 Okay. Well, you all have received the quarterly report and Andrew sent some questions. Instead of going through the annual report, I mean, you've had it for a couple days, so I'm sure you've seen it. So what I'm going to do is just kind of take it by section and I'll go through the questions I know about. And then if you have other questions, you can pipe in. So on page one, the first section is the summary section. It starts off by saying that we anticipate having a deficit this year. Not shocking. We just came off a year where we had a $700,000 surplus. So even if we have a significant deficit, we'll be better heading into FY22 than we were heading into FY20. So I'm not worried about that. Andrew asked if I had a feel for how much of a deficit. I mean, that's really crystal ball, eight magic, eight ball type of thing right now, because we're so early. But if I were to throw a number at it, I'd say maybe it would be in the $200,000 deficit area. But even if it's that, we're half a million dollars better off going into FY22 than we were in FY20. So still in great shape. When I said that some of our COVID expenses might not be reimbursed or won't be reimbursed. That still goes back to my uncertainty about what's going on statewide and with the agency of education. I know that there's only X number of dollars and all the districts put in for their grants. None of us have gotten our approved grant applications back. So we don't know what's going on. We don't know if the amount of money that everybody put in for is within the amount that the state has available. If it is, then we could get it all. If it's not, we'll get proportional shares. So I'm just not sure what that looks like. And I will be honest and tell you, I'm not putting in for everything, meaning if there's, say there's a requisition to Amazon and there's 100 line items on there, and one is Lysol wipes. I'm just not chasing that because it's just too much to deal with because there has to be a separate federal procurement form done. I have to make sure I have clean requisition invoice and all that backup for whenever I have to submit for the reimbursement. But the big chunks for sure, we're still waiting on a big order of Chromebooks for well over 100,000. That whole thing is going to be submitted and hopefully we'll get it all back. But right now I just can't say that we're going to get all the COVID money that we have coming to us. But we'll get a better feel for that as time goes on. Let's see. I can read the rest of that. Then right before I start with on the revenue side, Andrew asked a question again about projection for the likely deficit. So back to what I said before, if I were guessing right now, maybe a couple hundred thousand. On the revenue side, yeah. Yeah. One thing too, and I realized I didn't put this in my questions, and you might not have a feel for this just yet. But when you are looking at areas, line items where they're, and I don't know how you break it out, whether they're accounts or how you view these line items in your system, but we're looking at them as programs. So when we're looking at deficits within programs, are you able to identify the extent that something is one time related to COVID-19 or some other reason compared to if something's more structural like the food situation that we've been in, where we know that we've been under funding, that program for a number of years? Yeah. The COVID expenses that I put in for are going to be a separate fund. So I see them by fund, but they also are broken out by function. And function is those categories you see, general education, special education. So I will be able to see as time goes on what's causing it. Right now, you'll see a big chunk when we get down to it. Facilities is where there's a big chunk of it. And the good news is a good chunk of that we will get and we should get 100% of it. The efficiency Vermont amount that was granted, our grant request, and Andrew LaRose did a great job putting together that grant application and he's doing a great job executing it. It's $199,950 and we're going to spend most of it and we'll get it all back. And that's going to show up as an over execution in facilities, but then we'll see on the revenue side that getting backfilled. And a lot of the materials that we're buying, we're putting in the facilities area. So most of the expenses for CRF are going to be in the facilities area. Although whenever we see that big chunk of computers, that will show up in, I think it's staff, yeah, staff support is the line where that's going to show up. So yeah, we will see those broken out as time goes by. And then on the revenue side, I have special ed intensive reimbursement will likely finish under budget. And Andrew asked a question about that. What I'm thinking about is, as an example, we have a lot of IAs that are funded with special ed dollars. Some of those IAs are now in the pod model, and they're doing 100% general ed work. And so when the time studies come out, and I have to realign that money, I have to move it out of special ed into general ed. And that means I won't be able to get as much reimbursement because we don't have the expenses. We will have the expenses in total, we just won't have them in special ed. They'll show up in general ed. And when that happens, the expense will be there, but we won't get the full reimbursement. And what I was wondering is, and you and Libby will be much more attuned to this, is Act 173, I know some elements of that were delayed, but I thought Act 173 was going to allow for more flexible use of special education dollars. And I was wondering if that helps at all in this case or not? No, not yet. And not next year either. Because with COVID, they pushed it again. So not only isn't it in effect for this year, it won't be in effect for next year. And if others don't know what that is, that basically changes the funding model so that we get an X number of dollars in special ed funding times the number of kids that we have. And so it'll be just kind of like a block grant. And how we use that money is going to be up to us. So that will provide a lot of extra flexibility. And it's something that we've been thinking about in our system so that we can maximize that. On the downside, we're assuming we're going to see less special ed reimbursement through that model. But we'll have to see. The good news is, well, kind of good news, bad news. The good news is, we don't have to worry about dealing with that even through budget development for FY22. The bad news is that it does provide extra flexibility that we won't be able to see until then too. But you will, during the budget cycle season, during the presentations, you will hear about this. We are planning for it now and thinking about our budget this year with, this is the main thing that we have in mind to create our internal system to make it stronger, to support more kids internally so that we don't have to turn to external factors. So this is like that one idea that Grant was just talking about, Andrew, you asked about, we are planning for now for two years down the line. And you'll hear a lot about this during budget season. So are there any other questions about just that summary paragraph that anybody has? Okay. All right. On the expenditure side, I'm just going to kind of cherry pick some of the line items. Under general education, you'll see one of the notes there is that grandparent intuition for Roxbury students is going to under execute by about 50,000. That's going to help toward the overall deficit. And what that's all about is just kids that have moved from Roxbury to a different town and now they're not, we don't have to pay tuition because they're residents of that school. We also had some transfers. I think at least one kiddo instead of going like full time general ed high school is now going tech. So it saves money here, but eventually it's going to hit us in that six semester average. We also, I talk about the fact that costs may be a little lower here because we have a title one vacancy that we haven't filled. That means though our revenue for title one will be down. It'll match expenses and revenues. In special education, right now it's kind of hard to say whether we're doing well or not because billings are a little behind and it's kind of like I said, a timing issue. And when we start seeing bills, one correction that says two vacant positions will provide some savings. We do have two vacant positions, but one of them is in general ed. Only one is in special ed. So there'll be a little bit of a savings there. But as I also mentioned, some of the costs for these IAs and potentially even some teachers might shift from special ed to general ed, depending on the work that we're having them do to get through this. Let's see what else. Guess I'll scroll down to staff support. This we will overspend by at least 100,000 whenever we knock on wood when we get those Chromebooks in, but then we will have additional revenues to cover that. Moving further down, my personal favorite business services. So I'm going to come in over budget. The reason why is because Joanne retired, I didn't want her to retire and then have somebody come in the next day and have to try to manage payroll without some overlap. So we did have an overlap that wasn't budgeted. Not a big deal, but definitely worth the cost to make sure that we have transition there. Buildings and grounds, that's where we're going to see a lot of COVID expenses. Right now, as of the end of the first quarter, there was already 217,000 in expenses. Probably about 80 or so was for the efficiency Vermont, which I know we're going to get all back. And then 130 maybe or so is for supplies and materials, plexiglass, things like that that we purchased. And hopefully we'll get a good chunk of that back, but probably not all of it. Transportation. We don't have special ed transportation, daily transportation running, which is in the contract. So I assume that we're going to see some savings there. I've been going back and forth with a big wig at the bus company to just make sure that the assumptions are right there and that we're going to get that full credit. And then under debt service and fund transfers, this is where Andrew was talking about kind of that perennial issue that we always have a bigger deficit and food service than we budget. We've been building that up. It was like 25. And then we made a big jump up to 75 because we were providing benefit packages for some employees that didn't have it. This year, it's 100,000. And in a typical year, 100,000 might be good. It's just this year, I have no idea where we're going to finish with food service. On the bright side, it's 100%. Everybody is like getting free meals. And it's fully reimbursed through federal and state money. The problem is I don't know what our participation looks like right now. I know that it started out real slow. It's been picking up. Even though it's free, you still don't have all the kids grabbing those meals. So if the meal counts go up and we get fully reimbursed for them, then maybe we won't be in as bad a situation as I am kind of concerned that we might be in. But I'm just projecting that that 100,000 fund transfer that we budgeted probably won't be enough. I don't think we have to make a huge increase for FY 22, because I think this really is related to COVID. And I think if next year we're back in school all day, that we're going to be back to kind of our normal expenses and revenues. And hopefully $100,000 or so is about right. But in the interim, we've got fund balance that we can continue to cover it. Are there any questions on that section of expenses, or are we good? I guess the one question I have is, do we want to this year even just take 25, add 25,000 extra to food service just to be safe as part of the budgeting exercise? But I guess it depends on where we are. I'm looking at the available fund balance looks like 866,000 is what's estimated. So with the $200,000 deficit just in the fiscal year that would leave us out of fund balance of like 666,000, which 25,000 is not a big deal there. So we might not really need to address it. But is my understanding in line with what you're saying? Yeah. So how we end this year, and if you kind of scroll to the next page, because we're going to be on it anyhow, if you skipped revenues and get down to that fund balance section, that's where the last line is that 866,000 that Andrew is talking about. But a couple lines above, you see the COVID impacts. And right now I just put question marks in there. When I say maybe a couple hundred thousand there bringing down to 666, which is a horrible number to change that. But whenever I was forecasting maybe 200,000, that included food service deficit. And we could just kind of wait and leave it at 100,000 for FY 22, knowing that if that is not a good number and we end up needing another 25,000, we would have the flexibility to cover it in the fund balance next year too. But we'll think about it if between now and when we're pretty much baking the budget, if we have better information regarding food service and think that we really should bump that up a little bit more, then we can always do it during budget so that we don't have to worry about covering it from fund balance next year. So let's go back up a little bit and just look at the revenue section. I don't think there's as much to talk about here. Education spending, we'll get that full amount. There's a little bit of a timing thing because I think with the COVID impacts, I think there were some grace periods added, which I think is why we didn't get Roxbury in time for the first quarter. But we will get 100% of that money, so that's not a concern. And then the rest, like going down to special ed block grant and through special ed block grant, those should all execute as planned. When we get to special ed intensive, that's where we might see that we come in under budget because if we have to shift some expenses from special ed to general ed, then we won't get all that money back in intensive reimbursement. That's that 56% reimbursement for our expenses. The triple ed block grant, we'll get all that. I'm not sure if we have any state place students. I think we probably do, but we get 100% reimbursement for that. Extraordinary, sorry, skipped over that. Extraordinary, that's for individual students whose costs are over 60,000. Once you hit 60,000, you get 90% reimbursement. We will have some of that and that'll just align with whatever our expenses are. Best in Act 230, I don't think we've put in for anything as far as a grant for those. And we might not because a lot of that's professional development. Some of it is, you know, a conference that probably won't even happen. So we may not put in for that. But if we do, whatever expense we incur, we'll get the matching revenue. Vogue transportation should be pretty much close. idea B should come in pretty close to the budget. Title one is where I say we might get less revenue, but we'll have less expense as well. I think we're actually trying to fill that other 1.0 that it's really challenging. The Corona Relief Fund, we'll see. My frustration and I'm trying to temper my frustration with CRF. We have a receivable for FY20 of over $40,000. I still haven't even gotten that. And that's part of the grant that needs to be approved. So don't really know. The next line is CRF too, but it's specifically for heating, ventilation and air conditioning. That's where we're going to get that $199,950. Medicaid will probably come in a little under because one of the positions we fund with Medicaid, that person is doing 100% special ed services. So that'll actually be an increase in special ed cost and increase in reimbursement. But we'll under execute Medicaid, which is fine because that money carries over. EPSDT is kind of a Medicaid pot too, but it's separated out. We'll get whatever we spend. Tuition, this is the first year probably that I can recall where tuition is going to come in under budget. And I'm not sure what is going on there. I mean, I know there's at least one student that was going to be tuitioned in and that family has decided to homeschool. So we don't get that. I think there's just a lot less moving around. Families are staying in their zone and not moving. So we have less kids than we budgeted for. Hopefully that's a one year thing. And next year it might bump up a little bit again. Interest will be higher than we budgeted because we have that large fund balance. Rentals, I say dramatically under execute. By dramatically, I mean we will get none. Luckily, it's just a $20,000 line item, so it's not going to kill us. But as of right now, we are not doing any rentals inside or out. So unless something changes dramatically in the world, we probably won't get any revenues there. Excess costs, that's for kids that are tuitioned in here. And we provide additional services. We can build a district for those additional services. It will align with expenses. But I think expenses and revenues are going to be low just because we don't have many kids tuitioned in from other districts. And we might see some for the that the arrangement we have with U32, if some of those kids are still coming in here, we might have some special ed services there. But whatever we spend, we'll get back. Miscellaneous, we always budget just a normal amount. And then we always end up seeing these unusual revenues come in. This year, one that's a little strange is $4,000 in prior year. And that it still blows my mind. I am impressed with this family. We sent out tuition bills last year for kids that were coming in. And one of the families didn't pay the bill. And at the end of the year, I just wrote it off because I figured surely they're not going to pay because the kiddo I think was a senior, so it wasn't coming back. And we were not in person. And the fact that they didn't pay the bill by the end of the year, I figured surely we'll never we're never going to see that. And lo and behold, in like August or September, we got a check. So it was after the audit. So we collected it as a miscellaneous revenue this year. But we also have an electronic vehicle charging station. And people use that and we charge for that. We have a facility manager directors association rebate where if we buy money, if we buy materials through a contract that's been established by them, we get a rebate back. And so that's always a good chunk of change. So we're already well over halfway to collecting what we anticipated from miscellaneous. And I assume we'll get actually more than we budgeted. Enrichment, I assume Drew's going to do a lot less this year than he's done in the past. So I assume we'll have less enrichment revenues. What we have there is for a bike camp that went through the summer late summer. And then fund balance transfers. You won't see anything there until later in the year. That will be I'm trying to think actually that 240 that's there is the money that we budgeted from from food from fund balance as a revenue source for the budget that 240 it may never even show up there because it's actually our money. So it may just be something that I factor in at the bottom line at the end of the year. And we already went over fund balance. The quirky thing is the top section of that fund balance where you see that $1060. For those of you who have been around for a little while, we had a large committed fund balance for things like some of the playground work and various projects. We spent pretty much all that what's left now is this little bit of money for special ed software that just didn't get spent. So that's why there's this really small amount of committed money. Hopefully that'll go away and we won't have to deal with that anymore. The bottom part basically talks about what's left after that committed amount's gone. What we have is a fund balance revenue source in FY 21 this year. And then I put in assuming maybe 250 each year for the next two years, which if you remember as we lose two cents of merger incentive, 250,000 is about what you need to kind of offset that two cents. So we were planning on using fund balance revenue as a source of funds in our budget development for the next couple years. And then whenever there's no reduction in that incentive, then we won't use that fund balance anymore. So we're just trying to level out that tax rate. It's like we're pushing that 2% back a year and a year to kind of flatten out that path. It's a good idea. And whenever we have no incentive at all the very next year when we don't have to absorb that two cents, then we can make that fund balance revenue go away and we'll still be leveled. This year, the FY 22 fund balance amount, the assumption here is that it's going to be 250. We may have to play with that. That's a great lever to be able to adjust as we're building the budget. If we think the tax rate implications are a little too high and we think everything in the budget is important, then we can always tweak that fund balance a little bit to manage that tax rate or drop it back down. The only thing you have to remember in the back of your head is as you do that, though, that's not something that's sustainable. And the next year, if you don't keep that same level when you reduce that, it's just like increasing your expenses. So we do that very carefully as we build the budget. That's why I was asking about the structural versus the one-time deficits because it's really good to use something like that for one-time costs. But if we have ongoing long-term structural expenditure to revenue issues, then dipping into the fund balance is just, for lack of a better phrase, kind of like a taking time bomb. It's better to use it to cover a deficit. So if there's some uncertainty in the budget, if we think expenses might actually be higher than what we're budgeting, we could leave it like that and then just cover it, cover the deficit from fund balance. And then that way you're not building it into your budget and screwing up your tax rate across years. So it's something we'll think about and we'll talk about when we build the budget. But for right now, I mean, that's great shape having that kind of flexibility. Any question on the revenues or the fund balance? All right, you're making it easy. The next page, there's not really much to talk about. Food service, we already kind of talked about that and probably talked it to death. We'll just have to see how that plays out. The other funding section, those are grants that we didn't budget for that we might get. Like this bit has a $7,500 grant safety grant that you can put in for every year. This year, we also attended Libby myself and Andrew attended like a back to school webinar talking about COVID and precautions and planning. And since we participated in that, we got an extra $2,500. So I know we'll be putting in for $10,000 and we'll get the $10,000. The rolling grants are left over from prior years. I was hoping we could put a big dent in those this year and get that money spent, but with COVID, they're probably going to be limited on what they can spend that on. The good news is I don't think there's any kind of time limitation on that. So it's just something I got to continue to track until it's gone, but we don't have to worry about losing it. And Watson's has been around a lot longer than Lisa Noss's. I think Lisa will probably get her spent before and to tell you the truth. And then don't have Anne's in front of me. How much does Anne have left? I don't have the paper in front of me. 20,000. 20,343. Lisa has 21,319. So they almost have the same amount that Lisa's is like two years newer. No, I know. But Anne's is about international students and one of the things that I've really been thinking about is once we're out of this, how do we, I want to, Anne has kind of given me the like carte blanche to take that over and I really want to increase our international. So we'll spend that. No, it's in my bucket. We'll spend it. Yeah. And I have to remind you what the amount is. That's my concern. Between you and Andrew, you'll keep me honest. And so that other funding, there's not a whole lot going on there. We might see more as the year goes on, but I'm guessing that in this year, we probably won't see a whole lot more because, you know, we're just not focused on looking at what these little grants are that pop up that we could put in for. So we'll continue to track what we have and what we get. And then the bottom section is just that long term debt. I could take it off of here, but I think it's a good thing to just keep reminding ourselves of what that glide path looks like. You know, it's going to come down a little bit each year, but, you know, out in 2030, that's a big chunk of reduced expenses that we're going to see and then 34, 35 huge chunks. So provided we don't backfill with another bond in the near future, we can look at those expenses coming down every year and then the areas that are in gray are years where we're going to see significant drops. And I think that's it.