 The agency here to help us understand your recommendations for the Budget Adjustment Act and I have three of them here. I'm going to give it to you to decide who goes first. Looks like Bill is the chief. Thank you. Tag, you're it. Good afternoon everyone. Thank you. Good afternoon. So I'm looking at this device and I'm operating on the assumption that if I click on the hyperlink underneath my name, it'll bring up the BAA. Yeah, so you're hoping. Thank you. Thank you, Henry. The page three. Page three? I was looking for a spreadsheet. Was that the other one? Yeah, it was the other one. It's not a spreadsheet. The other one is a memory. Yes. The BAA. Okay. We won't be able to get up there anyway. We won't. I don't know if we'll be able to even get out the numbers. The reversions however, at least on the table that I asked for on page three of the draft. Would we like to do that out of order? And so I would invite Brad to talk about that and then I would do the BAA. Would that work for me? If we're looking at the same document, sure. I don't know, let's go up there and see. I'm actually going to have you around this because you're going to make the entry course. Okay. Is it on three? There. Those are the ones that were highlighted for us. I just posted a worksheet and I'm not sure if that's what you were looking for. If you want your spreadsheet, if you go back to the hyperlinks under your name, you may need to just refresh the page. I'm sorry, technology. How do I use this device? Usually we ask if the person wants to drive or not. It's hard to be able to get the option. No, please. Apologize for the delays. We can go out of order and just have Brad do the talk about the reversions and then it will come up. Let's do that. Is that okay with you, Brad? Maybe you can just come to the chair right now. Yep, for the record, Brad James, Agency of Education. That's right there for me. This is where we are, right? Yes, this page. Okay. So, the big number, educational grants, that 5.7 million number right there. A lot of that came from the last year of the clawback for healthcare. If you recall, that was a two-year process. The first year we took back, according to the legislature, we took back 65%. The second year we took back 35%. The total was right around $13 million, I think just under, that we came back. So, a lot of that consists of that clawback. Let's see, it's critical in that one. Can you just remind us on the clawback? I remember that was quite a moment of excitement. Yes, it was. Sure, what that was about, and I don't remember the number of the bill off the top of my head, which bill it was in, but that was designed towards the end of the legislative year to work towards saying that this is what we think teachers and other school staff, employees' healthcare benefits should be, we think you should be getting there. This was for FY19. This happened in FY18 and FY19. So, to pass in 2017, I guess. And the idea was that if people did what was presumed to be the right thing, then they would save this money. It happened after the fact, after budgets were passed. It happened at the end of the session, budgets were passed until meeting such. So, that first year when we took back roughly $8.5 million, it was out of people's budgets because they had not planned for it. So, we took that money out of the budget because they had passed. So, what happened was, I did it, but at your direction. Let's see if I can get out of this somehow. So, what happened was when I was calculating in FY18 how much money the school districts were to receive based on their budgets and their revenues and such, what I did then was I knew how much each district was supposed to be quote unquote saving, and so I pulled that money back from each one. And that's how they get half a million that first year. The second year, business managers aren't stupid, as you all know. Business managers are not dumb. So, I'm sure they built that additional $4.5 million, that 35%, a lot of it into their budgets. Some did save it. Some of them truly did. Their health care plans were at that point. So, I think what we saw that was a bit of an inflated education spending number because of that, but we've still pulled back over $4.5 million. So, that's roughly, that's a large part of what's in there. So, the rest of it, we used, there was a carry forward for obligations and such, but that's the amount of money that is going back. Okay. You know, I think that year we also overestimated a little bit what we're going to, we appropriated a little bit too much based on estimations. Because again, as you know, the amount that it ends up getting appropriate for education spending and the appropriations bill is based on estimates of the people's budgets, especially right now. And in about two or three weeks, we'll start getting information in from board approved budgets, and we'll start being, and I'll be working with Ways and Means at that point, and we will be getting a better idea of what the demand of the education fund is going to be. And then that will start bringing things together. That's what they'll start looking to change in the property yields and the income yields and the non-resonational, or non-resonational protection. So, I kind of went over that quickly. Does that make sense to people? Okay. We're at about 2 million of that. We're at about 2 million of that. The rest of it. I'm sorry. Kathy's lying again. Thank you, Kathy. Please be honest. I'm sorry. Kathy, what are you saying? That about 2 million of that is Act 46. That's right. There was money for Act 46. I knew there was something I was missing. Thank you. And I was looking at the wrong page. The Act 46 had incentive, had grants to pay to help with merger costs and such. We overestimated at that point. So about 2 million dollars I was going back. We kept about $300,000, I believe, going forward to kind of finish up in a little pieces out of that. But that's what we're going to chuck that to. Can I just repeat what you said and make sure I got it right? The thing about 2 million of that is that you had overestimated the amount of incentives that would be granted to unifying districts. And this represents correcting that. Yeah. Okay. And so that changes a little bit about what I said, that 5.6. That there has to be 3.6 million to take out that too. Yeah. And I'm saying we pulled back 4.5 million. So we must have misaligned what we were estimating maybe going on the wrong side. Okay. Do you want to go in any particular order? I thought I'd do the biggest one first. Yeah, that was about the thing. Okay. So special education formula. We had a fairly sizable balance on the end of that one, but that's because we have a tail with our reimbursement system. The last information that we pay on that comes to us in mid-September after the fiscal year is closed. And so we had a tail of, we had roughly $14 million left over. We kept most of that to pay off the tail, and we reverted that $87,000 there. I'm sorry. What do you mean by the tail? The tail, the tail when, yeah, it's a funny one, I'm not sure. I understand conceptually, but in terms of discussing, I may not do very well here. So, Kathy, you feel free to jump in if you want to, but let me try that first. Just let me try. So, when we appropriate money, we're appropriate for a fiscal year. So we're paying all that money on the fiscal year. So what we're really appropriating is the way we get information is we get information for, if you think about it in quarters, quarters two, three, and four, or one, two, and three, and then quarter four, we find out about after the fiscal year is over. And so, that money needs to be appropriated and brought forward. So we carried the money forward that we had from the prior year because we kind of do it that way. And the idea as we move forward towards special education census block grant is there's still going to be that tail the last year when we go from the reimbursement model in FY22, fiscal year 22, to the census block grant model. There's still going to be that tail. So we want to keep that money moving forward so that we can pay off that tail without having to appropriate more money. So if we carried it forward, we'd have to appropriate it. The reason we don't want to appropriate more money is because then that gets into the federal requirements of maintenance of effort. So whatever you appropriate is where you have to keep that number lower. That's a better place for us. That's what we're going to try to do. No, that's it. I was just going to, I remember hearing testimony to that effect, I believe from Ellen Lee and Mark last year. I just didn't mention that, but thank you. Got to say the same thing. Yeah, and better than I would have. So thank you. This is a vague memory. Okay. State place students, again, the numbers are estimates. We just ended up just not spending that money. So giving it back to the goodness of our hearts. Back at the Ed Fund. Transportation, we're close. Not sure why I was warning $9.14. That's awful, we were close. That's very close. Something happened. I remember there was something. I said, what? It was all okay. Except for that 14 cents. I hate panties when it comes to this stuff. So the 5.6 million, is that an unexpectedly large number? Was it kind of like normal? I think that's a little bit larger than normal. Do you know? Because of the, Well, you said it was made up of two. It varies. It's made up of two unique things. That will occur in the future, the Clawback and the Act 46. Right. But usually it's not uncommon to have to be a million or $2 million off. Usually we try to be on the high side a little bit so that we can give the money back as opposed to being low and having to come and ask you for more money at this point. So we do try to overestimate, not terribly, but by a little bit. And so the Clawback portion of that, that's going back as essentially the Clawback was too large before, too much was, No, no, no, no, no. This is, no, this was, the idea behind the Clawback was that school districts were going to save, again, we're going to save that $13 million by doing their healthcare differently. Right. Whether that happened or not, I don't know. I can tell you it really did. And the Clawback was spread over two years. And it was spread over two years. Okay. But if you take it all as one year, what was supposed to happen was, they were supposed to be able to, by being allowed to renegotiate, they were supposed to be able to save $13 million. Right. And therefore, they wouldn't need that $13 million the state was just taking. Right. As the state took it and put it in the end fund. Yeah. It stayed in the end fund. Right. It was appropriated. And we didn't pay it out. Right. So we're just returning it. Right. I see. And there was some issue that the language wasn't right. And they said there's, but I don't remember what that was. Mark Peralke can tell you about that piece. Yeah. But there was something about the language and we had to write new language to make sure that it came in the right way. And that was all beyond my scope of understanding. Okay. Okay. All right. Small schools grant is kind of the same thing. We, it's an estimate because we're not 100% sure of enrollments nor the final number that we're using for it. So we overestimate a little bit. So we're sending that back. 20,000. Not 20,000. Triple E, essential rate education. I, this one surprised me a little bit. I don't know why there's money left on the bottom line because it's formula driven. And I would have to go in and look and see. And I don't know. I, and I was talking to house appropriations about that. And I just, I just don't know what that is. So I can try to, I'm curious because I don't know why. So triple E is distinct from pre-K. Triple E is, Yes. Yes. It's special for pre-K. It's basically, if you think that way. When I say pre-K, well, that's not how I'm talking. I used to say triple E and pre-K to differentiate the two students. In pre-K, what I say is that I'm talking about general education students. So I should really be saying that instead of pre-K because pre-K is all of them. So I will try to make sure that I say it differently. This could be 20 years of changing what I've been doing, but I will try. It's like some of the school district names I don't know who they are anymore. Is that cool? So, so anyway, I'm not, I'm not sure why there's money there. I don't, I don't know. It's not a huge chunk of money, but I, you know, if somebody was short, they would certainly have been clamoring for it. So apparently, everybody else. Technical education. It's not here. Technical education is a lot of salary assistance and transportation. And we're estimating is what we're doing. And we usually try to do a kind of flat percentage estimate across the salary assistance. And we were a little bit high because you never know how many people are going to be asked for a certain type of assistance where they have that person on. So we were high and so that money's coming back. Flexible pathways is kind of a combination of where, well, let me read it to you. How it was put. Instead of me trying it. This money is partly due to the continued enforcement and monitoring of performance measures to ensure that reimbursement for program costs are only provided when students demonstrate the capacity to engage in secondary level learning. So now what our folks have been doing is they've been tightening, this is, I was going to say, screw it, that's not the right word. They've been tightening their parameters or their requirements and what these people are doing in order to get the money. If you're not really doing what you're supposed to be doing you're not getting the money, is what's happening. So it's getting some people's attention and so we've been pushing that cost down a little bit. Who's not getting the money? Yeah, that's what I was going to say. Generally speaking, this is the adult education provider. Yeah, there's a small school piece where they get it for some various things but it's very small. Most of it's going to the adult and providers. Adult education is in a whole different funding track. It's over. I think that's over in the general fund now. I think I moved a year or two ago. Yeah, so that's not in the end fund. Everything else is in the end fund, right? Yeah, you were talking flexible pathways. Was I? But you got it mixed up. I do that well. Okay, let me back up here a second. You know, but this was the year that they had them switched. This was the last year when they were at the end fund, I think. I think. You've not switched a couple of years. I think the language of what happened a couple of years ago started last year, I think. So I think we're still in the end fund on this one. I'll check on that one for you. Find out. Yeah, I like to sow confusion wherever I get on. So what fund does adult education come out in general? It is now. It was moved. It was moved. And I do think that just started last year was the first year. That was when we did the whole thing. Right. Things like shipping. Transfer, general funds, people with community high school outs. We took on sales tax. Sales tax, sales news tax. Increase the amount of people's meals, meals tax. There was a whole bunch of shifting around. I think that was part of it. And I think this is our second year right now. So I think that's what the confusion is here. But I will check. Thank you. Let's go back. Does that cover everything? Thank you pretty much. Questions? One thing I did say I would come back to you with. I tried my phone. I'm going to turn it on. I don't like phones. Especially cell phones. I told you I'd come back with better ADM numbers and equalized people numbers. We're not done. And I'll come into that. But the ADM number for this year currently is just about 86,300. Oh, I'm sorry, that's... Yes, that's right. About 86,300. Roughly. I think that will go up. And I'll explain that in a second. And then that leads to the equalized people calculation after the whole harmless of about 87,200. And rough numbers. So that's down about 402,304 from last year. The reason that things aren't done is because against some people we're still realizing that we screwed up in our submission as we talked about last time I was here. But also we found out that a lot of people forgot to put in their ELL suits. About 70 or 80 districts. And again I mentioned this to you I think last time I was in. We used to roll everything forward. We used to have that building. The system that we have, we're reaching into or they're reaching into our system from their student support so there's no rolling forward on our part. So apparently a lot of people forgot to roll forward their ELL students. So we're going to recalculate sometime next week and hopefully get everything finalized at that point. We're still in better shape than we were last year by far. Last year at this point we had maybe 60,000 equalized people. I hate to come in and talk to you guys. They forget things like the third grader. Oh they forgot everything last year. They forgot all their tuition students. Some people forgot all their tuition students. You operate K6 and you tuition 712 and you forget each other's students. So anyway we're doing better. So that's roughly where we are. The numbers should go up a little bit I think. I can't guarantee it but I think they'll go up a little bit from the numbers I just gave you. So of course the obvious question is if we implemented the weighting study right today, how many equalized people should we have? Same number. What? Same number. Equalized pupils is a zero sum game. Thank you. Equalized pupils is a zero sum game. It's what you're doing to shift who has them inside. That's what's happening. Because the equalized people calculation is based on the two year average ADM. And that number is not changing. It's the weighting factors. Even if you add new weighting factors it's still a zero sum game. You're not changing the total number of the state. You're just changing who has them. I've got that part. But if you have a student that was counted it was 1.22 and now it's counted as 3.14. I mean somebody else has counted less. Who counted below one? Well they're not counted. Precate but we don't care about them. It's all the equalization ratio. Exactly. It's that equalization ratio. In my world. That's right. Where you don't want to go. I now understand the equalization ratio when I say it all up. Exactly. But that's going to really... The equalization ratio is that two year average divided by the weight. And so you're keeping the same numerator but you're really increasing that denominator. So the ratio itself is going from about 93 to 94% probably down to I don't know I'm guessing here 86, 85%, 70% I don't know. But it's going to really drop. And so people's numbers are going to shift all around depending on where the new weights are. And at some point once we kind of figured out when you want to start talking we can play with that and see what would happen if you did certain things. I believe that's starting in the static. Okay. And is that why people are concerned about losing or gaining funding? Is that why? Because of the shifting around. Yeah. And again, that's one of the misconceptions that's rampant throughout the state with superintendents sometimes and most other people is we don't fund based on students. Most people think oh we're going to have more equalized pupils that are going to get more money. No. The funding comes from your budget whatever your voters have approved your total budget. And then you have school boards building an expenditure budget and a revenue budget when they come in they're equal to zero. And within that revenue budget are dedicated revenues such as federal money that has to be used for things in their category like transportation, special education, small schools, maybe you may have other sources of money like a surplus or fund raising or you might have tuition students coming in things that don't have to be raised by property taxes so those are what we call offsetting revenues. So when you subtract offsetting revenues from the total amount of money you need to get that's your education spending and that's what the state owes you. There's not a word there about pupils. I think it would be really helpful for you to actually come back and point in that and we like examples. I would be happy. I think it matters. I'll be happy to. Let me know when you want to do that. Thank you. You're welcome. So you can say that there's nothing that comes as a surprise. In this, no. I don't think so. Again, I think that number is a little bit high but there are reasons for that. So it goes back into the Ed Fund for a while and so what it's kind of doing is kind of coming to the bottom line of the Ed Fund and so if it will offset it will be an additional revenue to carry forward. So then the question comes, if we have money in the Ed Fund are we going to be applying that to tax rates? That's right. So this adds up to value 0.2, 0.3 million. I don't remember what I was talking about. I don't know what I was talking about. 8.2, 8.3 million, I don't remember what I was talking about. I have something like that. So again, that's roughly a penny on both tax rates. If you think of it that way, again we don't do homes of tax rates but that's the average tax rate. So 8 million is about a penny? About 8.3 million is a penny on both. Okay, thank you. And so if you want that split it's about 4 million on the homestead side and about 4.3 million on the and that's f of 20 numbers it will change. That's by 20 being the current year. Thank you. You're ready to write that? Sure. Alright, thank you. Want to try this again? Your documents are available. Alright, I'm not driving. I'll watch. Can you read that? Yeah. Can I? Is it up on the side? Yeah. I'm sorry. What? Can you see that? No, I'm good. Where are the top of page 2? Where are the top of page 2? Where are the top of page 2? For the record, Bill Bates, AOE. Good afternoon. How are you everyone? Good. I have a relatively easy conversation I think that the $59,000 that you're looking at here on the first line is made up of 2 numbers. There is and both of these are related to the moves. If you haven't heard, we moved from very city place over and buried to National Light. In a couple of moves, the first one was October-ish and the second one was November. So we're now all located in the old north building of the National Light campus. Is that a first light? It is, yes. If you haven't been over there I'd encourage you to come up with a really nice job with that property. There's 2 numbers that make up the $59,000. The first one is $26,000 and that is the fit up cost. So when we got ready to move into the new building we noticed that our legal team needed a more secure location and so what we did is we worked with the buildings and grounds in National Light to do some retrofit. The total cost was about $128,000 and what we've agreed to do is amortize that $128,000 over 5 years. So on an annual basis for the next 5 years it'll be $26,000 for the fit up cost and then the second component of that $59,000 is $33,000 and that is cost associated with the move. So when you take an agency the size of agency of Ed there's lots of costs associated with the move. So for example we've got an estimated cost of $5,000 for secure shreds. So we had an opportunity for old paper documents and secure shreds. We had new floor mats put down so that we wouldn't stain the carpet when we spill our coffee. And then another example of a cost that's in that line item is copier moves. We had multiple copiers and we had to pay the moving company to move those over. All in all $33,000 and then the other piece of the $59,000 is the fit up cost for a total of $59,000. Questions? More detail? Just to confirm this is all general fund money not education funds. Yes. And I took the tour and look at that. See I got two head notes. Brad would cry. Thank you very much. Could you have done it for Katie? I don't even know what to think. And the transcripts where they needed to go? The transcripts. Burlington College. You heard him mention the secure shred, right? Yeah. $38,000. Back in the truck. Yeah. You worked hard on that one. Rotland County Solid Ways Center. So hard. That's right. I kind of brought you in here for a small amount of money that's not from the end fund. So thank you for your time. No, not a problem. I enjoy spending time with the folks and have to come back over and have one on one. Good to know you better. Thank you. Thank you. Do you guys spill a lot of coffee? I didn't. You guys are great. She's leaving a crown to be your dad. Yes. Is that funny? I'm not joking. I'm just like wondering like why this money left me like a tech ad or a sponsored account. It's like why am I paying? You like it. Yeah. Thank you. Yeah. Yeah. No, no, no, I mean it was just like therapy kids that have gotten some passing. It's a matter of understanding. Yeah, you got a few thoughts. Yeah. Yeah. It seems like it's under the house. So there could be some information. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Just kind of a record filing. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. All right. We've got a little call here.