistant

Superintendent Christensen and everybody has been working hard, so Superintendent Little-

Kaumo appreciates all of “your” efforts on the budget. This District is in a lot better position than

a lot of people. Thank you.

31

11. EXECUTIVE SESSION

11.01 Personnel

Chairman Roosa asked to entertain a motion to go into Executive Session to discuss personnel.

Ann Rudoff moved, seconded by Corina Tysnky to adjourn into Executive Session at 8:21PM.

Motion carried unanimously.

Ann Rudoff moved, seconded by Corina Tynsky to come out of Executive Session at 8:40PM.

Motion carried unanimously.

12. ADJOURNMENT

12.01 Adjourn

Meeting adjourned by acclamation.

Brenda Roosa, Chairman _______________________________

Robin Steiss, Clerk _______________________________