►
From YouTube: School Funding Task Force (10/11/21)
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
P.M
and
hereby
call
this
fourth
meeting
of
the
school
funding
task
force
to
order.
I
will
remind
all
the
members
and
the
people
in
the
audience
to
please
silence
your
cell
phones,
remote
members,
when
the
role
is
called,
please
indicate
if
you're,
home
or
in
the
annex
and
when
you
joined
the
meeting
your
microphones
were
automatically
muted.
So
please
remember
to
unmute
your
microphone
before
speaking.
A
B
C
D
A
President
in
the
room-
and
I
will
representative
johnson-
did
text
me
this
morning
and
for
me
he
apologized
he
was
unable
to
attend
today.
You
all
should
we
need
a
motion
to
approve
the
minutes
from
the
august.
9Th
meeting
have
a
motion:
is
there
a
second
all,
those
in
favor
say
aye,
I
oppose
no
emotion
carries
and
I
will
just
make
a
note.
A
You
will
know
that
we
did
not
meet
in
september,
co-chair
wise,
and
I
discussed
that
and
we
knew
that
this
oea
report
was
not
going
to
be
available
until
around
the
1st
of
october.
So
we
felt
it's
prudent
to
spend
our
time.
Focusing
on
that
and
kde
has
got
another
presentation.
They
need
to
present
to
us
which
we
will
get
next
week.
So
that
is
the
reason
that
we
are
having
meetings
two
weeks
in
a
row.
A
A
B
A
It
appears
you're
going
to
have
several
sections
to
this
report
and
I
think
it
might
be
prudent
as
they
as
they
complete
a
phase
of
the
report
that
we'll
take
we'll
stop
and
take
questions
there.
While
it's
fresh
is
that
fine?
Yes,.
B
A
H
Good
morning,
in
november
of
2020
ears
assigned
oea
a
study
to
analyze
changes
to
the
current
sikh
funding
formula
to
improve
equity
without
increasing
state
funding.
In
addition,
the
report
would
review
other
states
formulas
as
well
as
review.
Rural
and
non-rural
district
characteristics
in
kentucky
oea
performed
a
detailed
analysis
of
how
the
seek
funding
formula
and
transportation
formula
are
supposed
to
be
calculated
based
on
statute.
H
Several
issues
were
found
due
to
these
findings.
Oea
staff
will
be
presenting
two
presentations
today.
The
first
one
will
be
on
to
seek
hypothetical
changes,
and
the
second
presentation
will
be
on
what
we
found
during
our
audit
of
the
sikh
formula.
Along
with
the
recommendations
in
the
report,
we
will
now
review
the
findings
of
this
presentation.
H
H
H
F
The
seek
funding
formula
was
designed
to
equalize
local
revenue
with
state
funds
to
ensure
that
students
living
in
property,
poor
districts
received
the
same
base
funding
as
students
living
in
property
wealthy
districts
in
school
year.
2020,
the
general
assembly
set
the
guaranteed
base
per
pupil
amount
to
four
thousand
dollars
seek
includes
additional
funding
for
students
with
additional
needs
referred
to
as
add-ons
to
the
based
guaranteed
funding
formula.
There
are
five
add-on
adjustments,
which
will
be
explained
on
the
next
slide
to
receive
state
seek
funding.
F
Tier
1
allows
school
boards
to
increase
revenue
above
15
percent
of
the
seek
based
funding
and
is
equalized
with
state
funds
for
districts
with
property
assessments
below
and
fifty
percent
of,
the
state
average
in
school
year.
Twenty
twenty.
This
amount
was
eight
hundred
and
thirty
four
thousand
dollars.
F
F
Moderate
incidence
has
a
weight
of
one
point,
one
seven
or
four
thousand
six
hundred
and
eighty
dollars
per
student
and
low
incidence
has
a
weight
of
two
point.
Three
five
or
nine
thousand
four
hundred
dollars
per
student,
home
and
hospital
represents
students
who
qualify
to
receive
an
education
at
home
or
while
in
the
hospital,
and
is
the
guaranteed
base
per
pupil
funding
amount
less
one
hundred
dollars
for
capital
outlay,
the
lep
add-on
or
limited
english
proficiency
has
a
weight
of
0.096
or
385
dollars
per
student.
F
F
F
Student-Based
funding
assigns
a
cost
to
educating
a
student
with
no
special
needs
or
services
called
a
base
amount
then
accounts
for
the
additional
costs
of
educating
specific
categories
of
students.
Kentucky
and
three
surrounding
states
use
this
model
and
kentucky's
base.
Funding
is
four
thousand
dollars
per
student.
Hybrid
models
use
a
mixture
of
student-based
and
resource-based
models.
F
F
F
All
surrounding
states
have
an
expected
local
share
for
funding
education
except
indiana.
Three
states
use
multiple
data
points
to
calculate
local
share,
while
kentucky
requires
three
dollars
for
every
one
thousand
dollars
in
assessed.
Local
property
wealth
virginia
does
not
require
local
effort,
but
districts
may
impose
taxes
to
generate
supplemental
revenue.
F
Some
states,
like
kentucky,
only
only
fund
students
who
qualify
for
free
lunch,
while
other
states
fund
students
who
qualify
for
both
free
and
reduced
lunch.
Some
provide
a
flat
amount
like
indiana,
while
others
provide
a
multiplier
of
the
base.
Funding
like
kentucky
or
based
on
the
concentration
of
at-risk
students
like
missouri
kentucky
and
ohio
use,
multiple
weights
for
the
exceptional
child
add-on,
depending
on
the
severity
of
the
exceptionality.
F
Some
states
use
one
multiplier
or
a
flat
amount
per
student,
regardless
of
disability.
Some
states
use
the
cost
of
delivering
special
education
services
and
others
use
a
hybrid
system
kentucky
and
all
surrounding
states
provide
extra
funding
for
limited
english
proficiency.
Students
lep,
sometimes
referred
to
as
english
as
english
learners
or
lepel
students
kentucky
and
missouri
apply
a
multiplier
to
the
base
funding.
F
A
A
A
A
Type
of
situation
and
a
follow-up
question
of
that
last
last
school
year
of
the
current
school
year,
we've
had
a
lot
of
students
who
are
in
like
a
virtual
setting,
and
this
year
we
have
students
who
are
in
like
a
full-time
virtual
academy
who
are
not
present
at
the
school
building.
I'm
assuming
they
they're
still
counting
and
receive
the
full
seek
allocation.
A
A
A
Okay
and
just
to
clarify
that
students
who
have
excused
absences
from
school
are
not
counted
in
the
average
daily
attendance
that.
H
A
Okay
is
any
other
member.
Devonna
page
has
a
question.
H
H
B
Just
a
brief
follow-up
to
rep
tipton's
questions,
so
if
students
on
home
hospital,
I
know
my
son
was
on
home
hospital
education
for
a
while
are
only
out
of
school
for
a
brief
amount
of
time.
Potentially,
why
is
it
that
that
amount
is
is
not
included
assuming
like
for
the
whole
year?
E
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
I
have
a
question
and
again
thanks
very
much
to
oea
and
all
your
staff.
This
is
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
in-depth
research
to
read
over.
So
I
appreciate
that.
Can
you
talk
a
little
bit
about
the
the
resource-based
funding?
Some
districts
or
some
states
had
a
flat
amount.
Others
had
like
tennessee
virginia,
you
say
based
on
the
cost
of
resources.
H
In
the
appendix
it
discussed
each
state
more
in
depth
than
what's
in
the
report,
however,
resource-based
normally
is
they'll
look
at
what
they
think
the
cost
is
to
provide
regular
education
and
how
much
materials
are
needed.
So
it's
basically,
they
look
at
what
types
of
resources
how
many
instructional
age
you'll
need
compared
to
this
many
students,
so
that's
basically
how
it's
funded.
J
Just
real
quick
on
the
surrounding
states
funding
when
it
talks
about
the
ada
and
adm.
So
when
we're
looking
at
ohio
and
indiana,
their
funding
is
substantially
higher,
plus
it's
the
membership
funding
correct.
Do
we
know
what
how
many,
what
the
percentage
the
average
daily
attendance
is
in
the
states,
so
in
theory,
how
many
students
we
want,
we
aren't
getting
funding
on
compared
to
the
surrounding
states.
H
C
I
wouldn't
say
they:
don't
they
don't
get
funding,
it
would
be
just
those
would
be
the
students
that
would
be
the
difference
between
membership
and
average
daily
attendance.
So
it's
about
90
percent,
huge
90
to
95
percent
of
students
who
are
in
attendance
daily.
A
A
F
A
F
F
Quintile
1
contains
districts
with
the
lowest
per
pupil,
property
assessments
and
quintile.
5
contains
districts
with
the
highest
per-pupil
property
assessments.
Equity
is
measured
using
the
gap
between
the
funding
received
by
quintile
5
and
the
funding
received
by
lower
wealth.
Quintiles,
particularly
quintile
1.
individual
districts
within
quintiles
may
experience
different
outcomes.
F
This
map
shows
each
district's
quintile.
Remember
that
each
quintile
has
approximately
the
same
number
of
students.
There
are
68
districts
in
quintile
one,
the
least
wealthy
quintile
primarily
in
eastern
kentucky.
There
are
five
districts
in
quintile:
five,
the
wealthiest
quintile
anchorage,
independent
jefferson,
fayette,
livingston
and
lyon.
Counties.
F
This
slide
shows
how
quintile
characteristics
have
changed
over
time.
This
analysis
may
look
different
at
different
points
in
time,
but
here
we
are
looking
at
pre-cara
and
early
care
compared
to
the
most
recent
years
for
which
data
was
available,
and
here
we're
only
looking
at
the
gap
between
quintile,
1,
the
lowest
wealth
districts
and
quintile
5,
the
highest
wealth
districts.
F
Later
we'll
look
at
the
gaps
between
quintiles
1
through
4,
compared
to
quintile
5.
in
2020
quintile
1
had
an
additional
15
districts,
but
only
900
additional
students,
quintile
3,
actually
decreased
in
both
number
of
districts
and
count
of
students
compared
to
1991.
The
number
and
percent
of
at-risk
students
and
exceptional
child
students
have
increased.
F
F
F
F
F
Local
and
state
revenue
increased
in
each
quintile,
with
greater
increases
in
lower
quintiles.
Less
wealthy
districts
had
more
revenue
per
pupil
in
2020
and
came
closer
to
the
revenue
in
wealthier
districts.
The
difference
was
115
dollars
more
equitable
in
2020,
including
federal
revenue,
increases
equity
even
further
in
2020,
compared
to
1990
equity.
F
Looking
at
expenditures,
kentucky
districts
spent
less
on
administration
and
more
on
instruction
in
2018,
compared
to
1990.
about
half
of
2018
total
current
expenditures
were
instruction
expenditures
and
the
difference
between
expenditures
in
quintile
5
compared
to
quintile
1
decreased
in
each
category.
F
D
Thank
you,
ma'am.
I
want
to
make
sure
I
get
this
right
because,
as
my
colleagues
know,
pay
equity
is
very
important
to
me.
D
E
C
In
not
in
nominal
dollars,
so
if
you
were
to
look
at
the
first
part
in
1990,
the
average
teacher
salary
was
26
000
in
2020
it
would
be
50
54
000
nearly
but
again
in
inflation
adjusted
dollars.
It
has
gone
up
so.
D
Do
me
a
favor:
do
me
a
favor
okay,
kentucky
is
contiguous
to
seven
states,
I'm
not
going
to
enumerate
them.
We
all
know
them.
Is
it
possible?
You
can
provide
me
that
same
analysis
by
november
1st
and
I
use
november
1st.
For
this
reason,
representative
tipton
and
I
are
on
the
ncsl
education
committee,
I'm
going
to
ncrcl
on
I'm,
leaving
that
that
tuesday
november
2nd,
I
like
to
see
those
comparisons
for
our
contiguous
states.
Before
I
go
to
ncsao,
can
you
do
that?
For
me.
F
A
Okay,
I
do
have
a
follow-up
question
too
senator.
Thank
you.
Thank
you
very
welcome
to
senator
thomas's
question.
You
you've
got
the
average
course.
We
know
that
in
our
171
districts,
there's
quite
a
bit
of
variety
in
teacher
salary.
Do
you
know
the
range
from
the
lowest
average
pay
per
district
to
the
highest
average
paid
per
district.
C
However,
one
thing
that
I
would
direct
you
to
is
every
year
the
office
of
education,
accountability.
We
do
publish
the
this
data
profiles
where
that
information
is
available.
Also,
if
you
were
to
look
online
with
the
online
dislocated
profiles,
tool
you'd
be
able
to
see
a
map
where,
just
where
it
generates
just
differences
by
district.
A
And
I'll
just
make
a
comment
here
and
then
representative
bojanowski
has
a
question.
I
think
members,
if
you
look
at
the
property
wealth
per
pupil,
it
really
really
helps
us
understand
the
issues
that
we
have
and
trying
to
come
up
with
an
equitable
funding
model
for
education
system,
because
there
are
certain
districts
that
have
much
more
capability
than
other
districts.
Now,
representative
bojanowski
has
a
question.
B
Could
you
speak
on?
Thank
you.
Could
you
speak
on
why
only
property
values
were
used
to
develop
the
quintiles
as
as
opposed
to
also
having
poverty
level
quintiles
and,
as
I
kind
of
looked
through
the
at-risk
districts,
covington
independent
is,
has
96.93
at-risk
students
and
they're
in
quintile,
three
newport
independent
96.7
they're
in
quintile
four,
and
there
are
several
so
I'm
wondering
what
prompted
that
decision.
I
mean.
B
I
understand
we're
looking
at
just
as
rep
tipton
pointed
out
the
property
values,
but
before
I
make
any
recommendations
or
decisions
on
on
the
options
presented,
I'd
also
like
to
see
how
that
would
impact
the
highest
proper
poverty,
the
districts
with
the
highest
poverty,
because
of
a
concern
that
some
of
the
lower
poverty
districts
may
be
averaging
out.
What
might
be
the
impact.
H
B
May
I
ask
a
brief
follow-up:
could
you
prepare
not
in
the
comparison
to
1990,
but
just
for
the
sake
of
the
22
or
so
projections,
how
that
would
impact
the
the
difference
between
the
lowest
poverty
districts
and
the
highest
poverty
districts?
B
I
would
assume
it
would
just
be
a
matter
of
ranking
the
districts
by
poverty,
creating
quintiles
based
upon
even
number
of
students
and
then
just
plugging
the
differences
in
into
the
formula.
I
think
that
would
be
really
important
in
order
to
reflect
on
the
impact
of
some
of
these
options.
C
We
would
be
able
to
do
it
and
actually,
if
you
were
to
look
at
the
back
at
all
the
appendices
they
are
ranked,
we
do
give
the
information
by
district.
We
would
be
able
to
look
at
the
district
poverty,
the
percent
of
students
who
are
receiving
free
and
reduced
price
lunch
as
a
proxy
for
poverty.
The
other
thing
that
we
would
also
do
is
we
would
caution
that
the
comparisons
made
between
the
two
might
be
a
little
bit
different.
So
I
would
caution
you
very
strongly
on
that.
E
E
Five,
for
instance,
there's
five
districts,
two
very
large
districts
and
three
very
small
districts,
so,
for
instance,
on
the
property
wealth
per
pupil.
Is
that
just
the
average
of
the
each
of
those
five
districts,
the
media,
the
mean
of
those
five
districts?
Or
is
that
you
take
all
the
property
value
you
take
all
the
students
and
then
you
come
up
with
that
number
from
that.
E
F
E
E
I
Thank
you
with
regard
to
the
property
tax
rate.
It
looks
like
from
my
look.
My
reading
of
this
is
that
the
districts
in
quintile
one
have
significantly
increased
their
property
tax
rate
to
meet
the
need
which
going
back
to
the
slide
that
mr
tuesday
was
talking
about
the
districts
in
quintile.
One
have
also
increased
in
the
most
need.
H
Okay,
so
here
are
the
definitions
used
to
determine
which
counties
are
classified
as
metropolitan
micropolitan
and
rural.
These
definitions
are
based
on
the
2010
u.s
census.
Data
independent
districts
are
classified
the
same
as
the
county
district
they
reside
in.
There
are
currently
58
metropolitan
districts,
44
micropolitan
districts
and
69
rural
districts.
H
H
H
H
28.5
of
people
living
in
rural
districts
do
not
have
a
high
school
diploma
compared
to
22
percent
in
micropolitan
and
14
in
metropolitan
areas.
In
addition,
only
11
of
the
people
living
in
rural
districts
have
a
bachelor's
degree
or
higher
compared
to
17
percent
in
micropolitan
and
25
percent
in
metropolitan
areas.
H
Rural
districts
also
have
a
higher
percentage
of
students
needing
special
education
services
and
more
homeless
students.
However,
rural
districts
have
the
least
amount
of
minority
students
and
finally,
rural
districts
on
average
have
lower
teacher
salaries
in
2020
metropolitan
districts.
Average
teacher
salaries
were
almost
7
000
more
than
rural
districts
and
micropolitans
average
teacher
salaries
were
almost
a
thousand
dollars
more.
H
H
H
H
H
The
final
column,
change
in
equity
looks
at
the
2020
difference
from
each
quintile
and
compares
to
the
new
equity
difference
to
determine
if
this
change
increases
equity
by
reducing
the
base
seek
amount
and
including
a
roll
district
add-on
of
0.239
equity
increases
by
629
dollars
per
pupil
in
quintile.
One
quintile:
two
equity
increases
by
two
hundred
and
ninety
dollars
per
pupil,
quintile
three
by
one
hundred
and
ten
dollars
per
pupil
and
quintile
four
increases
by
twenty
five
dollars
per
pupil.
H
H
In
addition,
if
the
general
assembly
wanted
to
fund
any
of
these
models,
instead
of
reducing
the
seat
guaranteed
base,
that
amount
is
shown
as
well
on
the
bottom
of
each
slide
to
fund
this
change.
Without
reducing
the
seek
base,
it
would
cost
the
general
assembly
140.6
million
dollars,
while
the
overall
equity
in
quintile
one
increased.
Not
all
districts
in
that
quintile
will
gain
additional
funding.
H
B
So
this
is
just
a
clarification.
I
was
a
little
confused,
so
I
do
understand
that
the
intent
was
not
to
require
additional
funding,
but
the
descriptions
will
usually
list
a
per
pupil.
Average
assessment
was
recalculated
within
one
dollar
of
the
original,
but
then
like
on
table
3.6.
It
says,
if
fully
funded,
this
change
would
increase
total
state
seek
by
27.2
million.
What?
What
does
that
mean
in
light
of
not
requiring
additional,
and
I
can
do
it
just
for
the
one
that
we're
on
right
now.
H
So
basically,
the
way
we
did
these
calculations
is
we
try
to
get
as
close
to
reducing
the
basic
to
cover
any
change
in
the
funding
formula,
and
we
try
to
get
it
as
close
to
zero
as
possible.
So
what
that
one
is
saying
is
we
actually
got
it
down
to
a
dollar?
Okay
and
the
base
amount
was
reduced
this
much
okay
and
then,
when
it
says
this
is
how
much
it
would
cost
to
fully
fund.
It
would
be
if
we
brought
the
base
back
up
to
four
thousand
dollars
and
made
that
adjustment.
E
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
was
there
any
other
methodology
that
you
looked
at
to
classify
districts
as
rural
versus,
whether
it's
metropolitan
micropolitan
or
just
not
rural
at
all?
Just
because
I'm
looking
at
this
map
and
and
this
is
not
meant
as
a
critique
of
oea,
because
I
mean
somebody
has
you
have
to
define
it
somehow,
but
I'm
looking
at
some
of
these
counties
that
are
classified
or
districts
that
are
classified
as
metropolitan
or
micropolitan,
and
I'm
telling
them
I've
been
there.
H
E
Okay,
because
I'm
just
I'm
looking
at
this,
this
slide
the
districts
that
lost
funding.
When
you
have
a
rural
add-on
and
I'm
telling
you
metcalfe
county,
that's
pretty
rural
lewis.
County
loses
funding,
and
that
is
one
of
the
most
sparsely
populated
city.
You
know
counties
we've
got
so
I
would
just
point
out,
I
think,
a
flaw
in
that
methodology,
but,
like
I
said
you
had
to
choose
something
to
classify.
A
H
H
H
H
H
J
When
you
did
all
of
these
figures,
was
there
any
thought
process
into
the
amount
of
local
tax
rate
for
each
district
and
the
reason
I
would
say
that
if
you
go
back
to
the
original
slide,
you
had
with
the
rural
add-ons.
J
J
Has
there
been
any
thought
process
in
that,
because
if
you
have
a
95,
95
tax
rate
and
then
all
of
a
sudden
you're
losing
some
of
your
funding,
the
only
way
you're
ever
gonna
be
able
to
make
that
up
is
to
raise
taxes
again
where
maybe
another
district
only
has
a
tax
rate
of
50
to
where
is
there
any
of
that
being
brought
into
this
into
this
discussion?
It's
just
straight
c
correct.
It
is
straight.
J
H
So
this
model
decreases
the
base,
seek
amount
to
3798
and
takes
those
funds
to
add
a
weight
of
0.239
for
rural
districts
and
a
weight
of
0.06
for
micropolitan
districts.
These
adjustments
increased
equity
by
six
hundred
and
sixty
seven
dollars
per
pupil
in
quintile.
One
and
quintiles
two
through
four
equity
also.
H
Increased
to
address
concerns
that
rapidly
declining
enrollment
negatively
affects
districts,
funding
for
districts
losing
students.
This
model
used
a
three-year
average
of
attendance
data
when
district
student
counts
decreased
for
two
consecutive
years
for
districts
whose
attendance
did
not
decline.
This
model
continued
to
use
prior
year,
adjusted
ada,
plus
growth.
H
H
H
A
Could
I
ask
a
quick
question
there?
Just
so
everybody
understands
if
you
look
at
that
chart
up
there.
If
you
go
to
membership,
the
new
average
per
pupil
is
down
in
every
quintile.
However,
there
are
more
students
being
counting,
so
the
total
dollars
are
equivalent
correct.
H
A
H
A
H
So
I
did
finish
this
line.
Didn't
it
okay,
this
model
includes
a
foster
care
add-on
calculation
using
the
number
of
foster
care
students
in
a1
schools
and
adding
a
weight
of
0.125
for
those
students,
including
the
foster
care
add-on
weight,
increased
equity
between
quintiles
one
and
five
by
two
dollars
per
pupil
and
had
very
little
change
in
equity.
Overall,
however,
the
general
assembly
may
still
wish
to
add
this
adjustment
due
to
children
in
foster.
H
H
H
The
next
slide
is
going
to
show
you
an
adjustment
based
on
percentage
of
students
living
in
poverty.
This
slide
shows
you
the
poverty
range
and
weight
for
this
change.
As
you
can
see,
each
classification
is
adjusted
by
adding
an
extra
fifty
dollars
per
student.
As
the
percent
of
students
qualifying
for
free
lunch
increases.
H
H
A
B
Okay,
so
trying
to
kind
of
follow
along
in
the
full
text
and
kind
of
jump
in
pages.
So
when
you
did
the
table
3.3
the
financial
data
comparisons,
you
discussed
the
local
and
state
revenue
without
on
behalf
payments
and
then
the
local
state
and
federal
revenue
without
on
behalf
payments,
reflecting
on
quintile
1
and
the
20.7
of
students
who
are
in
special
education.
B
My
question
is:
what
percentage
of
the
federal
dollars
are
applied
directly
to
special
education
and
when
we're
evaluating
equity
for
districts
that
have
very
high
special
education
students?
Wouldn't
it
be
prudent
to
include
those
federal
dollars?
I'm
assuming
quite
a
bit
of
it-
is
for
special
ed
and
wouldn't
it
be
prudent
to
consider
those
dollars
as
we
consider
the
equity
as
far
as
special
education
funding
changes
to
the
add-ons.
So
you
know
just
with
the
the
higher
special
education
levels
in
some
of
the
quintiles.
H
Reason
we
did
not
include
federal
funds
in
our
equity.
Analysis
is
because
the
general
assembly
has
no
control
over
that
they
can
only
control
basically
limits
on
what
they
provide,
along
with
what
the
local
requirements
are
for
the
seek.
So
that's
why
we
excluded
federal
funding.
However,
you
we
did
show
an
example
of
federal
funds
being
included
in
the
equity
analysis
and
when
you
do
include
the
federal
funds.
H
H
You
have
idea
b
funding,
which
is
special
education.
There
are
two
parts
of
the
idea
b.
You
have
one
pot
specifically
for
preschool
funding
and
then
another
idea
b,
pod
for
special
ed,
regular
education,
so
they're,
both
special
ed,
but
one
pot
is
for
preschool
and
one
pot
is
for.
There
are
several
other
different
funding
models.
I
don't
know
how
much
okay.
B
So
I
just
think
it
would
be
prudent
to
include
that,
in
specifically
in
the
analysis
of
data
for
special
education
and
for
at-risk
students,
so
that
we
have
a
full
picture
of
how
much
money
is
going
into
a
district.
Even
if
it's
money
that
we
don't
have
any
control
over.
So
I'd
appreciate
it.
If,
if
you
could
do
that
for
the
special
education
and
for
the
at-risk
projection,
so
that
so
that
we
can
have
complete
information
to
try
to
make
the
decisions.
Thank
you
you're.
Welcome.
E
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
and
I
swear
it's
not
a
competition
between
me
and
representative
bojanowski
to
ask
more
questions,
although
I'm
sure
we
both
have
a
lot
going
back
to
the
at
risk
add-on.
This
is
just
the
increase
to
60
for
only
students
who
receive
free
lunch.
That's.
H
E
Did
you
look
at
all
at
potentially
or
this
this
earlier
research
that
you
referenced?
Did
it
look
at
increa
instituting
an
add-on
for
students
on
reduced
price
lunch
because
it's
you
know
it.
I
I
H
Blick
and
associates
did
so
that
the
model
that
we
created
was
exactly
what
they
said
we
should
use.
H
So
we
did
look
at
that
and
as
far
as
the
factor
for
the
micropolitan
and
the
metropolitan,
there
was
no
research
done
as
far
as
how
we
came
about
those
other
than
the
one,
I
believe
is
the
same
as
the
metropolitan
is
the
same
as
what
we
were
currently
funding.
I
think
lep
students
at.
F
It's
the
change
to
lep
students,
so
some
of
the
add-ons
we
based
so
when
I
looked
at
it
on
some
of
them.
What
I
did
was
I
determined
how
much
money
that
group
is
getting
now
and
I
tried
to
make
sure
that
it
was
at
least
that
much
or
more
or
around
that
area.
That
way,
you
know,
I
wasn't
drastically
changing
anything
but
just
trying
to
make
an
impact,
but
as.
H
H
So,
like
the
prior
model,
this
model
uses
the
percentage
of
students
with
an
exceptionality
in
each
district.
Did
I
finish
this
one?
I
think
I
did
okay,
I
did
not
okay,
so
we
discussed
the
fact
of
how,
if
you
were
at
15
percent,
you
would
get
a
2.5
percent
add-on
for
moderate
or
high
incident.
Disability
and
districts
with
more
than
15
percent
would
receive
the
2.5
for
the
15
and
then
an
additional
1.38
for
students
with
moderate
or
high
disabilities.
H
H
H
H
This
increase
would
not
cause
any
district
to
increase
their
current
tax
rate,
because
the
tax
rates
in
2012-
I'm
sorry
2020,
the
lowest
one
was
42.4
cents.
Due
to
this
adjustment,
the
state
share
of
seek
funds
would
decrease.
However,
this
model
includes
the
same
state
seek
appropriations
in
2020..
H
A
I
have
a
question
this
time.
Okay,
now
I
believe
you
said
that
the
lowest
local
effort
is,
you
say,
42.1.
A
And
that's
per
100.,
yes,.
H
A
Okay
and
so.
A
Those
are
the
2020
numbers,
so
essentially,
what
you're
saying
is,
even
if
the
state
did
not
increase
their
appropriation
to
seek
if
we
went
to
this
model
the
way
the
formula
works,
the
total
seek
amount
would
increase.
Is
that
an
accurate
statement-
or
I
know
it,
get
the
seat
gets
very
confusing?
Sometimes
your.
A
I
A
Because
of
the
higher
local
effort,
yes,
the
state,
the
state
portion
is
less
correct
and
in
the
total,
seek
total
total
seek
base
would
increase
to
42
18.,
correct.
Okay,
thank
you
and
I
believe
we
have
some
other
questions
on
this
you'll.
Never
guess!
But
representative
bozonowski
has
a
question
followed
by
mr
truesdek.
B
I
was
never.
I
was
never
the
student
in
school
to
just
sit
quietly
so
and
and
this
kind
of
builds
upon
this
slide.
Could
you
talk
a
little
bit
about
tier
one
and
tier
two
funding
and
is
there
a
limit
as
to
how
much
a
district
can
raise
and
spend
that
maybe
is
or
isn't
equalized,
but
I
did
read
that
tier
two,
let's
see
and
just.
C
Tier
one
is
equalized
up
to
15,
and
that
requires
a
certain
amount
of
of
of
a
maximum
equivalent
rate
by
by
the
particular
district
tier
two
is
not
equalized
by
the
state,
so
tier
one.
Everyone
will
get
15
of
the
of
the
seek
base
and
the
different
add-ons
if
they
have
the
correct
mac,
if
they
have
the
maximized
equivalent
rate,
so
they
would
get
15
percent
and
tier
two
is
not
maximized
and
that's
going
to
be
30
of
seek
plus
the
15.
C
So
it's
about
you
know
so
total
it
would
be
up
to
about
149.5
percent
of
you,
including
tier
one
and
maximizing
tier
two.
B
So
if
I
may
so,
is
there
a
cap
on
how
much
a
local
district
could
raise
and
spend
for
education
that
may
not
even
be
data
collected
on
that
I
mean
I'm
trying
to
understand
why
we
do
have
differences
in
in
our
our
percentages.
Kind
of
going
back
to
give
me
just
a
sec
here,
just
the
percent
of
total
funding,
so
quintile
one
was
11
311
at
twenty
percent.
Quintile
five
was
25.
B
F
To
answer
the
first
part:
the
number
of
districts-
it's
not
being
tracked
currently,
if
districts
are
exceeding
tier
two
and
we
did
determine
that
36
districts
exceeded
tier
two
by
a
total
of
nearly
366.6
million.
H
There
are
other
issues
with
the
seek
funding
formula
when
it
comes
to
taxes
that
are
levied
in
the
beginning
of
cara.
H
You
were
able
to
determine
which
mix
of
taxes
made
up
that
tax
rate,
and
if
you
were
a
district
that
had
a
utility
tax
in
the
beginning,
most
of
those
districts
use
that
utility
tax
rate
and
then
what
happens
is
later
on
the
ones
that
didn't
use
the
utility
tax
rate
inside
of
their
seek
tax
rate
when
they
levied
that
rate,
it's
kind
of
above
what
they're
getting
from
seek.
So
there's
a
couple
different
issues
that
have
problems
with
the
seek
formula.
B
A
E
E
Sorry
I
stated
that
poorly,
but
I
followed
what
you're
trying
to
say.
So
my
question
gets
to
the
wolf
counties
and
the
other
districts
that
are
very
close
to
that
tier
one
threshold,
and
I
just
want
to
make
sure
I'm
following
because
if
you
raise
the
seat
per
pupil
base
to
4218,
then
that's
going
to
be
more
money
that
they
are
getting,
which
means
that's
more
money.
They
have
to
generate
for
their
local
share
of
tier
one.
E
C
Actually,
when
we
get
to
my
portion
of
the
presentation,
I'll
have
a
pretty
cool
thing
for
you.
E
Okay,
so
it'll
be
pretty
awesome,
I'm
glad
you
took
that
into
account.
The
other
thing
I
was
going
to
note
on
this
slide
is
that
all
of
the
other
slides
have
said:
if
funded
this,
this
change
would
cost
so
much.
This
slide
does
not
say
the
savings
if
we
just
kept
it
at
four
thousand.
H
C
I'll
show
you
on
the
tool
how
you
could
calculate
that
as
well,
and
I
I.
E
F
H
Okay,
this
model
represents
a
joint
effort
for
local
districts
and
the
state
to
contribute
to
seek
funding
by
increasing
the
base
per
pupil
by
inflation
and
changing
the
local
effort
to
35
cents.
If
done,
equity
increased
by
465
dollars
per
pupil
in
quintile,
one
and
quintiles
two
through
four,
also
increased.
H
The
report
has
several
more
models
for
your
review.
There
are
a
few
models
for
increasing
tier
1
percentages
and
what
happens
if
teacher
retirement
and
state
grants
that
are
funded
outside
the
seek
formula
were
instead
funded
within
the
seek
formula.
Some
of
these
adjustments
increased
equity
and
some
did
not.
The
report
also
discusses
some
transportation
funding
changes.
H
H
H
H
C
B
Okay,
so
I
tried
to
ask
my
questions
as
they
went
through,
but
I've
just
got
a
couple
of
clarifications
that
I
still
had
on
my
list.
Can
you
talk
about
the
districts
livingston
and
lyle
counties
who
are
in
quintile
5?
B
H
B
And
if
I
may
all
right
and
then
on
table
3.12,
which
was
adding
a
special
education
add-on
weights
by
percentage,
one
of
one
of
the
options
was
increasing
high
incidence
rate
from
0.24
to
3.88
and
from
what
I
understand
that's
for
more
than
15
percent
of
the
district
students
with
special
education.
I'm
just
commenting
that
for
speech
therapy,
which
is
essentially
what
high
incidence
is
going
from
.24
to
3.88,
is
probably
more
than
it
needs
to
be.
It's
just
a
comment,
and
then
finally
reptiften.
B
C
H
C
H
C
We
do
not
look
at
that
and
we'll
leave
it
at
that.
E
I
don't
think
I
actually
have
a
question
necessarily,
but
more
of
a
comment
on
this.
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
is
that,
when
we're
discussing
equity
on
this
and
equity,
obviously
is
something
we
need
to
strive
for
to
make
sure
that
a
child
in
the
poorest
part
of
kentucky
has
just
as
much
of
a
chance
and
opportunity
as
a
child
from
the
richest
parts
of
this
state.
E
Is
that
when
we
talk
about
equity
and
we
keep
the
total
funding
the
same
in
all
of
these
scenarios
and
I'm
very
glad
that
they
showed,
if
you
didn't,
if
you
actually
just
increased
the
funding
to
fund
these,
this
is
how
much
it
would
cost,
because,
when
we're
talking
about
keeping
the
total
funding
the
same,
what
that
does
is
you're,
essentially
putting
more
money
into
the
quintile
ones
and
twos
and
taking
money
away
from
quintile.
Five
and
again
I'll
say
what
I
said
at
the
beginning.
Quintile
five
is
essentially
fed
and
jefferson.
E
So,
for
a
lot
of
these,
if
we
keep
funding
the
same
and
we
achieve
what
we're
calling
better
equity,
we're
taking
money
away,
state
funding
away
from
fayette
and
jefferson
counties,
and
I
think
we
would
be
foolish
if
we
thought
that
they
would
just
keep
their
funding
the
same
and
absorb
those
reductions,
no
they're,
probably
going
to
raise
taxes
on
their
local
folks.
That's
the
reason
that
they
have
higher
property
values
in
fayette
and
jefferson
county
is
because
they
have
a
lot
more
commercial
property.
E
E
I
just
want
us
to
have
that
in
our
minds
that
we're
not
just
helping
the
poor
districts,
we're
also
hurting
what
we
would
call
those
property
rich
districts,
but
there's
a
lot
of
poor
kids
in
those
property,
rich
districts,
as
we
saw
on
that
previous
slide,
and
I'm
going
to
point
it
out
again.
That
is
an
alarming
increase
in
fayette
and
jefferson
county
of
students
at
risk.
So
thank
you,
mr
chairman.
J
Thank
you,
mr
chair
chuck
kind
of
took
away,
but
I
guess
when
we
talk
about,
seek
as
a
funding
distribution,
basically
based
on
your
your
for
your
task
from
from
the
legislators,
it
was
to
keep
the
base
the
same.
So
it's
just
going
to
kind
of
change
the
winners
and
losers
based
on
what
it
is
now.
Is
that
a
fair
statement?
Would
you
agree
when
you
change
one
formula?
Something's
gonna
somebody's
gonna
benefit
somebody's
gonna
lose.
J
The
question
I
had
is,
and
I
know
I
keep
going
back
to
this
local
tax
rate,
but
you
had
mentioned
that
the
lowest
tax
rate
was
around
42
per
100
per
100
valuation,
and
I
know
there's
some
districts
that
are
about
118..
So
it's
a
huge
gap
is:
was
there
anything
in
the
study
that
if
we
would
raise
the
ceiling
or
the
floor
to
a
certain
amount
with
the
local,
how
that
would
help
with
the
equity?
C
Floor,
do
you
mean
increasing,
for
example,
the
local
effort
from.
A
A
C
Can
do
other
things
as
well,
but
past
35
cents.
We
do
not
do
but.
J
H
Some
districts
do
not
take
the
four
percent
maximum
every
year.
That
they're
allowed
is
that,
where
you're.
J
H
From
we
did
a
report
several
years
ago
that
looked
into
that
that
explained
how
many
districts
had
been
raising
the
four
percent.
How
many
have
been
taken,
the
compensating
rate
which
generates
the
same
amount.
H
J
H
A
I
think
it's
important
to
remember
in
a
time
where,
having
increasing
assessments
on
property,
that
if
a
district
does
take
the
compensating
rate-
and
they
have
large
property
assessments,
their
rate
could
actually
go
down
a
little
bit.
As
you
understand
how
all
that
works.
I
will
point
out
members.
G
Yeah,
thank
you
again.
I
apologize
for
interrupting
there.
It's
just
kind
of
difficult
to
do
this
from
from
a
remote,
but
just
to
remind
everybody
on
the
group-
and
I
think,
just
to
kind
of
summarize
what
mr
borchers
and
superintendent
borchers
and
what
others
have
said.
You
know
again,
this
is
a
distribution
formula
and
if
you
look
at
the
amount
of
money,
if
we're
not
increasing
money,
then
ships
can
change
to
shift
the
tax
rate,
the
burden
back
to
local
people
to
local
tax
rates
or
it
can
shift
burdens.
G
You
know
any
any
change.
For
example,
I
posted
in
the
chat,
if
you
look
at
the
average
teacher
salary
for
jefferson
county
for
teachers
is
67
000,
whereas
in
rural
kentucky
it's
probably
in
the
upper
40s,
the
lowest
is
45
000..
I
think
that
might
have
been
augusta,
I'm
not
sure,
but
again
in
east
kentucky
you're
looking
at
probably
low
50
upper
40s.
So
you
know
sometimes
and
again
mr
truesdale
he's
absolutely
correct
too.
G
A
lot
of
these
shifts
take
away
from
what
you're
going
to
see
at
in
jefferson,
county
and
in
fayette
county
and
then
going
to
distribute
it
into
other
areas.
So
without
additional
funding,
there's
going
to
be
some,
you
know
if
you're
looking
at
equity,
you're
going
to
see
a
lot
of
losers
in
that
quintile
5,
unless
they're
holding
harmless,
of
course
than
jefferson
and
fayette,
but
then
also
too
any
other
changes
could
really
shift
that
bourbon
burden
of
of
educating
our
kids
to
the
local
taxpayers.
G
So
there's
a
lot
of
things
in
here
that
really
roll
into
a
factor
and
that
seek
formula
is
so
intricate
that
it
can.
It
makes
some
big
changes.
It's
one
thing
here
or
there
I
do
like
what
oea
has
together
here
for
us
to
look
at
you
know
as
far
as
the
seek
amounts
we
make
some
changes
here
there
you
can
see
what's
going
to
change
in
each
district,
so
I
do
appreciate
that
work
on
that
also.
A
Thank
you
and
before
you
begin
I'll,
just
let
the
members
know
that
there
is
a
link
to
this
website
on
the
our
commit
our
task
force
website
for
the
committee
and.
G
A
G
A
C
Let
me
actually
give
you
a
bitly,
just
in
case
bit
b,
I
t
dot
l
y
slash
in
all
caps,
o
e,
a
c
dash
2020.
C
And
also,
if
you
guys
would
like
to
go
onto
your
phones
and
check
along
with
this
here,
that
would
be
fine
too.
It
is
mobile
friendly
as
well.
So
you
may
may
do
that
as
well.
This
visualization
shows
the
amount
spent
by
the
state
on
the
seek
program
by
local
school
district.
C
This
tool
is
only
for
school
year
2020
and
for
the
add-ons
that
are
currently
in
seek.
So
just
please
keep
that
in
mind
there.
There
aren't
any
rural
add-ons
or
anything
like
that.
Pardon
me
that
are
included
in
this
here.
The
map
may
be
manipulated
by
changing
the
seek
base
right
here,
the
multi,
the
multipliers
for
the
seek
add-ons,
the
required
local
effort,
the
equalization
level
or
the
maximum
tier
1
percent.
C
This
is
something
that
was
discussed
before
below
the
map
and
to
the
left
right
over
here.
The
visualization
displays
the
maximum
change
required
in
the
mac.
Sorry
displays
the
change
required
and
the
maximum
levied
equivalent
rate
in
order
to
maximize
tier
1
funding
above
the
color
gradient
is
a
total
change
in
the
state
funding
relative
to
the
2020
appropriation.
You
might
know
that
it's
a
little
bit
in
this
part
here
it's
a
little
bit
off,
but
that's
just
that
to
sort
of
force
it
in
because
of
rounding
like
it's
just
some
pennies
here
and
there.
C
I
will
walk
you
through
some
of
the
changes
that
you
can
make
to
the
seek
visualization
in
one
of
the
task
force
meetings.
Chuck
truesdale
mentioned
that
for
every
dollar
you
add
to
the
seek
base:
it'll
cost
approximately
eight
hundred
thousand
dollars
right
now,
I'm
going
to
go
and
do
that.
I
will
increase
the
seek
base
from
four
thousand
dollars
to
four
thousand
and
one
dollars,
so
you
go
to
where
it
says,
seek
base
and
then
input
four
thousand
and
one
dollars.
C
You
will
then
see
there's
an
increase
in
the
state
portion
of
approximately
eight
hundred
thousand
dollars
so
chuck.
Thank
you.
We
were
correct
there
sabrina
mentioned
earlier
that
we
ran
a
model
of
having
that
risk
add-on
increased
to
0.60
percent.
0.60.
Excuse
me.
We
can
do
that.
C
And
which
districts
would
benefit
most
and
least
from
this
change?
The
colors
on
the
map
display
the
extent
to
which
the
changes
in
the
seek
formula
would
increase
or
decrease
state
spending
in
those
districts.
The
orange
colors
show
a
decrease
in
spending.
The
blue
colors
show
an
increase
in
state
spending
below
the
map
right
here.
C
Will
the
visualization
displays
the
biggest
and
smallest
changes
in
state
spending
per
aada
by
district
for
the
selected
changes
of
the
seek
formula,
so
essentially
the
winners
and
losers
by
ada
rolling
over
each
district.
It
displays
an
itemized
summary
of
the
changes
to
the
state's
funding
in
seek.
C
C
C
C
C
You
could
download
the
information
in
a
portrait
or
or
landscape.
I'm
today
I
like
landscape
for
some
reason
so
down
there
load
it
in
landscape
and
that
will
be
generated
right
here
and
you'll
get
the
pdf
and
you
could
use
that
later
on.
So
you
could
make
comparisons
later
on
between
different
district
choices
that
you
might
may
have
made.
Okay,.
C
Okay,
and
by
the
way,
also
one
of
the
things
that
we
had
mentioned
before
was
with
the
tier
one
changes,
and
let
me
just
reselect
everybody
here,
pardon
me.
C
One
of
the
things
that
we
would
notice,
for
example,
when
we
went
before
to
increase
the
add-on
to
0.6
or,
let's
say
0.4.
This
is
where
we'd
go
over
the.
Where
we'd
see
the
differences
for
tier
one
or
if
we
were
to
increase
tier
one,
we
would
see
what
would
the
change
in
the
levied
equivalent
rate
require
for
maximizing
tier
one
funding.
Still
in
this
situation
it
would
be
wolf
and
livingston
which
would
require
okay
and
bracken
as
well.
G
Thank
you
again.
This
is
a
very
fascinating
worksheet
here,
if
you
will,
but
does
this
just
a
question
if,
if
you
do
an
add-on,
does
that
take
in
account
just
what
the
additional
funds
would
be
if
or
if
this,
if
the
budget
stayed
the
same
for
the
state,
does
that
take
an
account
for
that,
or
is
this
to
say
how
much
would
have
to
be
added
into
the
budget
altogether.
C
That
would
say
how
much
it
would
have
to
be
at.
Let
me
just
go
back
to
the
tool
right
here,
so
this
value
right
here.
It
shows
you
what
the
difference
would
be.
That
would
be
the
amount
that
would
have
to
be
added
into
the
budget
for
that
particular
situation.
C
This
presentation
is
a
thorough
examination
of
the
sikh
formula
as
it
is
currently
implemented
by
by
kde.
There
are
16
recommendations
based
on
our
examination
and
again,
if
you'd
like
to
stop
for
questions,
let
me
know
please:
we
will
first
discuss
the
major
findings
followed
by
a
deep
dive
into
the
seek
transportation
formula.
C
C
I
will
now
discuss
the
major
findings
from
the
transportation
calculation
before
presenting
them
to
you.
We
have
discussed
these
issues
with
kde
and
made
them
aware
of
them.
We
appreciate
their
help
and
have
been
in
communication
with
them
all
throughout
the
year
and
presented
our
initial
findings
to
them
in
july.
C
C
C
Now
we're
going
to
continue
with
our
deep
dive
into
seek
transportation
a
little
bit
about
seek
transportation.
Districts
are
reimbursed
for
transporting
students
to
and
from
school
most
all
districts
have
do
transport
students
to
and
from
school
seek.
Transportation
does
not
include
transportation
for
field
trips
or
for
sports.
C
There
is
a
complex
formula
associated
with
transportation
that
is
complicated
and
not
implemented
correctly
by
kde.
Also,
kentucky
has
not
fully
reimbursed
school
districts
for
their
transportation
costs.
Since
2004
in
school
year,
2020
the
total
cost
for
pupil
transportation
was
392
million
dollars.
C
These
are
the
first
two
issues
that
we
had
found,
and
we
want
to
make
recommendations
based
on
them.
Statute
requires
that
the
area
of
independent
districts
be
subtracted
from
the
county
districts
of
the
county.
They
are
in
in
discussions
with
kde
staff.
Oaa
determined
that
for
county
districts
that
had
independent
districts
within
their
county
kde
did
not
subtract.
The
square
mileage
for
the
independent
district
from
the
area
served
by
the
county
district
also
statute
requires
that
the
ada
of
transported
pupils
includes
all
public
school
pupils
transported
at
public
expense
who
live
beyond
a
one
mile.
C
C
C
C
E
C
Calculate
transportation
costs
kde
uses
two
variables
as
inputs,
the
gross
transported,
pupil
density
and
the
cost
per
pupil
day,
and
please
excuse
this
marker.
It's
really
small
and
I
apologize
that
has
to
do
with
the
resolution
of
the
bigger
screen
in
looking
at
the
sas
program
code
oea
found
that
the
number
of
handicapped
students
was
multiplied
by
2.0
instead
of
5.0,
as
required
by
statute.
C
C
Kde
staff
then
used
professional
judgment
to
exclude
districts
from
the
graph
calculations
that
they
viewed
as
outliers
county
and
independent
districts
that
had
transportation
costs
above
nine
dollars.
That's
this
black
line
here
or
below
three
dollars.
That's
this
black
line
here
were
excluded
for
the
from
the
graph
calculation
in
school
year.
2020..
C
And
these
are
some
of
the
issues
that
we
had
found.
According
to
statute,
the
transportation
calculation
should
have
nine
density
groups
and
the
graph
adjusted
cost
per
pupil
day.
As
I
mentioned
before,
the
kde
calculation
only
includes
seven
groups
and
instead
of
using
similar
density
groups
as
required
by
statute,
kde
is
grouping
students
by
calculated
costs
per
pupil
day.
C
C
C
And
the
gross
ada
plus
handicapped
amount
was
used
in
determining
the
cost
per
pupil
day,
because
the
handicap
factor
was
used
in
determining
the
cost
per
pupil
day.
Each
handicapped
student
made
the
denominator
larger
when
calculating
costs
per
pupil
day.
The
larger
denominator
in
the
cost
per
people
day
led
to
lower
graph
adjusted
costs
for
each
handicapped
student,
and
we
make
these
recommendations
based
on
those
issues.
Recommendation
4.3
addresses
the
number
of
groups
and
methodology
for
the
graph
calculation
recommendation.
4.4
addresses
kde
using
objective
methodology
in
determining
groups
for
the
graph
calculations.
C
Districts
that
have
a
cost
per
people
day
between
three
dollars
and
nine
dollars
are
then
separated
into
two
categories:
county
and
independent
districts.
These
two
groups
are
then
separately
fitted
to
this
non-linear
eq
nonlinear
regression
model
the
coefficients.
A
and
b
from
the
nonlinear
regression
model
are
calculated.
Separate
coefficients
are
calculated
for
county
and
independent
districts.
C
C
This
graph
shows
the
graph
adjusted
cost
per
pupil
day
and
net
transported
pupil
densities
for
county
districts
within
the
district
graph
calculation
117
of
the
120
districts
were
included
in
the
in
the
graph
for
several
years.
Up
until
2020,
one
kde
made
an
error
in
transcribing
district's
graph
adjusted
cost
with
one
district
this
one
here,
the
diamond,
receiving
too
much
money.
C
C
The
three
districts
that
were
not
included
in
the
graph
calculation
received
five
dollars
and
78
cents
per
pupil
day,
which
was
jefferson
county
right
here.
This
guy
their
cost
graph
adjusted
cost
per
pupil
day.
The
two
districts
that
had
the
greatest
cost
per
of
any
county
district
were
shown
with
an
x
right
over.
Here
they
had
costs
above
nine
dollars
per
pupil.
C
C
This
graph
shows
the
graph
adjusted
cost
per
people
day
and
net
transported
densities
for
independent
districts
within
the
independent
district
graph
calculation,
40
of
the
48
districts
that
transported
students
were
included
in
the
graph
calculation
after
the
graph
adjustment
formula
was
applied,
five
districts
had
graph
had
per
public
costs
above
jefferson
county.
Those
are
the
circles
right
over
here
they
were
brought
down
to
the
jefferson
county
level
of
5.78.
C
There
were
also
three
districts
that
were
not
included
in
the
graph
that
had
the
highest
cost
of
any
district
in
the
commonwealth.
Those
are
the
plus
signs
right
over
here.
The
three
districts
that
had
the
highest
costs
receive
the
same
amount
as
jefferson
county
per
pupil
day,
as
required
by
statute.
C
C
C
Recommendation
4.7
addresses
the
county
districts
with
the
highest
cost
per
people
day
being
brought
down
to
the
same
level
as
a
county
district
with
the
lowest
cost
per
pupil
day.
It
also
addresses
the
independent
districts,
with
the
lowest
cost
per
pupil
day
being
reimbursed
as
independent
districts,
with
the
highest
costs
per
pupil
day.
C
C
C
C
C
C
Also,
the
statute
requires
kde
to
regulate
the
depreciation
of
school
transportation
vehicles.
The
regulation
allows
kde
to
depreciate
vehicles
124
over
14
years.
This
was
initially
instituted
in
order
to
incentivize
districts,
to
purchase
more
fuel-efficient
diesel
vehicles
and
retire
gasoline-powered
buses.
There
are
no
longer
any
gasoline-powered
buses
staff
determined
that
if
buses
were
to
be
depreciated
for
10
years
and
at
100,
the
unprovated
transportation
cost
would
decrease
from
392
million
to
387
million
dollars
and
transportation
would
be
funded
at
55.4
percent.
C
In
the
past,
when
an
independent
district
merged
with
a
county
district,
the
prior
year
cost
of
transportation,
expenses
and
appreciation
was
not
included
with
the
county
district
transportation
funding
for
the
first
year
of
the
merger.
This
should
change
county
districts
in
transportation
funding
for
the
first
year
after
the
merger.
C
Excuse
me,
krs
158
115
allows
county
governments
to
spend
more
from
their
general
funds.
Money
excuse
me
money
from
their
general
funds
to
provide
transportation
for
pupils
attending
non-public
schools.
That's
county
governments,
not
districts
for
non-public
schools.
Several
local
boards
of
education
contract
with
their
local
fiscal
court
to
provide
such
transportation.
C
C
Kd
does
not
provide
districts
guidance
on
how
to
how
to
include
the
information
in
munis
one
northern
kentucky
district
received
581
thousand
dollars
in
fiscal
year,
2020
from
its
fiscal
court
for
transporting
non-public
school
students.
The
reimbursement
should
have
been
recorded
as
a
negative
expense.
It
was
not
because
of
this.
The
district
overstated
its
school
transportation
expenses
by
over
half
a
million
dollars
of
the
seven
districts
contacted
about
this
issue.
There
is
only
one
independent
district
that
was
recording
revenue
correctly,
while
reviewing
2019
annual
financial
reports.
C
C
C
C
C
Types
of
district
activity
funds
include
fees
to
join
sports,
a
general
enrollment
fee,
textbook
fees,
parking
fees
and
course
fees.
These
fees
are
mostly
spent
on
extra
instructional
materials
and
supplies
in
2009,
oea
performed
a
study
on
fees,
dues
and
supplies
in
kentucky
schools.
This
report
included
information
on
the
amount
of
fees
schools
charge
in
one
year.
One
district
had
222
dollars
worth
of
fees
per
year.
C
C
Oea
reviewed
two
districts
with
similar
ada
that
had
their
district
activity,
funds
entered
into
munis
district.
A
is
a
wealthier
district
with
fewer
low-income
students.
District
b
is
a
poorer
district
with
more
low-income
students
district
a
received,
approximately
300
per
pupil
of
local
funds
for
district
activity
funds,
while
district
b
received
only
six
dollars
per
student
in
local
funding.
C
Section
3
requires
preschool
programs
to
be
funded
by
a
grant
from
the
general
assembly
to
local
school
districts.
Preschool
students
are
not
included
in
the
seek
based
funding
and
receive
grant
funding
separate
from
seek.
However,
preschool
students
are
receiving
the
seek
exceptional
add-on,
exceptional
child
add-on
in
fiscal
year
2020
there
are
about
2
500,
preschool
students
that
districts
receive
seek
funding
for
exceptional
children
at
a
cost
of
almost
8.2
million
dollars.
C
Also,
each
biennium,
the
general
assembly
determines
the
equalization
level.
The
equalization
level
is
150
percent
of
average
per
pupil
assessments
when
funding
full-day
kindergarten
and
hp
382
of
the
2021
regular
session.
The
budget
included
kindergarten
students
in
districts
per
pupil
assessments.
C
C
A
Thank
you.
That's
a
tremendous
amount
of
work
that
you
put
in.
I
will
make
one
note
for
members
in
your
packet.
There
is
a
letter
from
kde
that
was
sent
to
the
co-chairs
of
the
ears
committee,
but
it's
also
applicable,
I
think,
for
our
task
force
with
their
response
to
the
recent
comments
made
by
oea.
So
please
take
note
of
that
and
we
have
a
question
from
representative
bojanowski.
B
Okay,
this
should
be
a
simple
one:
it's
about
bus
depreciation
and
just
to
help
my
understanding,
so
in
accounting
depreciation
is
an
expense
that
doesn't
impact
cash
flow,
so
our
district's
actually
given
like
cash
monetary
reimbursements
for
their
depreciation.
H
So
what
happens
is
instead
of
taking
the
full
amount
say,
a
bus
cost,
a
hundred
and
twenty
thousand
dollars.
So
instead
of
that
year,
they
bought
the
bus
of
taking
all
of
that
expense
off.
What
they're
doing
is
taking
that
expense
over
14
years,
but
they're
also
adding
an
extra
24.
So
if
the
bus
is
getting
depreciated
more
than
what
the
bus
actually
cost
so
that
that
is
spent
throughout
the
years.
C
H
No,
the
districts
actually
will
either
sell
bonds
through
kista
to
buy
them,
or
they
will
pay
cash
for
them,
but
as
far
as
they
are
getting
reimbursed
from
the
state,
because
the
state
is
funding
the
transportation
at
about
58
right
now,
so
the
state
is
kind
of
reimbursing
them
for
part
of
that
expense.
Okay,.
A
Will
follow
up
with
representatives
both
genocide's
questions?
There
are
no
gas
buses
now
we're
going
to
the
high
efficiency,
diesels,
the
propane
buses
or
the
life
expectancy
on
their
buses
higher,
or
do
you
know
than
than
the
older
gas
buses
or
have
any
idea?
Just
a
curiosity
question
there.
E
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
I
have
a
actually
a
handful.
If
you'll
indulge
me,
one
number
one
I'll
check
with
our
staff
on
the
depreciation
for
at
least
at
the
general
depreciation
on
the
diesel
vehicles
versus
gasoline,
but
I
was
going
to
note-
and
I
think,
sabrina
you
pointed
this
out
a
little
bit,
because
the
state
doesn't
fully
fund
the
transportation
formula
so
they're
the
depreciation
is
124
percent,
but
the
actual
reimbursement
that
they
get
is
substantially
less
than
that
as
a
result.
E
So
there's
that
the
question
I
have
for
you
on
the
the
one
mile
rule
because,
as
you
noticed
and
I'm
not
going
to
rehash
all
of
kde's
response-
is
that
every
other
state
in
there
had
it
based
on
route.
Did
you
review
any
of
the
the
actual
statutes
that
they
have
in
their
states?
Did
they
specify
by
root,
or
is
it
just
general
language,
because.
F
Some
of
them
did
specify,
and
it's
in
one
of
the
appendixes
okay.
E
You
keep
you
keep
pointing
out
all
the
appendices
that
I
apparently
missed
that
they're
very
data
intense.
So
I
appreciate
that
further
reading,
two
more
points.
If
you'll
indulge
me,
mr
chairman,
on
a
lot
of
these
issues,
I
will
note
that
kde
for
a
number
of
years
has
requested
a
budget
item
to
update
its
seek
packages,
so
they
could
do
a
more
robust
forecast
and
help
deal
with
some
of
these
issues.
E
Traditionally,
the
way
that
has
been
done
is
the
eighth
834
thousand
dollar
number
was
part
of
the
forecast
and
the
way
that
it
has
always
been
done
in
the
past.
To
my
knowledge,
at
least
when
I
checked
it,
when
I
was
at
lrc,
was
they
would
do
calculate
150
of
the
per
pupil
assessment
average
statewide
in
year.
E
One
of
the
biennium
and
keep
that
flat
in
year
two,
so
that
was
always
going
to
artificially
reduce
the
equalization
level
from
the
state
in
year,
two
on
top
of
which
that
forecast
number
never
changed
in
terms
of
when
the
actual
numbers
came.
In
typically,
property
assessments
were
higher
than
forecast.
So
again
it
artificially
deflated
the
number.
So
while
oea
is
certainly
correct,
that
those
numbers
did
not
change
in
year,
two,
even
though
the
the
number
of
students
was
drastically
higher,
that
was
that's
sort
of
been
practiced
for
years.
It's
just.
C
E
Forecast
is
done
going
forward
that
will
be
accounted
for,
and
so
that
is
something
that
the
general
assembly,
when
it's
calculating
its
budget,
may
want
to
pay
attention
to
how
those
per
pupil
assessments
are
calculated
going
forward.
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
A
D
Okay,
thank
you
very
much,
representative
tipton.
You
indicated
that
that
kde
had
sent
some
responses,
but
but
my
question
to
you
and
and
and
to
senator
wise,
is,
are
we
going
to
allow
kde
to
come
forward
and
address
these
before
the
committee,
because
I
think
there's
some
very
serious
allegations
that
have
been
made
against
kde
and,
of
course,
you
know
being
an
attorney.
I
think
they
ought
to
have
due
process
opportunity
to
respond
to
those
and
just
putting
something
in
writing.
D
Writing
doesn't
give
them
a
chance
to
really
speak
before
the
public
or
give
us
the
opportunity
to
ask
questions.
So
so
is
there
a
possibility
or
likelihood
that
we
can
have
kde
come
forward
and
address
the
allegations
that
have
been
made
against
them
today?.
A
I
suppose
anything's
possible,
senator
thomas
and
and-
and
I
agree
with
you-
I
think
these
are
things,
questions
that
we
need
to
ask
questions
and
get
some
responses
from
and
what
venue
that
comes
in
we
can.
We
can
discuss
that.
You
have
a
comment.
We
have
a
representative
from
kde
here.
Let
chuck
comment
on
that.
E
Thank
you,
mr
chairman.
I
would
say
we
we
discussed
that
we
were
actually
invited
by
chair
tipton
to
present
or
to
come
forward
today,
and
we
kde
believes
that
its
written
response
is
sufficient.
However,
I
will
say
that
kd
has
been
invited
to
speak
on
a
different
issue
next
week
and
that
if
there
are
any
questions
from
the
committee,
I
think
our
kde
staff
would
be
more
than
happy
to
answer
any
questions
that
may
come
from
the
committee.
The
task
force
at
that
time.
A
Senator
thomas
understand
that
explanation
that
the
kde
will
be
here
next
week
and
possibly
have
questions
ready
for
them
at
that
time.
D
Thank
you,
mr
chair,
that
that
that
answers
my
question
I
had
to
I
had
muted
myself.
I
had
to
get
back
off
mute,
but
that
answers
my
question.
Thank
you,
sir.
G
Can
we
scroll
back
to
the?
Thank
you.
Thank
you
chairman.
Can
we
go
back
to
the
factory
to
talk
about
the
handicap
factor
that
should
have
been
5.0
versus
2.0?
Can
we
look
at
that?
Just
for
a
second,
please.
C
C
Oh,
that
is
correct,
yes,
so
that
is
in
looking
at
their
sas
code.
So
looking
at
not
the
data
that
is
posted
on
the
website,
but
that
was
in
the
data
that
they
used
in
the
program
called
sas
that
they
used
to
calculate
it
and
there
within
sas.
It
was
at
2.0,
not
5.0,
and
that
was
an
error
on
their
part,
and
that
was
an
admitted
error
on
their
part.
G
G
Do
we
know
how
much,
as
far
as
just
to
help
me
understand
the
formula
a
little
bit
better?
Would
that
just
simply
have
added
some
money
to
some
districts,
or
would
it
have
taken
away
from
others?
You
know
when
you're
looking
at
transportation,
we've
talked
about
how
one
thing
changes
impact
someone
else.
So
I
guess
my
question
is:
how
much
of
a
difference
would
that
be
to
a
district
from
a
2.0
to
a
5.0
in
the
budget,
and
would
that
be
something
where
it
would
take
away
from
one
district
and
add
to
another.
C
Yep,
that's
a
very
good
question
actually,
as
it
turns
out,
and
I'm
not
here
saying
anything
bad
about
eddie.
There
are
two
errors
and
actually
those
two
are
sort
of
like
a
football
game.
You
have
two
penalties
that
are
sometimes
offsetting,
so
those
two
errors
to
some
extent
offset
one
another.
C
So
if
we
notice
here,
we
have
the
gross
ada
plus
handicap
factor,
because
they
included
that
in
the
denominator
that
sort
of
offset
the
fact
they
were
multiplying
it
by
2.0
to
a
small
extent,
there
are
other
situations
which
did
have
a
which
it
might
have
had
a
little
more
of
an
impact.
However,
those
were
really
only
for
a
certain
number
of
districts.
I
I
ran
the
numbers
in
most
districts
for
the
pro-rated
transportation
costs.
It
was
really,
I
think,
out
of
the
173
districts
about
150
560
of
them.
C
They
were
within
five
to
ten
thousand
dollars
of
of
what
they
had
before.
It
was
really
only
for
about
15
districts,
where
we
did
all
of
the
changes
so
getting
back
to
what
we
had
said
here,
with
the
non-linear
regression
model
and
a
couple
of
other
things,
and
that
one
error
that
we
had
said
kde
was
making
for
for
a
number
of
years.
This
guy,
that
would
have
been
maybe
about
15
districts
at
about
you
know,
between
15
000
and
about
a
hundred
thousand
dollars,
either
plus
or
minus.
E
Thank
you,
mr
chairman,
if
I
could
follow
up
on
that
question,
sure
those
if
that
would
have
because,
obviously
again
transportation
funding
is
capped.
It
sort
of
just
moves
the
money
around,
but
when
it
comes
to
the
unprorated
transportation
costs
those
factor
into
tier
one
funding,
certainly
did
it.
Yes,
it
did.
Can
you
tell
us
how
much.
C
Districts
there
for
the
whole
state
in
some
situations,
is
about
309
thousand
dollars.
So
not
you
know
in
2020,
and
that
was
the
net
one
way
or
the
other.
So
that's
where,
where
it
had
the
effect.
Thank
you.
A
Any
other
questions.
Well,
we've
got
our
presenters
here.
Well,
if
not,
our
next
meeting
is
going
to
be
one
week
from
the
day
monday
october,
the
18th
at
10
a.m.
We're
going
to
include
a
presentation
from
kde
on
non-resident
student
funding,
and
we
will
have
a
general
discussion
of
possible
findings
and
recommendations
from
this
task
force.
The
meetings
adjourn.