2026-10-20 - Board of Education Fiscal Committee

I want a call to order at 6.58 p.m. the Fiscal Committee meeting. We have full strength today. Mr. Evander Root, Mr. O'Brien, Mr. George and Ms. Koch and myself, they're all here. We have a couple of

grants to accept and about 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 contracts over $100,000 to be approved. I know that some of the committee members have sent questions about this and I didn't follow if they got the

answers. But as the fiscal meeting goes on, if you have already asked a question and you didn't get an answer, you can ask the question again or you can hold for an email to come back to your

response. So with that, I'd like to start with the first resolution here, resolution number 77. Be it resolved that on the recommendation of the superintendent of schools, that the Board of Education

approved the Connecticut High-Dosage Tutoring Competitive Grant application of $50,000 to fund a part-time site facilitator to expand the High-Dosage Math Tutoring Program, delivered in partnership

with the Great Oaks Foundation across Dolan, Turnip River and Ripawam Middle Schools, as well as the Stanford and West Hill High Schools. Be it further resolved that the superintendent is authorized

to execute all documents necessary to accept the award. So do I get a second here? I'm a little bit out of touch here. So get a second, then we can discuss, then you vote. Yeah. So do I have a second

from the fiscal board members? Ms. Koch seconded and I'll open it for discussion. Any discussion from the board members? Nothing from the board members. Any discussion from BOE members? Yes, Dr.

Hammond. Yes, thank you. And again, I just want to say this is a grant and it's fabulous that we're looking at helping our mathematicians, you know, excel. And so I just did the math. I always like to

put my dollar amount to kids. So you're looking at approximately $231 per child to help them improve in math. And I know that the term that was used is that this is, you know, to really support them

high dosage. So I just want, again, the public to know $230 or 32 actually, it's a darn good deal. And I look forward to seeing success with this program. Thank you, Dr. Hammond. Anyone else, any

comments? If not, I'll move for vote the resolution number 77 committee members only. Please raise your hand if you're in support. Okay, we have Dr. George. I don't see others. Okay. Oh, Brian, Mr.

Vander Root, myself and Ms. Koch. Are you using your hand up? Sorry. Okay. Yeah. So it's unanimously passes 500. Thank you. Okay. Now we're going to go for acceptance of Eve Janet's Grace Bequest.

This is resolution number 79, be it resolved that on the recommendation of the superintendent of schools that the board of education approve to accept the Bequest of $32,000 from Ms. Eve Janet Grace

estate as approved by the Stanford probate court. Do I have a second? Okay. Thank you, Mr. George. And any discussion from the committee members first? Any questions? It is pretty silent today. Good.

Dr. Hammond. Yeah. And again, I just want to highlight, I did ask the specific question, who is Ms. Eve, Jeanette Gray? And not only is she donating 32,000 here, she also donated 150,000. She is from

AITE. I assume a teacher or she was a teacher that AITE and what an outstanding individual to do this for the district. So you're looking at almost, you know, 200,000 that she gave to our district on

behalf of her estate. So I hope I'm not speaking out of turn, but what an honor to have this given to our district by a teacher. Fabulous. Thank you for your comment, Dr. Hammond. So if no further

questions or comments, I'd like to move to vote to accept the Bequest here. All in favor, please raise your hand. Mr. Van Der Root, O'Brien, George Koch and myself. It's unanimous. So resolution 79

passes five zero zero. Now to get to the approval of contracts over $100,000 resolution number 80. B, it resolved that on the recommendation of the superintendent of schools, that the board of

education approved the power school renewal for $302,217.22. Sorry, let me read that amount again. $302,217.22. Do I have a second? Okay, thank you. Ms. Koch and any discussion from the committee

members? Okay, none. Any discussion? Any questions from the non-committee members? None. Thank you very much. Any, all in favor of passing this resolution number 80, please raise your hand. Mr. George

Koch, Mr. O'Brien and Mr. Van Der Root. So five zero zero for resolution number 80. Moving on to resolution number 81, be it resolved that on the recommendation of the superintendent of schools, that

the board of education approved the ED99 agreement for child nutrition programs authorized signatures change from, sorry, the ED99 agreement for child nutrition programs authorized signatures change

form so that the claims can be signed, submitted and reimbursement delays are avoided. Do I have a second? Okay, Mr. O'Brien and any discussion from the committee members? Okay. Any discussion from

the non-committee members? Okay, so all in favor of passing resolution number 81, please raise your hand. We have Koch, Van Der Root, O'Brien and George and myself. So number 81 passes unanimously

five zero zero. Moving on to number 82, be it resolved that on the recommendation of the superintendent of schools, that the board of education approved to accept the contracts with Solent Healthcare

LLC for board certified behavior analysis and applied behavior analyst services, not to exceed $316,750. Do I have a second? Okay, three seconds, I have a lot of seconds. Okay, so the next one is Mr.

George and any discussion from the committee members? Okay, none. Any discussion from the non-committee members? None. So all in favor, please raise your hand from the committee. Got O'Brien, Van Der

Root, George and Ms. Koch. So number 82 passes unanimously five zero zero. Moving on to resolution number 83, be it resolved that on the recommendation of the superintendent of schools, that the board

of education approves to accept the contract with Solent Healthcare LLC for speech and language pathology services, not to exceed $122,175. Do I have a second? Ms. Koch seconded. And any discussion

from the committee members? No discussion. Mr. O'Brien was in two minds. I saw your hand wave a little bit. I don't know. Okay. Alright. Any discussion from the non-committee members? None. So all in

favor, please raise your hand. We got, looks like another unanimous vote. So resolution number 83 passes unanimously five zero zero. Moving on to number 84, be it resolved that on the recommendation

of the superintendent of schools, that the board of education approves to accept the contract with Sunbelt Staffing LLC for Para Educator Behavioral Therapist Services, not to exceed $337,725. Do I

have a second? Mr. O'Brien and any discussion from the committee members? None. Any discussion from our non-committee members? None. So all in favor, please raise your hand. Thank you. Another

unanimous five zero zero. So number 84 passes five zero zero. Moving on to number 85, be it resolved that on the recommendation of the superintendent of schools, that the board of education approves

to accept the contract with Sunbelt Staffing LLC for special education psychology services, not to exceed $120,960. Do I have a second? Ms. Koch, any discussion from the committee members? None. Any

discussion from the non-committee members? None. All in favor, please raise your hand. Another unanimous? Yes. Okay. So it passes. Resolution number 85 passes five zero zero. Resolution number 86, be

it resolved that on the recommendation of the superintendent of schools, that the board of education approves to accept the contract with the Stepping Stones group for speech and language pathology

services, not to exceed $121,541. Do I have a second? Ms. Koch, any discussion from the committee members? None. Any discussion from the non-committee members? None. All in favor, please raise your

hand. Got Koch, George, Wanda Root, and O'Brien and Tunga. So it passes five zero zero. Now for the next item on the agenda is board of education operating budget actuals for the fiscal year 2026. I

don't know, Mr. Chan or somebody has a presentation here or what's this item? I'll hand it over to Dr. Chan. Okay, thank you. Basically this is the budget to actual. The budget column actually is,

there are some adjustments that were made along the way, but the total number should, it remains the same. And the net amount is really that $280,000 is the surplus for the year. One caveat is the

city is still making some accrual adjustments for shared resources, shared services like IT. We don't expect it to be much. We haven't heard yet of the final accounting from the city. But as of now,

and so what we're also trying to do is make sure that there's a deadline for a close from them. And so we just have to go on and our number is 280,000 as a surplus. Dr. Chan, just a question from my

understanding. So fiscal year 2026 ended at September 30th. It ended June 30th. June 30th, right? Okay, sorry. So you're saying that the 12 previous months we had a surplus of 280,000. Right. And

usually this gets rolled over into the next year budget or what happens to the surplus? What I'd like to do is ask that it be rolled into the capital budget so that we don't, there will be needs. And

so rather than rolling it into the next year's operating budget that we reserve it for capital expenditures that we'll need. And is that is that solely the CFO's decision or do you need a vote from

the board for where it's utilized? I believe we should get a vote from the fiscal committee in agreement of that. No, I would correct that. If there's a surplus, again, we get an appropriation from

the city to the extent that there's a surplus, it really is up to the city. It has been tradition for that amount to go into a reserve account for short term capital needs. But the fact that there's a

surplus does not require any kind of vote from the board because it's just excess. Again, we got money from the city. We didn't spend as much. So they get the benefit, if you will, the city gets the

benefit of the 200 and 200 plus thousand dollars. That makes sense. Thanks. All right. Thank you. Anyone else from the committee? Any questions on that? Yeah, I had, I had another one percent. Sure,

Mr. George. Yeah. I just, I just wondered if you, I know, welcome, welcome to Stanford. You've been, you've been on the job now in a month. But here we are looking at last year's results. And again,

the overages in, again, the components of overages in teacher and certified staff, you know, keep moving around. Ultimately, the overage is not that much. It's all, I think it was two hundred and

eight thousand dollars or something based on everything that happened. So I don't know if there's any sort of comment on what's happening with the mix in the overages. But more to the point, year

after year, and this precedes you and Dr. Talley by quite a bit, we keep winding up with large negative variances in custodial overtime, year after year after year. And it's almost like I, it's like

we, somehow I guess I feel like this is a future looking thing, not a past looking thing, that do we have to budget better for this? Do we just have to assume, you know, that some of this is going to

happen? Because I think I've been on the board 11 years and I can't remember a year where custodial overtime did not go over budget in a particular year. So I just throw that out as a new team to you

guys, as is there something we can do better somehow, or are there more controls we can put on it? I know that, I know that, you know, our team, Cindy Grafting, Kevin, Mike, everybody are working to

minimize custodial overtime, yet it seems to always be a sore point when it's related to our budget. You know, are we just not budgeting enough? So those are my comments. So it's not so much relative

to what's happened as much as much as preparing for the future. Thank you, Mr. George. Anybody else from the committee, any comments on this surplus or any questions to Dr. Chan? If not, we'll go out

of the committee to Dr. Hammond. And, you know, I'm so excited with this budget, meaning, you know, I know we're going to get reimbursement and, you know, with some of these areas that, you know, the

long lists of reimbursement. And I guess my question is, and I did ask it to the whole board, and, you know, we received an answer, which I appreciated, but I again want the public to know this is

their taxpayer dollars, and we've been promised reimbursements. And it's important so they hear that this, all this due diligence that the district is doing is fabulous work. But, you know, according

to my math, it was about 41 percent reimbursement. But again, it varies from solar to, you know, building a whole school or renovating a school. And so I just wanted to put that out there, you know,

because it is in the notes, the reimbursement. But, you know, Mr. Chan, is this something that, you know, we can keep doing because the public needs to hear that their taxpayer dollars are not only

getting the job done, but we're going to get, you know, reimbursement back on this. And so I would love that to be part of some of those discussions so that they see that there is support here and

that we do really care and that we want to have the finest of schools and updated buildings, but they need to know that we're doing it to save money. And it's pretty exciting to see some of the

savings. So anyways, I just wanted to put that out there because I think it's important. These are, we got to remember who's paying for this. You know, we're not paying, we are, as you know, we live

in Stanford, but really, it's all of our taxpayers that are putting the money forward to help make this happen. And it's exciting to watch it, you know, the construction and the updates, you know,

take place. Thank you, Dr. Hammond. Ms. Koch. Thanks, Mr. Chair. I just I just want to clarify because I don't and maybe through Dr. Talley and Mr. Chen, can you just clarify because not everybody has

an accounting background or has worked with budgets of this scale before. We're not, are we getting reimbursed for anything? It's just that we budgeted for something or receive money from something.

And then we're not at this point in time, at least we haven't used the full budget. So we have this surplus. Is that the right kind of framing this? Because I just I want to make sure that for folks

who are listening, that we are kind of being clear on where the surplus is coming from, right? Like we're not getting money back from anyone. So you're talking about the $280,000 I mentioned in the

surplus. And that is haven't used fully use the budget. And that is the surplus that's left over. Okay, at this point in time, could that potentially change? Depends on what the city comes to us with

and when. Okay, thank you. I just wanted to make sure that was clear, but this isn't something that we should count on per se, right? Right. So what we'd like to do is work with the city to make sure

that say within 60 days that you know, we close the books for the year and everything that there are no additional vouchers or accruals that go back and forth. Otherwise, you can't close your books

for the year. And we're already in October. So once we have that common understanding, we can say for sure that that is the $280,000 that's recorded and on the books. Awesome. Thank you. We're gonna

head into budget season pretty, pretty fast. It's coming up, because I'm sure you feel it coming too. And so yeah, I think this will be good to revisit when we get to that in two months or so when we

have that conversation. Yeah. And I just want to clarify, if I may jump in, that this is the operating budget for last year. So what we're just talking about, it's not grants, it's not anything else.

It's just the operating budget. So all of this money is from the city. So in other words, what we've done, we got an appropriation from the city for 2026 fiscal 2026. We did not go through all of it.

We had $280,000 left over. That's essentially, there we are. Yeah, that's actually a good clarification, because Miss Koch, when you asked like, can it change? It's already closed on June 30. So we

can't spend this money without further approvals or, you know, proposals, but it's already ended four months ago, whenever. Okay, Dr. Hammond, your just hand was up from last time. Okay. All right. I

think with that, I think we have come to the end of the agenda. So for adjournment, I move to adjourn the fiscal committee meeting. This is time is 7 23 p.m. Do I have a second? Okay, Miss Koch, and

all in favor. Anybody opposes to end this meeting and talk more numbers? No. Okay, that's it then. The fiscal committee meeting is adjourned at 7 24 p.m. Thank you.