Transcript Elida Local Schools

Elida Local Schools
Financial Summit II
Report to Stakeholders
Fiscal Year 2006-2007
Joel L. Parker,CPA
Summit Team






















Lynn Metzger, Metzger Financial Services
Bruce Opperman, WLIO
Phillip Morton, Elida Visionaries
Matt Huffman, State Representative
Mike Estes, Village of Elida
Dennis Swick, Mayor of Elida
Paul Basinger, Township Trustee
Pat Schymanski, Elida Visionaries
Peter Kesler, Ohio Foam Corporation
Cliff Barber, General Dynamics
David Anderson, The State Bank
Max Stover, First Federal Bank
Steve Boroff, Superior Federal Credit Union
Steve Romey, Attorney
Beth Jokinen, The Lima News
Mike Ford, Delphos Herald
Sally Ulrich, Elida Board Member
Brenda Stocker, Elida Board Vice President
Don Diglia, Elida Superintendent
Joel Parker, Elida Treasurer
Faith Cummings, Elida NCLB Director
Jo Ellen Miller, Elida Information Director
Goals







Review data on high school bond issue
Review the financial condition of Elida Local
Schools
Expand the knowledge base on school funding
issues
Review data for future financial planning
Exchange ideas on “best practices”
Encourage dialogue on future economic trends
Have summit representative report to the Board
of Education on current condition
THERE IS NO BUSINESS
LIKE PUBLIC SCHOOL BUSINESS






Ohio Revised Code
No Child Left Behind
Unfunded mandates
DeRolph case
Collective Bargaining
Tax structure
State
Budget
Levies/Bond Issues
Phantom Revenue
Voters
Raw product - 100%
accepted
Emotional Issues
TYPES OF LEVIES

BOND LEVY – Used to finance permanent
improvements, new construction or
renovation (Per ORC-MAY NOT BE USED FOR
OPERATIONS)

PERMANENT IMPROVEMENT LEVY- Used
for repairs/fixed assets with a useful life
of 5 years (can be limited or continuing) and
can be renewed or replaced
TYPES OF LEVIES

OPERATING LEVY-Used for current
operations (can be limited or continuing) can
be renewed or replaced

EMERGENCY LEVY-Used for operations
(limited to 5 years and generates a set amount)
can be renewed but not replaced

RENEW=same effective rate

REPLACE=original millage
ELIDA BUILDING PROJECT

Elida High School $39,750,000
6.46 Bond Issue and 1 mill PI Levy
(38,250,000 Bonds + 1,500,000 Interest)

OSFC Ranking




Year Rank
2006 386
2007 393
2008 399
State Share
36%
35%
34%
Building Project History
High School
Fall 2006
36,000,000
Spring 2007
36,000,000
Construction Inflation
Spring 2008
35,600,000
2,670,000
Middle School Addition
4,500,000
4,500,000
Demolition and Abatement
2,300,000
1,900,000
Stadium Building
1,600,000
-
1,480,000
-
Total Cost
44,400,000
42,400,000
39,750,000
Bond Issue
41,000,000
39,525,000
38,250,000
7.7
0.5
6.8
0.5
8.20
7.30
Bond Millage
PI Millage
Total Mills
Plan
Reduced
400,000
6.46
1.00 (5 years)
7.46
4,500,000
820,000
1,600,000
7,320,000 16% Decrease
1.24 16% Decrease
WHY NOW?










Close one 90+ year old building
Take advantage of current construction costs
Improve air quality and handicap accessibility
Expand community partnerships
Protect local and community real estate values
Better investment of tax-payer money
Great interest rate 4.25%-4.50%
Hungry contractors(good time to bid)
Excellent strategic planning
The need goes back to 1969---The Right Plan
The Right Time!
Benefits to Community







Protect property values
Provide “Center Piece” for the community
Attract new families
Retain old families
Provide safe, healthy learning
environment
Loss to open enrollment $834,000
Loss to community schools $506,000
Get The Message Out! Answer
Every Question!










Newsletters
Web Site
Door to Door
Town meeting
Mailings to voters
TV and radio shows
Signs
TV ads
Newspaper ads
Notes from teachers
Inflation Defined






1969 New High School $2,150,000
2006 New High School $37,000,000
2007 New High School $39,750,000
1997 - $92 per square foot
2007 - $211 per square foot
(Review Trend Data)
Interest Savings
on $40 Million New High School



7.0% - 28 years $51,000,000
4.5% - 28 years $30,422,000
A Great Time to Borrow!
Legislative Concerns/History









HB 920 Tax Reduction Factor
HB 152 Phantom Revenue
Budget Reduction Order
HB 95 Inventory Tax Phase Out
HB 282 Favored Charter Schools
HB 412 Mandated spending on
repairs/educational supplies
SB 55 Increase in testing requirements
NCLB Increase in testing
2008 State Budget Cuts
HOW MANY CLIENTS?






Students
Tax payers
Boosters
Parents
Business partners
Local officials
WHO ARE WE?







Students – 2,458
Teachers- 145
Nurse –1
Guidance – 4
Professionals – 16
Secretaries – 16
Aides – 14
Maintenance
–2
Custodial – 13.5
Food Service – 25
Bus Drivers – 31
Asst Tech Co-1
 Total 268.5
4 Buildings
 81 square miles
Average Teacher Experience




EHS – 19.1 years
EMS – 17.0 years
EES – 16.9 years
EEK – 7.6 years
PERFORMANCE INDICATORS







Carry-over Margin 1-5%
Strength of Carry-over - 60 day
80% Rule on Salaries and Benefits
Debt to Total Assets
Residential Tax Rate
Per Pupil Spending (vs. other schools)
ADM Per Pupil Spending
AUDIT LIST





Annual Financial Audit by Auditor of State
ADM Audit by ODE(every 5 years)
Staffing Audit by ODE(5 years ago)
Curriculum Review by ODE
Annual Facility Inspection (Jared’s Law)
68 Day Cash Balance!
Cash Graph
6,000,000
5,000,000
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
4,000,000
3,000,000
2,000,000
1,000,000
Ja
nu
Fe ary
br
ua
ry
M
ar
ch
A
pr
il
M
ay
Ju
ne
Ju
l
A y
S ugu
ep
te s t
m
b
O er
ct
N obe
ov
em r
D
ec ber
em
be
r
General Fund Cash
7,000,00060 DAY CASH BALANCE ALMOST A REALITY
Month
June 30 Carry-Over *Gaining Strength*









1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
$ 936,422
$1,048,819
$ 758,675
$ 821,146
$ 360,933
$ 967,429
$1,865,900
$2,645,703
$3,496,376
21 days
23 days
17 days
18 days
8 days
21 days
39 days
53 days
68 days
WHAT CHANGED?










Staff cuts
Administrative cuts $239,155
Administrative Wages-0% increase 2 yrs
Streamlined food service
Moved staff to PPO insurance plan
Moved to pay to participate
Passed a levy in 2005 to bring back
specific programs
Reduce bus fuel consumption
Savings on Retire/Rehire
Sharing on health premiums
Revenue Chart FYD as of June 30, 2007
General Fund
7%
6%
Real Estate
0%
42%
Personal
Property
Foundation
Restricted Aid
Homestead/Roll
Other
39%
6%
Expense Chart FYD as of June 30, 2007
2%
0%
0%
2%
4%
Salaries
20%
Retire/Ins
54%
Purchased
Service
Supplies
Capital Outlay
18%
Debt-Prin.
Debt-Int.
General Fund Expenditures
Other
Elida Transportation Data
500000
Amount
400000
300000
200000
Expended
Gallons
100000
Miles
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Fiscal Year
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
Expended
86,985
61,233
70,591
66,988
92,372
144,618
127,159
Gallons
83,123
67,209
63,354
60,504
57,217
62,220
64,631
Miles
428,886
440,673
415,682
376,971
372,549
402,349
398,107
Fiscal Year
FOOD SERVICE
Fiscal Year
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
Revenue
Federal
State
Local
243,346
10,072
594,211
234,529
10,092
576,010
223,494
10,756
561,344
278,530
10,706
575,917
243,644
12,630
586,843
239,122
13,207
513,334
320,161
11,028
575,959
279,240
10,954
571,476
Total
847,629
820,631
795,594
865,153
843,117
765,663
907,148
861,670
Expenses
Salaries
Fringes
Purchased Service
Supplies
Equipment
325,736
134,816
9,128
339,680
9,333
332,741
156,892
8,421
338,004
12,348
345,760
198,125
5,285
327,304
20,709
353,996
211,198
5,011
314,984
-
350,154
245,929
4,507
292,572
-
276,396
181,288
7,022
279,624
16,241
283,380
153,651
11,485
307,740
-
313,751
179,800
13,657
342,635
-
Total
818,693
848,406
897,183
885,189
893,162
760,571
756,256
849,843
28,936
(27,775)
(101,589)
(20,036)
(50,045)
5,092
150,892
11,827
Plus Advances
Plus Beginning Bal.
111,602
140,538
112,763
48,636
11,174
40,000
39,774
54,000
29,726
88,818
239,711
Ending Balance
140,538
112,763
11,174
39,774
29,729
88,818
239,710
251,538
Net Gain/(Loss)
5 Year Forecast
Fiscal Year
2005
1.010
1.020
1.030
1.035
1.040
1.050
1.060
Revenues
General Property Tax (Real Estate)
Tangible Personal Property Tax
Income Tax
Unrestricted Grants-in-Aid
Restricted Grants-in-Aid
Property Tax Allocation
All Other Revenues
1.070
Total Revenues
2.010
2.020
2.040
2.050
2.060
2.070
Other Financing Sources
Proceeds from Sale of Notes
State Emergency Loans and Advancements (Approved)
Operating Transfers-In
Advances-In
All Other Financing Sources
Total Other Financing Sources
2.080
Total Revenues and Other Financing Sources
4.010
4.020
4.030
4.040
4.050
4.055
4.060
4.300
Expenditures
Personal Services
Employees' Retirement/Insurance Benefits
Purchased Services
Supplies and Materials
Capital Outlay
Intergovernmental
Debt Service:
Principal-All (Historical Only)
Principal-Notes
Principal-State Loans
Principal-State Advancements
Principal-HB 264 Loans
Principal-Other
Interest and Fiscal Charges
Other Objects
4.500
Total Expenditures
5.010
5.020
5.030
5.040
Other Financing Uses
Operating Transfers-Out
Advances-Out
All Other Financing Uses
Total Other Financing Uses
5.050
Total Expenditures and Other Financing Uses
6.010
3.010
3.020
3.030
3.040
3.050
3.060
7.010
7.020
Fiscal Year
2006
Fiscal Year
2007
$6,852,071
1,497,346
$7,354,275
1,531,472
$8,177,224
1,230,346
7,502,306
64,011
895,012
1,129,184
7,434,281
126,781
913,801
1,191,073
7,567,028
80,380
1,186,853
1,327,283
17,939,930
18,551,683
19,569,114
16,000
16,000
67,214
527
67,741
55,511
9,700
65,211
17,955,930
18,619,424
19,634,325
9,322,548
3,144,906
3,226,038
475,893
334,935
9,731,655
3,189,571
3,445,327
631,558
463,637
10,221,067
3,421,171
3,707,597
738,752
311,707
46,942
65,821
10,511
50,883
27,279
287,495
2,248
309,612
18,734
311,736
16,931,857
17,784,119
18,781,647
121,214
55,511
2,000
121,214
55,511
2,000
17,053,071
17,839,630
18,783,647
Excess of Revenues and Other Financing Sources
over (under) Expenditures and Other Financing Uses
902,859
779,794
850,678
Cash Balance July 1 - Excluding Proposed
Renewal/Replacement and New Levies
967,430
1,870,289
2,650,083
1,870,289
2,650,083
3,500,761
Cash Balance June 30
AUDIT REPORT






Performed every year
Cost to taxpayers $16,000
Cash basis (saves taxpayers $10,000$13,000 each year)
Tests are performed on accounts
payable, payroll, compliance with ORC,
fund raising, athletics, food service,
grants, etc.
Clean opinion
No adjustments
Salary Data – Get the Facts!!
Fiscal Year
2002-03
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
2009-2010
TOTAL
Classified &
Teaching
5%
4%
1.5%
3%
3.5%
3.5%
3.5%
3.5%
27.5%
Admin.
6%
0%
0%
3%
3.5%
3.5%
3.5%
3.5%
23%
Health Ins.
50/50
50/50
50/50
The Lima News-April 1, 2007







Top 25
Lima Total $928,919(7 of top 25)
Shawnee Total $915,855(5 of top 25)
Bath Total $836,848 (5 of top 25)
Apollo Total $829,174 (1 of top 25)
Elida Total $760,064 (1 at 16th)
Delphos Total $753,602 (3 of top 25)
The Lima News April 1, 2007Superintendent Salary Data










Lima $115,269
Crestview $108,159
Allen East $102,019
Delphos $101,457
Auglaize ESC $96,600
New Bremen $93,767
Lincolnview $93,711
Putnam ESC $93,565
Waynesfield $92,426
Elida $91,628
How does our 2007
residential tax rate stack up?










Residential Tax Rate 2007
31.44 Lima City
31.26 Allen East
31.15 Bath
29.76 Shawnee
29.23 Bluffton
27.86 Perry
27.09 Spencerville (Plus 1% income tax)
27.14 ELIDA
26.80 Delphos
ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES
Administrative
Expenditures
Lima City School
Expenditures Per
Pupil
$1,228
Percentage of Total
Expenditures
13.1%
State Expenditures
$1,143
12.2%
Spencerville
$1,025
13.3%
Delphos City
$1,005
12.7%
Allen East
$961
12.9%
Perry
$933
13.4%
Bath
$882
11.7%
Bluffton
$856
11.1%
Shawnee
$831
11.5%
Elida
$811
11.3%
Administration: Salaries for administrators, office staff, and office supplies
BUILDING EXPENSES
Building Operations
Expenditures
Bluffton
Expenditures Per Pupil
$1,804
Percentage of Total
Expenditures
23.3%
State Expenditures
$1,779
19.0%
Shawnee
$1,749
24.2%
Bath
$1,716
22.7%
Lima City
$1,673
17.9%
Perry
$1,664
23.9%
Allen East
$1,567
21.0%
Spencerville
$1,529
19.8%
Elida
$1,412
19.7%
Delphos
$1,326
16.8%
Building Operations:Utilities, maintenance, repairs, busses and lunchroom expenses
Staff Support Expenses
Staff Support
Expenditures
Lima City
Expenditures Per
Pupil
$389
Percentage of Total
Expenditures
4.2%
State Expenditures
$293
3.1%
Bluffton
$155
2.0%
Elida
$90
1.3%
Spencerville
$51
0.7%
Bath
$35
0.5%
Allen East
$34
0.4%
Perry Local
$25
0.4%
Shawnee
$24
0.3%
Delphos
$12
0.1%
Staff Support: Teacher training and other professional development activities
Pupil Support Expenses
Pupil Support
Expenditures
State Expenditures
Expenditures Per
Pupil
$935
Percentage of Total
Expenditures
10.0%
Lima City
$931
9.9%
Delphos
$907
11.5%
Bath
$851
11.3%
Spencerville
$806
10.5%
Shawnee
$727
10.1%
Allen East
$688
9.2%
Bluffton
$672
8.7%
Elida
$669
9.4%
Perry
$623
9.0%
Pupil Support: Salaries for librarians, counselors, and nurses
Instructional Support
Instructional
Expenditures
State Expenditures
Expenditures Per
Pupil
$5,205
Percentage of Total
Expenditures
55.6%
Lima City
$5,148
54.9%
Delphos
$4,664
58.9%
Spencerville
$4,299
55.8%
Bluffton
$4,244
54.9%
Allen East
$4,220
56.5%
Elida
$4,169
58.3%
Bath
$4,070
53.9%
Shawnee
$3,891
53.9%
Perry
$3,704
53.3%
Instruction: Teacher and education professional salaries and classroom materials
STATE FUNDING FLAWS








Over-reliant on property taxes
No inflationary growth on property taxes
Phantom Revenue
Unfunded mandates
System too complicated
Many man hours on
levies(2000,2003,2004,2005,2006,2007,2008)
Schools get viewed as “Big Government Waste”
One of the few ways voters can express
frustration with taxes
PHANTOM REVENUE






Who is it??
State assumes we receive 23 mills from
local tax payers
Elida actually receives 20 mills
This 3 mill gap is a huge problem
The State deducts 3 more mills than we
actually receive
See SF3 handout (making sausage)
State Aid-Short Version
$5,403 x 1.00687x2,442.15=13,285,586
 Less 8,226,036(.023 x357,653,735)
_______________


$5,059,550
23 Mill Charge- Off



FY 2005 $7,383,852
FY 2006 $7,870,054
FY 2007 $8,226,035
State Aid
FY
FY
FY
FY
2006
2007
2008
2009
$7,520,508
$7,520,508
$7,458,619
$7,458,619
TAX BASE
Tax Valuations
Collected Year
1999
Values
2000
Values
2001
Values
2002
Values
2003
Values
2004
Values
2005
Values
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
Ag/Residential
Commercial/Industrial
Sub Total
164,693,830
70,131,360
234,825,190
175,352,850
70,709,240
246,062,090
179,161,050
72,432,590
251,593,640
182,378,550
73,126,890
255,505,440
213,179,340
87,268,820
300,448,160
216,149,940
90,926,040
307,075,980
219,179,010
91,884,270
311,063,280
Utility Real
Total Real
40,220
234,865,410
45,900
246,107,990
43,010
251,636,650
45,410
255,550,850
47,120
300,495,280
47,890
307,123,870
31,820
311,095,100
12,149,290
36,829,336
48,978,626
11,460,990
37,055,024
48,516,014
9,296,660
40,797,097
50,093,757
9,603,630
39,268,817
48,872,447
9,517,850
32,993,852
42,511,702
9,280,790
36,274,840
45,555,630
8,795,910
27,665,882
36,461,792
283,844,036
294,624,004
301,730,407
304,423,297
343,006,982
352,679,500
347,556,892
20,080,550
20,324,880
20,946,010
20,946,010
20,946,010
24,203,770
24,291,910
Utility Personal
Tangible Personal
Total Personal
Total All
Exempt Values
STATE BUDGET BREAKDOWN
Primary & Secondary Education 35%
 Medicaid 20%
 Colleges 13%

State Budget Concerns-FY 2010







CAT $ 1.3 billion new
Corporate Franchise Tax 1.1 billion loss
Tangible Property Tax 1.6 billion loss
Income Tax 2.1 billion loss
NET LOSS 3.5 billion in state revenue
10 year job loss – 210,000 manufacturing
10 year job loss- 4,000 Allen County
CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT








High-quality education is a fundamental right for every Ohio child
Determine levels of funding based on student need
Eliminate “Phantom Revenue”
Exempt Ohio seniors and disabled from property taxes on the first
$40,000 of the market value of their homes
Create an independent commission appointed by Ohio’s top
elected leaders(to monitor efficiency)
Direct the commission to report annually to the governor
Create and maintain a permanent local government fund to
support local government services
Establish a system to fund colleges at no less than 2007 amounts
and increases annually based on state’s personal income
percentage
FY 1995-96
FY 1996-97
FY 1997-98
FY 1998-99
FY 1999-00
FY 2000-01
FY 2001-02
FY 2002-03
FY 2003-04
FY 2004-05
FY 2005-06
Total
High
School
23,799
35,209
27,918
81,276
32,830
34,144
58,311
59,248
91,489
80,184
67,983
592,391
PI Repairs-10 years
414,235
Total FY 96-06 HS
HS-11 Year Ave.
1,006,626
91,511
Middle
School
9,627
15,804
15,502
22,623
67,997
15,890
13,894
23,447
26,079
36,326
18,012
247,189
Elida
Ele.
3,349
10,481
25,997
14,225
19,228
2,141
5,937
7,003
6,084
56,356
31,475
150,801
Gomer
7,901
17,348
31,014
53,493
15,411
26,167
8,361
16,811
31,830
17,054
33,381
225,390
DISTRICT WIDE
REPAIRS
Building Data
FY 06-07
Gomer
Repairs
Heat
13,178
33,361
Elida High
Repairs
Heat
69,260
Heat
122,339
102,557
Electric
9,524
Electric
Water
2,215
Water
EMS
25,305
EE
24,941
GK
33,361
Total
83,607
EHS
122,339
8,951
Difference
Total
58,278
Total
303,107
ADM
171
ADM
820
Per Student
341
Per Student
370
Elida Ele.
Repairs
32,411
Elida Middle
Repairs
Heat
24,941
Heat
25,305
Electric
31,015
Electric
65,598
114,049
38,732
Electric
EMS
EE
GK
Total
65,598
31,015
9,524
106,137
EHS
102,557
Difference
(3,580)
Square ft.
Water
11,405
Water
7,692
Total
99,772
Total
212,644
ADM
888
ADM
581
EMS
86,283
EE
67,642
GK
47,320
Total
201,245
EHS
135,117
Difference
Per Student
112
Per Student
366
(66,128)
5 Year Goals







Pass a building bond issue
Continue to monitor health insurance
(Health Savings Accounts, Spousal language,
Mandate Generic Drugs)…impact of state pool
Enhance customer service
Maintain 0-5% profit margin
Continue to review staffing needs
Monitor new legislation
Others ???? (group discussion)
Cliff S. Barber
“From a cost savings standpoint the bond issue is a "nobrainer". The annual maintenance cost for the old high school
alone is over $100,000per year and that does not include the
$122,000 per year in heating costs. Also, the addition to the
middle school will save $4.4 million in operating and personnel
expenses over the life of the bond by allowing the district to
operate three buildings instead of four thus allowing the middle
school addition to pay for itself. “
David A. Anderson
President - Lima Region
The State Bank and Trust Company
“I haven’t talked to anyone that won’t agree Elida NEEDS a new
high school. I don’t think anyone could reasonably argue
otherwise. Both the high school and Gomer buildings are tired
and costly. For example, over the past 10 years alone our school
district has spent $4.80/sf, $4.39/sf and $2.87/sf on repairs at the
Gomer building, high school and middle school, respectively. By
comparison that translates into $300,000 of excess costs being
absorbed to keep the older buildings operational. If a major
problem presents itself at the high school or Gomer, which is
highly probable, we’ll be forced to put more “band-aids on
craters.” We need to take action now. Waiting would cost
everyone much, much more…and
we’re not just talking about money!”
David A. Anderson
President - Lima Region
The State Bank and Trust Company
“It is clearly documented that new school
facilities improve attitudes and enhance the
education process. If we do not update our
facilities we not only leave money on the table
(35% from the State of Ohio), we all but assure
ourselves that future graduating classes will
continually fall behind their peers that have
access to better technology and equipment that
come with new buildings.”
David A. Anderson
President - Lima Region
The State Bank and Trust Company
“From an economic development perspective, we need to be
aware that new business prospects care about the quality of
schools when determining where to locate. They understand
that modern, well-maintained facilities provide students with
access to advanced technology and equipment that will be
important to the future quality of their workforce. Likewise,
prospective new residents also make choices based on the
quality of schools. Anyone who has ever moved from one
community to another knows that part of the process involves
evaluating which school district to move within. I know my
family did when we chose Elida in 1994. With all the new
school facilities now surrounding the Elida School District,
what’s the chance of new residents making that same choice
today? Exactly! We need to take action now.”