Discussion

Steve - I just don't understand the motion. I really need to know.

Dean - I will give this one more try. My motion is that this board not close or repurpose any of our schools. Not close or repurpose schools.

[Debating about how to do this.]

Dean - Madam chair point of order.

John - I don't know all of the rules. The chair does have the ability to overrule the motion or you could get more advice from legal cousel.

Legal counsel - the motion must be seconded.

Kim - Out of respect for director Hinkey can we move on? This seems to be the reverse of the previous motion. It seems to me that this is just the reverse.

Dean - It is a modification of the main motion. This modification to the main motion. Either there are or are not four board members that are interested.

Steve - there was no second to the modification. Dean's motion should not pass and we move on.

John - I can pretty much guarantee that an amendment to a motion requires such. You would just get away from a second.

Kim - Legal counsel.

Legal counsel - He read the rules for motoins.

Steve - once it is stated then it requires a new motion and then a second is needed. Regardless we are to a point where nobody is willing to second the motion.

Kim - is there another consideration?

[More discussion about modifications.]

Linda - I have an interest to vote for or against FO/CI closing Ossee, closing edgewood and repurposing WL. I would like to begin with Edgewood Weaver Lake as a new motion. I do not want to vote on this proposal as one.

Kim - the motion is to vote separately to close Edgewood Elementary and repurposing. Three pieces.

John - I believe we need a motion and a second. Then we can discuss it.

Linda - take various components of the proposal and give the board the freedom to vote on what they believe on. I do not want to vote no on the entire proposal.

Kim - separate it into 3 different parts - FO/OF/CI is first component; closing of osseo and Edgewood as second part; the rest of the third.

Steve - I need to know where we are going to get the money for splitting this apart. Before I could vote on it separately, I would need to know where we could get the money. I am not in favor of taking money out of the reserve fund. I owuld be opposed to pulling them out for separate discussion unless we know where we would get the money.

Dean - I would offer that we have a fund balance - unrestricted general fund balance. We have over $2 million in mid-year adjustments to be used.

Kim - board memebers?

Lin - If we put secondary education back...[lots of numbers thrown around. Difficult to summarize.]

Dean - We've spent downa sizable fund balance. With these particular changes these are changes with very, very high impact to students and families. Since we have been willing to spend down fund balance for other sorts of things. These are a very direct impact on neighborhoods, students and parents. I would support using the fund balance. As we go forward we will have to do some belt tightening.

Lin - can I ask for some examples of belt tightening.

Dean - we have a half a dozen contracts coming up that could have belt tightening. I believe we should pursue our belt tightening there.

Lin - those are negotiated contract. What happens when they do not get what they want?

Dean - these people out here are not given the choices they want. I guess if going to our employees and saying this is what we can afford is something we could go for.

Linda - we are required to maintain a 3% fund balance and we are trying to maintain a 5%. Why are we trying to preserve and protect that fund balance? I would ask Ms. Hintz to provide what it would look like if we used additional fund balance.

Susan - at the last work session, I shared what was potentially available for the project fund balance. I do not have the figures available.

Dean - What is on the spreadsheet is 16.3 in budget reducations will result in 6.2% unrestricted fund balance.

Kim - I am comfortable with keeping the 5%+ fund balance. I am challenged. I feel like we can't even begin to negotiate the amount since the special education piece is so high.

[Sorry - no vote yet -- just on these side motions right now.]