City Council - Regular Meeting

I'm going to call city council to order for the joint meeting of Wesboro City Council and Wesboro School Board. And I would like to call our Wesville School Board meeting joint with Wesboro City Council today on January 13th at 7 p.m. And I'll let Mr. H start.

Okay. Thank you, sir. And welcome. Good evening everybody. Um the municipal staff have prepared uh some slides to hopefully uh communicate the council's interest in modifying the the funding formula but also to um provide some brief history on the leadup to this point and then next steps and agenda to guide our evening. So we'll spend a little bit of time on our current practice current funding formula. we'll move into um the proposed amendment to the formula. Hopefully that will prompt um some conversation or questions and then we'll look at next steps. Join. So, a little bit of history. Um there's been a funding formula in place that has for the most part guided um if not outright determined uh the funding that the municipal organization provides to public education in our community. The chart here illustrates about a 9-year history of uh the formula. And in 2017, um we were at about just a little bit north of $14 million of local support for public education. And then in 26, we'll be just about about a half a million dollars short of uh $21 million. And so over that amount of time um you can see appreciable growth um both in the number of dollars and percentage um and that percentage of growth um exceeds by nearly twofold um the rate of inflation um controlled over that time. Uh the formula was established in 2006. uh the documentation there that on the municipal side are some pretty clear um

notes reflected in meeting minutes. Um in 2013 I think there were joint actions taken to amend the formula to address some debt [clears throat] debt issuance and debt considerations related to the K Collins Middle School project. I think Mr. McCormack now is going to spend some time on the details of um how we determine or how the formula funding agreement functions today. Thank you.

So, the handout passed out and then snipped on to the um slideshow. Currently, the way that the funding formula works in practice is the way the formula addresses the revenues that'll be shared is it cause them causes them or cause them discretionary revenues. And so what uh Bond and I do is we go through the account inquiry and pull out each and every one of them. Well, in reality, those items tie to the back um of our audited comprehensive financial statements each year. And so what I've done is work through um one and two on the sheet in front of you, which one is what is posted up there, just corresponds to a position in the um audited financial report. So that anyone can take those instead of going through the accounting query can take those to the back of the acter and say okay what are total general property taxes for the year what were our total other lo local taxes um minus the business license taxes and then what's the non-categor non-categor categorical aid from the commonwealth um reduced by certain items. This makes it so that in a quick reference it we're taking what we do in practice and making it so that it's in the resolution specifically versus just called discretionary revenue. And that way there's no confusion in what actually gets pulled into the sharing formula. Then the next section, section two, um these are the items that we've gone through over the years. All of these are the current withholdings um from the formula. It does the same thing. It works through um and spells out more explicitly in an exhibit that would be adopted by council to say, okay, R1 is a portion of the 2018 tax increase for the um tax rate for the ways u Wayneesboro schools debt. R2, we actually had to do that increase in two phases. R3 um I wrote a little bit different the value in the nature's crossing debt reserve or the payment related to so we wouldn't have to come back and touch it again. Um, basically

once that debt reserve gets built to the amount of the payment, it'll just default to whatever ends up being borrowed. Um, R4 is again any economic development tax incentives and this is current practice. That number actually correlates to a note in the financial statements. And then R5 is the value of the school debt reserve for the new um addition to the high school or the payment related um or the payment related to that once the um renovation debt has been issued. That comes up with a withholdings calculation and then you come to the final calculation which is where the current formula ends in number three which is the base calculation in number one minus the withholdings calculation times the 42.5% shared revenue.

Do are there questions or shall we keep going? I think you're just a quick question. So you you're able to change the the various types of withholdings that's taken off the top of the line prior to the application of the funding formula. Yes.

Okay. So how are those withholdings then accounted for as far as re received revenue or credits after the application of the 42.5%. they would go to fund whatever the item that's called out is. So, for example, if you take the economic development tax incentives, um those funds went to pay the um company that you had the economic development incentive with or the debt reserve would go, another example would be the um school debt reserve or the nature's crossing debt reserve. The nature's crossing debt reserve goes to RCIP plan to fund the nature's crossing project. The school goes to the our bond fund because we have to issue the debt. high school for the one and two to pay the debt payment that's currently outstanding for the um first phase of the high school.

So when those debts then fall off when there's nothing when the title is clear at that point, how is the revenue then redistributed back? We would just go back into the formula. So the way it the way that I wrote it was um to show or the debt or the amount of the debt. So once the debt falls off, it would come back into the discretionary. We've had things like um probably the most obvious example is the town center issuance with the um where target is currently that was a big um economic development incentive that came off for a number of years. I think it may have been 10. Um and once we stopped giving that incentive to the taxpayer, it fell back into the formula and was distributed once those uh revenues were collected. [clears throat]

Okay. Thank you. out of curiosity about when do you know about when those fell off and since I've been here 2021 2020 maybe I could go look I don't have the formula the full formula handy but I could go look and send that out it just seems like it aligns with what our increase

yeah it would have been yeah so without that debt service our numbers would have been higher to start Right. I'm sorry. But what about that incentive? Our numbers would have been higher to start with if it had not been included and we had collected those revenue but then not included the incentive. Yes, ma'am. Yes. Just want to make sure. Thank you. 2020.

Okay. [clears throat] So, what does the council contemplate doing? So the proposed amendment would establish a maximum increase of a amount of 3% perom per year. The modification would limit the year-over-year increase. Um and just as a note um we we do not foresee that the the modification would impact revenues on an annual basis. Um in fact the projections that we've done um for 2027 fiscal 2027 um the 3% maximum increase would not be triggered so the schools would realize the full benefit of um the revenue increase as dictated or prescribed under the formula. Um I would as a suggestion as we work through um consideration of the proposed amendment, I think it would be worthwhile to at a minimum um renew and formalize and have both bodies endorse the current practice um for funding formula as a basis. um given the time that's passed since the formula was established and given the fact that um I don't think anybody present at the table um was serving in elected capacity when the formula was established, but I might be wrong about that. So, um I've covered kind of the what um of the proposed amendment. Um so, perhaps it would be helpful to understand why. And I think council seeks to create additional capacity in the general fund for municipal investment that would be capital or operational without having to necessarily contemplate and satisfy obligation to increase school funding. Um this would in as a matter of process

create some independent consideration of u municipal need. Why? Now, I think that um there's a significant positive momentum both um within the public school organization and um on the municipal side of um service to the community. Um council has affirmed and committed to issuing debt um to complete the high school project. Um when we do that or when the council does that with the royal we um that will be a we estimate probably a 60 million uh dollar project will which will be the largest capital investment and debt issuance in the history history of our community. Um, the city has maintained uh over the last several decades real estate tax rates among the lowest among the 38 municipalities in Virginia. While municipal organizations provide an affordable quality of life, the current funding arrangement prevents the council from considering strategic investment for exclusive benefit of city operation without implication of school funding. I would note also during the recent period both the schools and uh municipal organizations have been able to um make strategic investment um to improve operation and service to their constituents and also to improve um our respective labor or our positions in the labor market. recognizing the challenges that the schools have to attract and retain um qualified or exceptional teachers and similar challenges that we face on the municipal side attracting public safety, public works and essential municipal employees. So all that to say I think there is um significant positive momentum in both organizations um and the history of

increase. Um I think that that the amendment is intended to curb um those increases again to create additional capacity and the process of being able to indic to consider independently um needs in the municipality. Um I would emphasize and note that um over the last 10 or 11 years uh a retrospective look at the proposed amendment would have the the limit would have been triggered I think six times. One of which um was a nominal impact of about $7,000. the remaining five times um I think the the difference would have been um just short of a half a million dollars which I I acknowledge is more than nominal. Um I think that's what I have on the proposed.

May I have a question on that please? Um so with that you're saying though on an impact on 2027 we are two years post your data. So what was your when will you know 2028 had the impact on that? Do you already know or will when will you know? No, because the formula is based on the audited um annual the act for the annual comprehensive financial report for both the city and the schools. Um the formula runs off of known data and um we won't know that until we complete the 26 audit.

When is that? we get those numbers in Novemberish, [clears throat] November of 26, December of 26. So I guess my question would then be if we take part in the debt payoff by it coming off of the top of the discretionary fund prior to the 42 and a2% is applied. Would it not also be fair to share in the revenues of those debt payoffs once they have been paid off and they can be applied fully to the discretionary fund?

If I'm understanding your question, I think the answer is that that's the way it works now. Once those debts are satisfied or those economic development incentives are satisfied, that revenue returns um into those discretionary uh funds which are distributed at 42.5%. So, right, but if it's increased revenue based off of property uh real estate growth and that extra then funding from year-over-year, that also is coming from the discretionary fund. Correct.

Correct. So with a cap, we wouldn't then be realizing the actual full impact of those revenue growths based off of the real estate that's fallen off the debt services.

I was with you until the last sentence. So if you are realizing increase year-over-year that goes that goes straight into the discretionary fund that no longer is falling off from the debt services because it's been paid off. So right now you're just realizing actual revenue from the increased real estate growth. If the cap is then applied after the 42.5%, you're not actually realizing all of the true revenue that's been generated from those properties because you're not getting that year-over-year actualization. Question makes sense.

I think that um assuming that the the increases in revenue values exceed um whatever a 3% increase of the previous year, then your statement is true. That's correct. Well, that's also operating under the assumption that uh the city council doesn't modify the tax rate to accommodate the citizens to reduce their burden for personal property taxes, property taxes, and so forth. So, we're kind of that's also assuming that we don't look at that and say we have another $2 million coming in, there's no big items on the line. We're going to

not raise, you know, tax rates by five or 6 cents, but, you know, utilize those funds and maintain or even reduce tax rates from when we raise them up. So,

I definitely see that point. And even to you all's point that you've made, being able to keep the tax rate at the lowest in the Commonwealth, even if you do raise it, you're still amongst the lowest. And that realization can still be increased by I mean for the sake of argument half a million dollars annually and at that rate you're still possibly susceptible to the 3% cap. If I'm looking at the school increase funding correct anything above 500,000 would then be susceptible to that 3% cap. Well, that's a rolling number, too, because with the increase in evaluations, that number is going to continue to increase,

right? So, the year-over-year um increase will then subsequently follow. So, that 3% catches more as the act the as the valuation and as the increase grow. Mhm. And then with inflation as well at 2.7% currently the buying power of that actual increase then is shrunk. So the 3% cap is almost it's a penalty break at the best in some years a current service level funding at the worst a cut

but it would be it would it would be less increase is not a cut it's still more money yearover-year so for lack of semantics it will be a reduction and what it would be and I think because that's not keeping pace with inflation I think we can speculate because all of speculation on what a future council school board do. I want to note that since this formula has been in place, correct me my tax rates have

decreased stabilized the council's will at different times while the formula has been in place has changed at different times. We all know tax rates is a big deal in so we've wrote that way with you guys regardless of what you've decided to do for tax rates. So to [applause] speculate what would happen in the future based on saying take this limitation cut whatever you want to title this is still saying that we're going to be limited or you're not going to be limited where we have not been limited in the past. We have wrote with you guys whatever council's rule is for a tax rate we've dealt with. So to say that we should take this because of we don't know the future tax rate I think is kind of the miss personally.

I I don't think that that's what we're putting forward at all. what I'm what I had put forward and if anybody had listened to any of the conversations we had while we were doing budget proposals um the city side of it from the city employees have have had years where their pays have been frozen where they've had positions frozen and um haven't seen the growth that the school system has. All right. Um so when we were going through the budget session this time and there were Equalization is always the a same rate, you know, slight increase, but basically we don't want to impact the citizens with more taxes. Obviously, there were holes and there were gaps and there are certain things coming on the horizon that are going to have to be addressed. One of the big ones is the high school, which is going to be a $3 million a year debt payment. Absolutely has to be done. That aside, we had positions in the fire department. We had positions in the police department. We had um the sheriff's office that hasn't been staffed with a full-time sheriff on the city's dime ever. I think in 30 some odd years, I think we did two or four part-time positions to fill the coverage of the doors. Um emergency services, volunteerism is gone. So, we're having to foot the bill for I foot the bill, but having to supplement the income of what was once a a majority volunteer and donationdriven service. So when we're looking at that and we're looking at, okay, there's four or$5 million worth of items that need to be addressed because they have been let go for so long and not supplemented the way that the school system has and riding the

wave with it and Queensboro has kept their taxes low. The school system has seen, you know, eight, four, seven, five, four, two% increases year-over-year over the past five or six years. The city workers and and the city employees haven't seen that. So, us seeing that that needed to be addressed, it was it was a struggle. All right. And and we worked and and really ground it out to try to come to some type of understanding that we can't do everything. Um, but we wanted to be able to address those issues without doubling down. So, $5.5 million worth of revenue was was taxed on the residents of Wesboro for those items. And I I want to safeguard against the necessity to make that $7.5 million just because the formula says so.

If I may for a moment, what you're describing is what we learned because Terry and I went through the comprehensive process together when I first started in 2017. what you're describing is what we learned is a direct result of not collecting enough in real estate taxes. And I even asked the question in one of our joint sessions a few years ago because we learned that most localities collect about 60% and then 40% in sales um and meals taxes and we are the exact opposite. And so I asked, did we have any plan to move the needle on that and get to a place where we're collecting enough? Cuz this is how you pay for services really. It's through the taxes. [cough] And just because we are fiscally responsible doesn't mean we should bear the brunt of there not being enough revenue collected through the real estate taxes.

[snorts] What were you going to say, Nigel?

Well, I I think no one here would disagree that emergency services and public works is not a crucial part of the discussion. They are. I I think it's also important to note that we also don't hold the purse. And that if you are the revenue generating body, I guess my question would then become is what has the plan been to cook in those revenues and reserve funds to then allocate to services such as these, whether it be a CIP or anything of that nature. I would argue that there really hasn't been. I think there has been a a effort on this council and previous councils to um satisfy the citizens desire for a lower tax rate.

And in doing so, uh there are municipal projects that have to take a back seat. Mhm.

Um this allows us to address those municipal projects because in my my opinion um it is a collaborative um effort to improve the schools which we are committed to do but also to address other municipal uh projects within the city and that should not and I think one my colleague said that be on uh totally on the backs of the citizens by raising taxes to do that. So I I I think that we all um have to make concessions to do that to get that done. I do want to point out that we invest through that top end that comes out. We have invested over $4 million into those tax rebates. And therefore, we are investing into the same properties that you all are. And when those increase, our investments are increasing as well because we have put in that money as well. and sacrificed on that end for the schools. So, I feel like we are putting our piece into that pie for Waysboro as well when it comes to funding that comes out of that fund. I just want to put that out there. But with that, do you all have more for your presentation?

No. Okay. With that, would you mind if Dr. Castle and Dr. Barbara present something as well? Sure. Thank you. [cough]

And I really like that you use the word collaboration because I like the idea of collaborating and I know that Mr. Short talked about that in a twoon two meeting and I feel like if collaboration is the true way we want to move forward that in Instead of thinking of resolutions quickly, maybe having more of these conversations on what the numbers and compromise looks like, maybe a couple months and then maybe come back to that.

And the floor is yours.

I wanted to start by [clears throat] talking about enrollment. Over the last year during calendar year 2025, Dr. Barber and I were invited to present to city council and to this to I'm sorry planning commission and to this group there seemed to be an idea that schools were becoming overcrowded or at capacity which as you can see we are having a slight trend up but since 2020 2021 um our enrollment has been somewhere between 3 and 393 currently. So it's pretty stable although trending up a bit. We do have capacity in our buildings. Um, depending on where you go and look on DOE, D, the Department of Ed reports attendance differently. They'll report attendance for K12, which is probably in the 2900, 2,800. They report preK students, which are 3 to four year olds in other locations, and that's about 240 students. There's another group of students who are um high but highly support needed intensive support. Um, and those students are in a variety of specialized programs that are funded differently and are not included in that K12 traditional um, ADM. There's about 80 of those students. I would point out that 10 years ago there were 13 and we now find that we have 80. Um, so our enrollment has been steady. the next side if I could please. Um, Miss Hutchinson took I believe the the sheet that Cameron has referenced, Mr. Cormick has referenced and the revenue of the city being the top line, the city division being the red line, and the green being the school division

share. Um, we did look up and found that 2.7% inflation for 2025 is the lowest it's been in five years. If you go back to 2021, I believe it was 7.5%. Cumulatively over the last 5 years, the rate of inflation has been 22.5%. And so, as you know, that's the cost of doing business and the cost of running the household and living. So, our expenses go up. Everything that Mr. Hampton and council members have talked about. I can reiterate for the school system. We have projects that have been put off. We currently have failing heating systems in two of our buildings that will be over a million dollars each to to repair. It's it costs a lot to do those those kinds of things. Um, I think a couple of points that I would would also point out to Ms. Lipkcom's point, the economic development incentives that have been given over the years totaled over $9 million, right around N million, just a shade over. That comes off before we apply the formula. If you apply the 42.5%, that's $4.2 2 million that would have come to the school that was invested in that economic development of business and industry. That's been successful. Good for you. It's working. But when that revenue comes back in, to Miss Lipkcom's point, I have to repeat, we've invested in it and feel like we should um reap the benefits of that investment in that. Um, I'll speak to just a minute of debt service. And throughout our conversations over the last few years of debt service and operations, we have said repeatedly, we just can't do this project if it's going to cut and reduce operations. We

have to pay our teachers. We have to have curriculum. We've got to have utilities and run school nutrition and and it's about people in the building are teaching and about the materials and supplies. We can continue to do a good job in the building that's really not acceptable. A brand new building with new windows and nice heat and everything that works is great, but if we don't have the money to put the people in it and run it, it's not going to be a good school system. I would really encourage you to to try to keep operating in capital separate. Having said that, Cameron [clears throat] can confirm these and go back in many school in many localities, municipalities, counties, Augusta County are a great example or um cities, there is a set amount of the tax rate that goes to school debt service. And as a school debt is paid off, which since 20 since FY10, we've paid off Westwood, William Perry, part of Kate Collins, some renovation at Wayne Hills, and and a renovation in 2020 at Wsboro High School. So there was some number some sense of the debt service going to those many localities that would have just gone into reserve fund and that is the money that goes to school debt and that fund would have built up. So now when we take on the high school we could have paid cash for some of that and it wouldn't have that impact. So, and this is your all's decision or past councils. I believe if you went back that far, probably 12 cents of the tax rate was going to school debt service. I don't believe it's at 12 cents now. I think it's probably closer to 8 cents right now. So my point being the amount of the tax rate that goes to school debt service is always going to

be there because you've always got to maintain your schools and and it that just costs money. It's like maintaining your house. And so I understand that that we may require additional tax dollars, but I think to Mr. Stewart's point maybe earlier is some of those tax some of those cents that were going to school debt dropped off were used for other things. We enjoyed 42 and a half% of that. Now it's it's time to to come back and pay those. I'll make one other observation about funding. Um and that's around per pupil costs which we've not heard about but I feel like I need to address this because we do hear about it from time to time. like enrollment. You can go to the Department of Education and find different numbers for per pupil expenditure, whether that's just K12, whether that's all students. One of the things that's misleading is a common place to look at Virginia Department of Ed is table 15, which reports local, state, and federal broken out. The local part, however, if it's not state and it's not federal, the department of ed views it as local. So that's not just tax dollars from from the city council. That's not just allocation. It's also money that we as a school division generate ourselves. Our Medicaid reimbursement will be over $300,000 this year. There's e rate reimbursements and others that that show up under that local but we generated if we receive grants that don't come from the department of ed for example a grant from the opioid development authority that shows up under the local contribution because it's not state and it's not

federal and so that local number when we frankly work hard and get grants comes inflated on a per pupil basis. The other thing that gets that is sometimes the state, the Virginia Literacy Act, which you may have heard about, I remember three or four years ago, had a couple million dollars, but you had three years to spend it. Well, if the if the state budgets it to you in one fiscal year and we have three years to spend it, if we don't spend it that first year, it comes off of their record as us having gotten it, but we're holding that money and spending it over the next two years, spreading it out and that then shows up on their reports as local. So, that local number gets gets somewhat inflated. I actually took the uh 20,677,000 is the is the city contribution for this year. Divided that by our 3,90 students came up with a number. Mr. Barber, we had a number 6,685. We do have a folder of information to with to deny in that also. And I would point out that is in an average of our surrounding school divisions. If you also go to the Virginia auditor of public accounts which is where the city audit is submitted. Is that right Mr. McCorman? As well as the school board audit and the and the school portion of the audited financial. The auditor of public accounts also generates a report that's quite reliable and encompasses everything that shows the spending of each locality. And so we've provided that and we are we're not above, we're not below, we're we're in our um in the range for our for our region. Um are leaving anything out of those two

slides that I needed to talk about?

I don't think so. I think the only other thing that I I might add is so Dr. Castle said, "Right now, if you go to the Virginia Department of Education website and look at our enrollment, it says 3,13 students, when you include all of our students um for our ADM, there are 80 students right now who are funded differently um because they have intensive support needs. Um we are so proud of our students. um our enrollment in specialized programs, the narrative that they're decreasing enrollment um is is just not accurate. So, for example, at the beginning of this graph in 2012, there were 279 students who were identified as students with disabilities. Right now, Miss Burks and her team of amazing special educators serve 408 students. So, a significant increase over that period of time. English language learners. We had 154 students back in 2012. Right now, exactly 400 students are speaking a language other than English. We're up to 16 different languages and providing supports instructionally um is our honor, but also a challenge and resource intensive. Translation services are quite expensive for our communications with parents and within the building with those students. We the the Virginia Department of Education has started um counting students with interrupted schooling. So students who have moved here to Wesboro and have a gap in their educational experience. So for example, they might have left Honduras um in second grade and and and instruction stopped there and now they're in Wesboro and they're enrolling in 10th grade at Wesboro High School. and the the level of need that those

students have is significant. There are 37 students right now who were in that similar um space. Um our governor school students back in 2012 18 students went to the governor school. We have 39 students enrolled right now. Valley Career and Tech 42 students went in 2012. 81 students um are going now. Um and then this is an important part I I think and I think it goes to the part that you guys are are talking about the needs of the community are significant. 42 students were experiencing homelessness in 2012. 106 students as of today are experiencing homelessness and are attending our schools. So the the narrative that that enrollment is um declining is inaccurate. I would I would say the enrollment in um specialized programs is increasing significantly and all of these specialized programs are resource intensive and we have to hire people. This is not optional. We have to make it work for all of these groups because of state and federal law. One example of that would be our students experiencing homelessness homelessness. By federal law, if they move into an adjoining school division, they can stay at their home school and many choose to. So, we go pick them up wherever they are and take them home at the end of the day. We have a number of students in programs again by either state or federal law from Harrisonburg to Lexington to Charlottesville. So, you see our vans. We've got a parking lot full of vans and they're the parking lot's empty at 7:00 a.m. and again in the afternoon because we're transporting students to all those. So, much like the

city, our we are a reflection of the city. Um, our needs have changed over the last decade and I would say at an exaggerated amount since 20 2021 with COVID it seems and therefore our services and just the overall expense of all of those likewise. So I would just ask you flip back one time Dr. Harbor to um you know the red line's going up a little faster than the green line, but it should because that's 67 and a half% and we have 42 and a2 I'm fine with 42 and a2. Um our expenses are are increasing as well. So I'll leave that where we are. I believe based on my calculation that this year's current I would make this final point. our our allocation based on this formula for the the budget we're doing for FY27 is 2.7%. Which matches inflation for 2025. That's the lowest rate of inflation we've had in 5 years. So I'd like to think it keeps going down, but inflation goes back up to five or 6%. 3% increase doesn't even cover our inflationary costs. So, another point I would like to point out as well is with your presentation letting us know that this is not impacting funding for 2027. I feel like it would be due diligence to continue these type of conversations as a whole in joint meetings or two on two sessions and push back a vote on a proposed change and give this really good detailed thought as a collaboration of two entities that service our

Waysboro residents. And I think what would be even more in support of that would be if we could have a third party come in to evaluate the efficiency of which we are currently funded and the support that you all receive and may need that could then point to what is a balanced uh proposal for this moving forward. Nigel, what would be the suggested third party? I think we could all come to an agree on one. Uh there's not one that comes to mind now.

There are groups that do that much like I believe I don't believe I've been in the meetings. The city has engaged the services of a of a group to help develop the comprehensive plan. Correct. Out of Chartersville, I believe. And so there are groups that do that that kind of efficiency studies for school divisions and presumably cities as well. Can we assume that's what other localities do as a due diligence step before making these decisions? Certainly can guide me to specifics of it.

I'm wondering I know we all want to be mindful and I I don't want to simplify it, but I prefer to try to keep it simple. Like y'all's bills are increasing. We all want a wellunded city. We want emergency services. We want all the things. I don't want my tax rate to go up personally, but I feel like we all need to make sure we're doing our due diligence. so that the schools bills and the city's bills, we're not making assumptions that we go about this as collaborative bodies working together. Um because this kind of I know the conversation has been had over the last year. I know we've talked about this. We've had two or twos, but we've not had this full conversation. And so before we push something that kind of feels like shoving it across the [snorts] finish line without due diligence and conversation, I think we owe it to the citizens and to those who have elected us to make sure we do all the steps necessary. I as a school board member would like to be able to say that if we need to do this to pay all the bills and we're overspending or whatever the question. I don't feel like you're questioning our expenses or how we spend money. We all have bills to pay. I just feel like we need to make sure we're on the same page and that it's not I'm curious where the 3% came from. like how do we get to that as the cap? Like how do we back into the numbers to say this is enough for y'all? I mean, I I venture to say it's because we kind of looked back at the 10-year history and, you know, you have lows as low as 1% or just below 1%, but you have the one giant jump which is about 9% 8.9 um in

take into consideration the economic incentive rebate that but but that that that economic incentive rebate is tax money that we give to an to a company for coming in. We don't get any of that money. It's not like we got 68% formula wants to receive. So yeah. So you got as soon as it rolls back in that's 42%. Mr. Slope, can you tell me the year of that one again? 2020. It was it was it was our audit year of 2020 your 2022 budget. Commissioner would have been I might

sorry go ahead Dr. If would that have been the year that during co we did not get our allocation of whatever the amount was in nature we said sure we understand but then that was appropriated to us the following year would that have been the the year that was budget year 2021 because of the way the budget we were working on. Okay. So that March of 2020 was when everything happened in budget year 2021 and then once we got through budget year 2021 that's what we were talking about. I think we reappropriated those funds where I think we reappropriated those funds in 22 or

I don't which balanced it out to those two years being at 5% because it was 10% between the two years. Yeah. But you know 4% 7% and keeping in mind that those percentages were also affected by tax rates and revenue being you know in revenue being increased tax rates being lowered because revenue was increased you know the different fluctuations I don't could that be because of like PGI Lumos WTA TC rebates all of those dropped off right about those times. Would that have helped with that increase? That would be additional revenue.

May have been an assessment year if I'm recalling that right. My years are running together a bit. So any but there was a reassessment that generated pretty significant additional revenue some point in there. But I I'm I'm speculating. Mr. McCormack knows the answer. He doesn't know it right now. He can find it for years. So 2020, 2022, 2024, 2026 is when that But again, that would open up that big that opportunity to have that conversation to look at that data like you're talking about and see what are the outliers versus

and the other carryover to that would be that with the 3% max, if for some reason one year was 5% and you were held to three, but the next year was 2%, you would get three and the next year was 2%, you would get three because it would it that fund amount is still in there. Um, and that's, you know, conversation, you know, we can have about, and if I'm not mistaken, because the volume would still be increased if you based it on the previous year's formula versus previous year's appropriation. Say that again. I'm sorry.

So, it depends what number you use as the base. So, if you use the appropriation as the base, those numbers wouldn't pull in. If you use the previous year's formula as the base which way are your proposal for your resolution since this is how you're going about it. I think it's currently written as appropriation because appropriation can be different than what we come up with the resolution if it's restricted by um what we come up with. Correct. So so the form so formula will say 5% but then we appropriate 3%. If we go on the formula from the previous year, it would still have the volume greater than what we actually allocated. So that would fall into bringing them back up to another 3% potentially.

I think to that point, like just as you guys clarify that among yourselves is more reason of why can we not continue these conversations to make sure there's clarity and understanding. Um just for you guys to talk that out right now,

make sure we're clear. How do y'all feel? So we're going to stay. We obviously don't want less funding. It's I know you guys say it's not a cut. We don't want a cap or a limit. You guys need to do what you need to do. We're saying, can we take another due diligence step and have a third party? They're saying there's people that specialize in this to make sure that we're doing what we're supposed to make these decisions. These guys are our third parties, our our instructors that we go to for the information that we need to make educated decisions as I'm sure you guys have your leadership that you go to for your numbers and to figure that out. Um so I have full trust and faith in our leadership to help us come to an agreement with you guys. I don't think we need a separate outside third party. they already have um you know assess you know yearly audits and assessments that they go through um just to make sure they're spending money properly and whatnot. But

I don't think it's a lack of trust or competency. I I think it's more like I mean to everyone's point we are elected to make sound decisions but it wouldn't hurt to make a vote or a decision based off of outside perspective on factors that might not have been taken into consideration with current staff our side or your side. I think outside opinions always see things that we might not see. I mean, respectfully, our both of our admins have been in their roles for a significantly long time. Sometimes you see things you just like a smell, you become nose blind to something. I think it's important that when you have someone with a fresh pair of eyes and a a nose that can smell a fresh smell, you're able to better indicate what you see and what you smell that might not be fully what you want to make a decision on. And I just want to reiterate the fact that like with that conversation you all were having now, I feel like those still need to happen with us conjoined, whether that be two on twos or a joint meeting like we're doing now prior to the official vote on your end. If you could give us that due diligence and respect as the collaborated party that Mr. short talked about wanting to have and I feel like you all want to have that as well. And I feel like that would [snorts] help with the citizens as well, knowing that this was truly thought about, collaborated, and discussed and looked at the numbers and looked at the outliers to find all the facts like you were just saying to make that conclusion that betters our city as well.

And even in conjunction to an outside perspective, I I don't think it would be unbeneficial for us to continue these dialogues whether it is joint two on twos or whether we meet individually. I think those conversations should still happen. I don't think we should seize communication in lie of a third party. I think it's still beneficial for us to just at least talk about the figures and the process together so that way no one's thrown off guard when something happens. we can then be in agreement like, okay, based off of what we talked about, based off of what they presented, I I think we can then meet in a middle based off of those two perspectives and then make that sound decision that everyone voted for us to be here to do.

So, I think that um I've heard a lot and I can appreciate what I've heard. Um as an elected official uh we uh have been given the um task of growing this city and growing the city in a way that would be beneficial to all involved. I do not agree with a third party. We were elected to govern and we intend to govern. So I would not accept any third-party mediation um whatever that would entail. Um

I I would respectfully just sort of chime in that I would agree with that um position and and principally on the fact that we've [clears throat] got you know a singular proposal that we shared this evening got some uh other ideas um and you know I think we would like to give you all the space and time necessary to come up with a counter proposal right so why would I bring a mediator in when I have no alternative counterp proposal to consider and to review. Um, you know, I the Dr. Castle served up the uh the per pupil neatly and nicely, you know, so local contributions. What was that? $6,000 per student per pupil is um, you know, to challenge you all to go back and sort of consider what is the the the number. So what is that number that is required in order to yield uh um an even stronger uh outcome for our community in public education? Um because it can't it can't be infinity, right? And I think we're all hopefully everybody can shake their head in that it can't be infinity. So So if it's if it's six grand, then what's what's that number? And then let's back into uh um almost look at from a from the perspective of a of a of a capital plan. What do we want to grow into? What services do we want to provide? what are what are the strategies um that that you all want to employ with uh um uh you know I I have deep appreciation for for the cohort survival nature of academia and and the student population and the challenges that that can present and the wide variety and swings of cost. Um but I would I would I would echo uh the mayor and that I would I would like to hear a counter proposal uh to consider before um because I don't I don't think

there's a problem. I mean, I I you know, in in our collaboration, you know, we're all neighbors, so I I got I got no problem just continuing the conversation. We do two on twos, you know, meet every month. I'm cool with that. Whatever. I feel like what you just said, Mr. Short, just reiterated the fact that I feel like you're in alignment that this conversation needs to continue to happen versus getting a vote next week or in the future, like near future. I feel like that's kind of what you were pointing at that this needs to be pushed back further because those conversations and whatifs and kind of proposals need to kind of happen.

Yeah. And well, I would I would also just respectfully offer that it it it that has to be on a fixed timeline as well, right? So um uh recognizing that the the only the the ideas only were to sort of maturing I guess around the October time frame but in from October to January 13th I prefer nothing. So um you know I I I would I would lean on establishing you know begin with the end in mind.

So decide the date that we're going to we're going to pick to come to resolution. If it's is it April 1. Cool. Because this this isn't really a really really complicated thing. It's not hard math, right? So, so April one, let's back into what does that collaboration look like? Are there two on twos, whatever, full groups,

whatever is required. But um I mean we you know we really stressed with uh you know the um our um our you know fire fire uh um department staff this last round of like you know every when we raise uh when we have to raise two cents in order to make that to add to our labor pool in order to provide for the growth and services that are in there. Well, we know we also have to count for an extra penny um because of the agreement. Even though again my time on council, I don't I I can't it it's probably it's been a while and that's on all of us. So, I'm not I'm not throwing darts at anybody, but you know, in in nine years, uh I I I think it's probably been seven since I've even since we received a presentation, right, on what your needs are, where your growth is. And I I I personally believe it's kind of crazy to that's where I you know and I'm on an island with with the poor people. I get it. But um but you know it's crazy to me that we predicate the needs and services that our community and our children deserve based off of a a number that that swings. Uh you know the last five years you've averaged a 6 and a half% pay raise every single year for the last five years. the five years prior to that it was it was two and a quarter percent two and 2 2.4%. So the spread is um normalizing at 3% seems like a pretty fair settlement you know or a starting point a starting point in the conversation. So that's why I would respectfully ask for some feedback on if you don't love that then where else do we go with that and again that's where I go back to the to the per pupil is we'll figure out it's not infinity so is it if it's seven grand what is how does that affect what

the rate ought to be is it eight grand is it 20 grand you know what what do we how do you scale that yeah and I think I would say and this is part of the point of having discussions I I I would tell you I I don't believe we've given 6 and a2% each year for the last 5 years. I'm just I don't recall giving 6% raises and there were some years we didn't I didn't say raises I say but the school division has received a 6 and a half% pay raise for the last on average over the last 5 years. Oh you mean funding not pay I thought when you said pay you that's what I was wondering. I'm like I think the state [laughter] that would be folks pockets no [laughter] I'm going to play want to check.

No, but you're about to get me in trouble here. As an organization, as an organizational to just simplify it, it's a 6 and 12% pay raise for the last 5 years. Kudos to the city for that two and a quarter of the five years prior. So I have a question, Terry. So ju from what you guys said this doesn't the if your cap went into place it doesn't affect the current budget year that we're working on for fiscal year 27 right what you're in that's what the city believes okay we agree

okay so since your staff and our staff right now are in budget cycle there's a lot of time so you said April one is as an example I just since there's not an effect right now I just want us to be mindful of that timeline to not rush to a resolution. Um, just to make sure we're diligent and I don't have a problem with April if the body doesn't, but I just want us to be mindful like we have no choice but to go with what you guys resolve to do. But to give us time while there's other priorities going I don't our staff need to focus on the things that they're focused on. So I don't want to add extra. We have to be diligent about their workload too. I want to make sure they do everything we need to make sure we're prepared to collaborate with y'all on a good faith effort like maybe after the budget.

Yeah. Like I don't just for me in a supervisory perspective I would I don't want to add this load and so I want us to be mindful in the timeline whether you guys say April you're the ones that hold the control over this situation. I just for your staff and our staff let's be mindful of the workload they currently carry. Yeah. Alo in our budget discussions where we keep an open dialogue between us to let us know where you're at through your budget process as we do to help adjust those numbers and be able to look and get a more definite uh where our definite needs are and what uh what we can do to help each other

help us help you help the taxpayer. Yeah, I think setting up a a goal end goal I think is a good idea and it gets us able to make a timeline and it gives opportunities for the public to come to our meetings and um be able to speak about what they how they feel. Same thing for you all at your meetings and allows them to give us their opinions on things that we need to maybe dive into and look at and I just think that gives due diligence for them as well to process. So, I think giving us a timeline would help. And so my my interest in uh a spring um uh sort of conclusion uh if you will is is principally driven off of the the work that will be involved uh uh you know leading up in into the budget because your [sighs] your budgets are set off of the our actuade numbers or ACFR numbers that that arrive in October of October November time frame 26. And so um uh the last thing I and I think I speak on the part of all my colleagues as well, the last thing we as a collective want to do is is do anything that would cause harm or stress to the school system. And so it's a matter of of finding um again it can't be infinity. So what is that that solid number? and and and so where I'm at with the spring is that recognizing that the world is going to the is going to continue to spend by the time we get to the fall to make it more predictive for the collective in budget season 28 then um that's that was that's my my rationale. So there's an adjustment time for for if we have a number that's s that's six months prior to you all starting talk about your budget and about eight months prior to us talking about our budget. So it gives

everybody some room to to sort of flesh out um needs and and again I you know I think it from uh you're a very labor rich labor centric organization and so you know uh um that is I don't envy uh uh the the the work but um that you all do I admire it and I think if you uh um you know [clears throat] that strategy of of of a fiveyear year uh of plan. The other thing I wanted to mention um kind of jumping all over the place, but for is that over a four or five year period is that this was last really talked about and and like what first established in 2006. Are you freaking kidding me? And and only now are we actually like like that's that that's not cool for the community at all. I think having on the regular a re-update every four or five years that ought to be memorialized, right? So, at the bottom of it, that ought to be memorialized that folks are coming together because because it's crazy that that that so much time has gone by

and uh um and you know, we're we're we're kind of at where we're where we're at. I mean, that the smoothing of the 3% um is doesn't deny growth. it may not be the growth that uh is ideal. Um but if you go back to the five years prior to the if you go back year 10 to to uh to year uh six uh back in time, what you're going to see is that 3% was a lot better than what you got back then. A lot better. So,

so I guess what I would also say, so these these folks, these principles are meeting with us right now and and when we get [clears throat] their 42 and a half% rate, we are looking at a needs-based budget. And so every year, Dr. Castle presents a budget that is zeroed out and is balanced. But these folks also know that we are hiring less folks when people are retiring or resigning. We're not replacing them. somebody at the top of the scale is replaced with somebody at the bottom of the scale. So we are making it work with the 42 and a half percent and not having to come to you all and say we've [clears throat] got this really really huge need. We are just making it work based on the arrangement that we have now. I want to clarify though back the conversation that happened before. So let's say that the 42.5% yielded a 1% increase to the school division. Do we get 1% or we get 3% over the increase from the year before? We get 1% right.

Yeah. So we have made it work on the 0.9 year that you talked about. We've had employees who haven't gotten raises. They've actually taken a pay cut when the health insurance rates have gone up and their salaries have been flat. We've done all of that work too. Freeman was chair. We cut 10 positions that year to balance.

We've cut at least 10 positions just this year just to make the the budget work with the amount that you're you're giving us. These some of these kids that I talked about earlier um and we love to serve them, but they walk in the door. Uh we had we had a friend join us just this week that's going to cost us about $150,000. So we get 6,000. And so the math is not mathing. Um

well the math maths because that's this that's the average. So you can have 350,000 and two 4,000 and and so that's you're you're you're spread the 6% is average just to set that out there. So we're not saying that there aren't kids that need require more services that have more cost and we should service them. I'm not saying that at all. Yeah. I would like to reiterate that this conversation came up and I'll have it noted that it was brought up that I don't remember how many years ago you said you had uh school children registered or understood to be homeless

at 50 or 60 and right now we're at 100 plus. the families that are on the fringes that are scraping to get by that are in households that were passed down to them from generations because they you can't afford to buy a house right now if you're on the fringe. If you're a single if you're a single parent, you can forget about it. Those people are the people that I don't want to collapse their income and cause them to become homeless or to lose their home or to be forced to move out of the city because they can't afford the tax rate because of the increase so high. And with us looking at it again, equalization is historically the goal for the city. So equalization plus one, equalization plus two. So you do a little bit more. Um this time at the budget session they highlighted some severe needs. We were extremely short on our fire department um to government standards. We're ne we're never going to get to government standards because we just you know we we'd be at almost $2 tax rate to try to get to the quantities that um that we would have to hit. But knowing that we had needs in the sheriff's office, we had needs in the police department, we had needs in emergency services, we had needs in our city staff, um you know, parks and wreck that, you know, you got guys that were making 10 or 12 dollars an hour, you can't hire somebody for that. Um and they had been on pay freezes for a long time. So we had this huge bundle of things that we knew we had to hit and do something about which is already impactful on the on the residents on the tax rate. So we were looking at okay so every cent or every two cents we spend is another you6 cents whatever8 cents but basically 50% more. So if we have to raise eight we got to go 12. We have to raise it 10 we

got to go 15. Okay. How could we address dire needs without exponentially growing the burden on the tax on the resident? And part of that conversation was we got some of the increased revenue on meals and sales tax um or meals and lodging or whatever. Um, and I saw a thing on the news where Newport News or Virginia Beach had like the second highest rate in the in the country or whatever of the state at 12% and I think we're higher than that. 12 points.

Um, but the balance of that is if you're on the fringes and you can't afford or you can barely get by, you're not going out to eat. You're not going to a sit down restaurant. You're not spending $100 or $200 to take your family out. That's discretionary money. It's not going to their grocery store taxes. It's going out, you know, to a restaurant. And I pay that. I have a family, you know, a large family. You know, we go out to eat a lot. You know, they all go to the schools, you know, William Perry, K Collins, Wesford High School, and I got two more coming up through. And you guys do a wonderful job. Um, so, you know, part of the discussions we had with the 3% and when I met with Dr. castle uh last month. You know, maybe we can have further discussions and build on that and say, well, we're not only maybe we don't only put a reserve on top, but we put a safety net underneath, too, where if we have a down year, we're for some reason assessments tank that we don't everything. You know, that we would be willing to go in potentially go into debt to make sure that we don't any function of government um especially our educational system. So,

oh, sorry. I I just I want to let you finish your point, but I have a couple thoughts if possible. You're good. Go ahead.

No, I just I like what you're saying, and I feel like Diana is well verssed on our side about um potential opportunities of of how we bring revenue. She said her interior work on the last comp plan. So, I feel like you and Diana would be good in a two by two. I just want to suggest that. But also, you're talking about the families on the fringes that are in need, which I think is our focal point, too. Um, seeing the poverty level of our students. And so, I take that a little um not personal, but that that's a big deal to me. I don't want to see those families. I am those families. I'm a single mom. I've experienced homelessness. I grew up in public housing. I serve those families. And so, we're not trying to make decisions that harm those families because we're the ones that make sure that those families are taken care of. And I would be remiss for myself with my own lived experience and with my background to not speak to how incredibly important the school system is in serving those families on the fringe. So we cannot cut our nose to spite our face. So you cannot we've got to look at the balance. So if we're going to use that as the story, as the reason, let's make sure we look at the whole balance. Let's not prop poverty as a reason to cut because we serve that.

It absolutely is. And again, I look at numbers differently. Okay. So cutting and is to me is less and I understand that that putting a cap on potential and significant increase to address other things looks like a cut and if it's not the percentage if it's not 5% when it could have been 5% but it's only 3% you know you got look at it as a cut. Um, I'm merely saying that these were the discussions, the heated impassion discussions we had. I lived in Parkway Village Apartments. That was where I got my start, okay, as a young father with my wife and, you know, my pregnant wife moving into Parkway Village Apartments and starting there and then working through the city. Um, and growing up in poverty, um, it's important to know that that people are struggling and I don't want to push force them out. And our goal is to bring industry into the city to increase the the positive effect on the residents. We can increase wages and get people to earn money and be able to work in the community. um [clears throat] you know what when when VISTA lost or DuPont lost half of their plant and shut it down that was a big impact where we lost hundreds of jobs. So

can I challenge you? Can I add some words? Not bad.

Um so what I've heard is is that the school board is asking us the city council to you know work in collaboration uh give more time more effort before we make a decision. Um, and I can go for that, but I want to make sure that we as a body and and specifically I'm saying city council is that we are going to be genuine about the effort and not just say, "Okay, we're going to give more time just so we can make ourselves um look better for the perception for the for the visual." Um because I mean we've been on this path to to make this thing happen and make it happen um as quick as we possibly can once we got all the data and all of this. And so I just don't I don't want to spend more time, more effort and then at the back end we still make the same darn decision.

Mr. Lee, you want to add anything to that? I want to make sure that we What are your thoughts on that?

I agree with what the vice mayor just said. If if there is not a um sincere effort, if we're if we're just kicking the can, then it is a waste. Um, I I we sat down with the chair and the vice chair, the vice mayor and I did and and I think April or May and gave you our intentions that we were looking at adjusting the funding formula [cough] and for all intents and purposes, we got no response. But tonight, I hear bringing third party. Let's do two on twos. Let's continue to meet. Well, where was all of that from April to tonight?

Can I clarify? So, I'm I'm disappointed somewhat. I'm not saying that I would want to close the door, but I am disappointed.

I would clarify that with that first meeting, unless there was no fruition of that until October. So October was the true first time that there was any collaboration on that because that's when it was presented in a formal manner and we were going to try to do more meetings but I know not everybody could meet in later November and December due to personal things going on and this was the first full time that we were able to collaborate together. So pushing that to maybe a proposed April 20th deadline to have those two on twos and full meetings would be best served and not kicking the can because it gives an opportunity for our constituents to have an input. It gives a perspective that we go over all of the things that everybody talked about today and maybe ideas and thoughts could change maybe on your side or our side or whatever. I don't think that it is going to kick the can if we are um actively trying to understand both parties and come to maybe the same or different conclusion whether it may be I don't feel like that's going to be invaluable time or waste of time. I think that it would be due process to this proposed amendment and fundamental change. So I don't think it would kick the can. I would be fully invested in that. I have control of my schedule that I can make anytime happen. So, I just want to put that out there.

Yeah. And I I hear you, but for the record, anytime that the vice mayor, the mayor, the city manager, or our assistant city manager for finance, the superintendent, the vice superintendent, the vice chair and chair, when we sit down, I would consider that official. Okay? So when we met in April, I would consider that official to let you know that we are considering a change to the funding formula. I would say that consideration and intentions are just that when there's nothing for us to fully bake on.

I I Okay.

However, I think we have spoke our peace. I think we have had all parties now at the table. Everyone's heard it. I think this will be a great time to discuss those next steps and move forward and and realizing that something is going to happen. So, let's work together to make that something happen. Point blank period. There's no there's no need to belabor the point any further. I think we've all spoke our peace. So, the next step I would, and I just said it to Mayor Lee, I think a deadline of April 20th, that's the third Monday in April, and that we are doing the due diligence of meeting up and having those conversations, going over all the scenarios. Does that make sense? Was that an outlier year for 2020, 2021? Um, that would be my proposal towards you. with my fellow Miss Lipson. Could

Would you agree with that? Well, I don't know about that date specifically, but maybe we could we talk about April and see if that's a date that if everybody can settle on a on a date that that that works for and I can be here, but I can tell you I'm pretty sure that's a state meeting that's around budget. So, maybe not necessarily just a meeting, but like, hey, you're not going to do a resolution on Monday. like you won't buy that. I mean, that's it's hard to get 12 people in one place without some kind of polling ahead of time. So, that Yeah, I would I'm fine with whatever deadline you all put on it. We'll make it happen. I just

I ask about asking find a date that everybody want and I'll be here whatever it is. But who's going to frame the process from now to then so that we can have two or twos or do whatever so that we're working through the process. Yeah, I [clears throat] I need to myself understand um I guess clearly um outside of what's been presented um what we intend to accomplish. So I guess I guess there should be some some some goals and objectives that we're trying to accomplish if we're going to

so if I can I think my my my the thing that I would as a takeaway right so a next step of of both parties so I would respectfully offer for the school board uh uh your next step would be we we you have a you have a proposal is to h offer a counter because right now I have no idea what your baseline is uh um and so that would be I don't that would be really helpful to understand that because again, you know, collaboration means that we both talk to each other. We're both here with each other to say. And then the other thing too is that it uh um I'm sure we've all had friends in our lives where you say, "Hey, where do you want to go to eat?" And they're like, "I don't know." And you say what it is and they're like, "Well, I don't want to go there." And then, "Well, how about this? I don't want to go there."

So, you know, the the collaboration means that when when there's an exchange that, you know, we're we're never going to get to the middle if if one side stays on the shore, right? Right. I mean, so we've got to we got to figure figure that out um too. And I know we'll I know we'll get there. I'm but and then maybe what we could figure up just uh timelines you know of of some hard dates and you know so late April uh as as the that's when we're going to sort of you know reach reach an agreement uh an arrangement

and uh and then um and then the uh the structure of you know for me the the the sausage making happens in the two the two by twos because the two by twos is like you know everybody gets to collaborate and talk to everybody offline at coffee shops and all that kind of stuff. And so you the the that and then but also respectfully and also for transparency to have these experiences baked in uh from April end of April to to January 13th and what is that frequency? So you know that's every month and we kind of come back and we say hey we met with this and this is what we heard. No, I'm just I'm just throwing out ideas saying like continuing post taste like continuing that two.

Yeah, because it's not it's not going to go away and you know it it impacts our uh uh um uh uh you know we've got our our budget to influence which will directly impact your 28 budget um uh that we have to we have to sign on to you know by May June time frame. So us getting this thing buttoned up again gives that predictability and understanding of uh um because I I can't tell you the number of again nine years the number of times that uh um you know like oh right hey revenue is up this is going to be great and then and then our sunk cost completely erodess uh you know where health insurance went up $380,000 and and you know xyz you know um um that that we may have a million dollar [clears throat] increase in in net revenue, but then it's gone in sunk cost immediately. So when it talk when we think about what a penny means, well, is it a penny and a half? Is it is it you know? So

that's that's where I'm at again with the the April to be more clear. But yeah, so that's where we we figure it out and then we together as friends and neighbors we we figure it all out together. So I think to Nigel's point then um we would expect that action from you guys. Yep. Okay. The counter offer if I can I really do need to jump in because I feel like for the record we have to push back on the official business being conducted in 2 by two meetings. That I did not say official business. I just want to make sure it's not even implied. No, I did not say that. Okay. So

I said sausage making. So and that's and that's what it is I mean nobody nobody wants to eat you know what's comes out of it but yet you have it's that's the that's the rules right well it's the legal like we cannot conduct official business and 2 by two meetings and your choice of words official offer is your choice of words is concerning my choice of words did not say 2 by two official I spoke on the session that we met with the chair the vice chair of your school board along with the mayor and the vice mayor that's a 2 by two meeting you can't conduct official business in 2 by two just to alarm you or not alarm you but to notify you that we intended better. Okay, whatever. Anyway, I just want to make sure for the record though.

Well, go ahead. We will we will wait for you to uh contact us with dates and how we're going to set this up, what your counter offer is going to be. So, or count off or your alternate solution option, whatever you want to to call it. Okay. So I am hearing that we are not going to present anything the 19th on any amendments to the formula. Correct. We are going to wait until we do our due diligence with a counter or whatever conversations need to be happen for maybe a late April timeline. What was the 19th?

I don't know. I just threw a date. [laughter] I think we're asking if we're going to have something that's correct. That that's what I need to hear. Thank you. So, we feel like when we present our counter, it should be in a public meeting, a forum as well. So, we'll figure we'll put all of that in that timeline that we can bring to you guys as well for that action.

Well, I mean, don't I mean, and it's it's whatever the collective wants to do. I I I would just say that um the ability to uh act and counteract like so we can go to uh uh anyone in the room can go to the Virginia Department of Education and read uh uh enrollment data per kit per per per pupil expenditure and all that kind of stuff. And what we heard tonight was that all that's garbage and no one in the Commonwealth of Virginia should believe it because it's not accurate. They got it wrong. They're not doing the math right. Right. So that's what we heard tonight. So if we're having a conversation where you all are proposing account a a a thing out not out of a oh well that's interesting let me go look into that a little bit. We just wasted a lot of time of everybody sitting in the room together hearing about something for the first time and unless we all want to do you know 30 minute recesses and everybody go get to the laptops and go do diligence real quick which I'm fine with doing that as well but the ability to kind of react and respond to that I think is unproductive. Uh, so I if we're going to if we're going to make it, you know, uh, you know, productive, you know, before before a contracting crew comes out and works on your bathroom, they come out and they they assess assess the the state of of the needs, right? Before a roof is worked on, you have somebody that comes and says, "Well, you might be able to get a few more years out of it, or you might need some shingle work as well."

So, it it that's that's that's the purpose of the of the two on two. Nothing can happen, no decisions can happen outside of the public eye and in full transparency. But to get that assessment and the pulse and the check about, you know, are we going to make a left there? Are we going to make a right there? Will you, you know, and if we don't think that's going to work, then why are we doing it? So if we don't think the 2 by twos are going to work, then why are we doing them?

I think if the 2 by twos are flexible, if I just to be honest and transparent and Amber and you'll correct me since you handled our 2 by twos, we didn't feel like there was a room for counter or for conversation in the way it was presented in 2 by twos. It was more presented and this is what the will of council is and this is what we're going to do. You guys, we asked for a public meeting. So let's be clear that we said can the two bodies get together? You guys were going to try to conduct this in a different way, right? So please do not infer as if we are trying to change the conversation. You said that you didn't know about the numbers Dr. Castle gave in those two by two meetings. He has told you your data is wrong. So I want to make sure we present to the public facts and not what we want it to look like. This is not new information. We have said the numbers you're using is wrong. The per pupil formula is wrong. We have

Let me just clarify. I don't know that I said that in the 2 by two meeting cuz I had to go back and check it. I had to have my 30 minute re. Well, that's the thing is so in that in that case, so what we did in that 2 by two is that we presented ADM, you know, numbers and then you came back and today offered a counter to it. Yeah. Right. So like you said gave the factual information for the whole picture which is what the goal will be. Well, I I would say perspective information, factual information for the here are the state reports.

Here are the state reports that support all of those numbers. So, the ADM number is a traditional funding model that kids who have traditional needs that are typically developing students, those students are funded. So,

right. I completely believe you. You don't you're not selling me on it. I I absolutely believe you. But what I'm saying is that that's a big failure with the Virginia Department of Education's reporting because what you what I heard you say this evening was that it's not materially materially accurate that the that what I heard was the $6,000 doesn't account for grants and for uh other uh Medicaid and it doesn't account for all those sorts of things. Show me a website where it says that on the Virginia Department of Education's website. I don't read it anywhere.

So that's where I'm saying. So to get that number, I have to find the the for right now 3,3 students and then the students with intensive support needs. I've got to go to a different report. So you're exactly right. The transparency is is not there, but I go to a different report and find those 80 students that we're serving. And then that ADM number doesn't account for any of the students who are at Wayne Hills, right? And so or post high house

or the po Yeah. We're serving students from age three to 22 and and so those kids that are that have graduated from Waysboro High School who are attending any of our post high programs, students with significant disabilities, those aren't in your ADM numbers. So I don't I I might push back with my colleagues just a little bit. I don't know that your ADM numbers were wrong. You didn't ask us for all of the data, right? And that's that goes with the students we're serving. You didn't ask us and we didn't give you them because you relied on a state website. And I think that that's why we need to be talking more

because to say that I think the narrative has been there that we have 300 less students or you know our our enrollment's dramatically decreasing. That is not all of the state reports. I brought the last two and if you want them I can go through them with you but we're not seeing a significant decline. If anything the needs of our students are increasing and they're expensive. Yeah. Yeah. All the things that you're spending money on, we're having to spend money on too. Full disclosure, the 2 by twos weren't everybody getting 2 by twos with everybody. I was not a part of any 2 by 2's conversation. We'll fix that. Yeah.

So, and 2 by twos would be good cuz there's never a bad thing from bouncing ideas off each other because, you know, that's how we I promise not to do the per pupil stuff with anybody that I meet with. I won't [laughter] talk about it anymore. I' They've already all chastise me. I appreciate that. I appreciate your respectful um conversation and the due diligence on both side to have this conversation and to be adaptable like you said, not staying on the shore and allowing that conversation to be authentic. Thank you.

Because the stuff we do too, I just want to put that out there too, just for everybody to hear, the stuff we do also benefits, right, our community as a whole. And so, you know, uh uh if I've learned anything, uh I you know, I always think you know know everything and I don't know everything, but what I have absolutely learned you heard him say it is

public is how is how connected everything is. It is everything is so much more connected than anybody really gives, you know, appreciation for. So, when we're talking about, you know, uh um uh folks in the fire department or police department or sheriff's office, um uh clean water, 911 that responds when you pick up the phone, all of those things, uh economic development, growth, uh um uh quality housing, um options for housing, all of these things uh make uh and support the work that you all do and supports the collective community and and and the growth and makes Williamsboro a great place to live, work, and play.

More affordable housing. Yes. Thank you everyone. So, next steps would be for us to come to back to you with a counter or our proposition for what we believe to be um in a best interest and then we come up with solid timelines and goals on behalf of both to get to that April deadline. Correct. Sounds good. Anything else? No, I'm good. Thank you. Do you want I believe that's my assignment is Yes. I call city council. All in favor say I. Do I have a motion for adjournment? So move. I have a motion to have a second. Second.

All in favor say I. I. All oppose. Motion carries. We do have a folder of information. Council members. You were just a regular