Little Rock School District DATE: August 10, 1989 TO: Eugene Reville, Metropolitan Supervisor FROM Mark D. Milhollen, Director, Einancial Services THROUGH:'Herb Cleek, Deputy Superintendent SUBJECT: STAFFING COSTS As a result of our meeting on Tuesday, August 8, 1989, I am submitting the following information concerning fringe benefits of Little Rock School District employees for the 1989-90 School Year: (1) SOCIAL SECURITY Current rate is 7.51% with a cap of $48,000
since rates historically change on January 1 of each year, we are using 7.60% for budget purposes. ~ (2) FRINGE BENEFITS - Package includes: TYPE ANNUAL OPERATING BUDGET COST ANNUAL FEDERAL BUDGET COST Health Dental Hosp. Indemnity Short Term Disab. Life Ins. ($16,000) $576.00* 161.28 65.52 45.60 26.88 $875.28 $1,195.20 161.28 65.52 45.60 26.88 $1,494.48 The Health difference in Federal and Operating costs is due to the fact that the State of Arkansas $619.20 of the cost directly to Blue Cross. pays (3) LONG TERM DISABILITY - The District provides this benefit at a cost of .0054 of the annual salary with a salary cap of $36,000, thus making the maximum District cost of $194.40. *It is anticipated that this amount will decrease when the State's contribution is revised. 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)374-3361 0(11 Myilf(a /o J i 'Jy c,J tuC Memorandum, August 10, 1989 - Page 2 To Eugene Reville (4) Most District employees are members of the Arkansas '7 Teacher Retirement System. The State of Arkansas pays the Matching Rate of 12^ on all Operating Budget employees, while the individual Federal Grant pay the 12% on each federally funded employee. must (5) The District allocates 12 Sick Days, 2 Personal Leave Days, and 10 Vacation Days for its 12-month employees. (6) Cost ceilings for actual meals and incidental for School District Travel are as follows: expenses (7) (8) (9) In-state Out-of-state not to exceed $17.50/day not to exceed $25.50/day I am also attaching a copy of our Administrative Directive 81-2055, concerning District Travel. The District also pays an annual car allowance of $1,200 to certain cabinet-level administrators, and $900 to most directors. In addition, we reimburse at the rate of $.24/mile for local travel. I am attaching a copy of the 12-Month, 240-Day Calendar. I am also attaching a copy of the 1989-90 Budget for the Superintendents Office.Uttle Rock Public Schools October 29, 1981 ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTIVE 81-20SS TO: FROM: Prinopals, Directors, Supervisors, and Managers ^'V^ce Jones, Manager, Support Services THROUGH: Dr. H. Benjamin Williams, Associate Superintendent Educational Programs SUBJECT: Paul W. Masem, Superintendent of Schools Out-of-District Travel Regulations^tlA^ As you are aware, financial restraints resulted in a reduced budget for out-of-district travel along with many other budget items. In addition, our auditors have commented that our travel regulations and procedures To insure that maximum impact can be achieved from our are inadequate. limited travel budget, the following regulations are effective immediately. TRAVEL DAY The travel day shall begin at 6:00 a.m., include breakfast, lunch, dinner, and one night's lodging, and shall end the following morning at 6:00 a.m. Requests for reimbursements of expenses incurred in less than full travel days must reflect a reasonable allocation based on the expense limits directed herein for a full travel day. LODGING EXPENSES The district will reimburse actual lodging expense incurred in trav"'' for the district. District employees must understand L 't the district 'rates on public funds and there is an obligation to protect these funds by using lodging as economical and reasonable in accordance with the purpose of the travel. Reimbursement for lodging expenses will require lodging receipts that indicate the employee has paid for the lodging. Receipts from personal credit cards will not be accepted unless accompanied by the receipt from the lodging establishment. LONG DISTANCE TRAVEL The district will reimburse travel expenses to the maximum limit of point- to-point costs for coach fare on common carriers. are required for reimbursement of common carrier costs. Receipts or ticket stubs If an employee chooses to use a personal automobile in long distance travel, reimbursement shall not exceed 23<t per mile or point-to-point coach fare, whichever is less. When more than one employee travels to the same location in a personal automobile, long distance travel cost will be reimbursed only to the employee whose personal automobile is used. Afxl Irard Urtle Rrxk Art*77 701 (501)374-3361Principals, Directors, Supervisors, and Managers Out-of-District Regulations October 29, ^981 Page 2 local travel at destination Actual reasonable expenses destination will be reimbursed. of local travel by common carriers at the Reimbursement for airport limousines or airport bus costs require the submission of ticket stubs or receipts. Mass transit or taxi fare do not require receipts, but must be reasonable. AUTOMOBILE RENTALS Automobiles will not be rented at district expensewithout prior approv^^ of the Superintendent or his designee and in r.c zzzz ri- in advance, that automobile rental will be less expensive to the district than the cost o^ public transportation to meetings, conferences, etc. Reimbursement is conditioned upon advance authority as well as receipts no case without documentation. transportation to from the leasing agency. MEALS AND INCIDENTALS reimburse employees for actual meals and incidental expenses incurred in out-of-district travel on district business, not to exceed the following limits
The district will In-State and Border Areas - Not to exceed $17.50 per day. Out-of-state - Not to exceed $25.50 per day. The allowances listed Reimbursement is allowed for actual expenses, onjj^. rates but are cost ceilings that are not to be exceeded. are not per diem ADVANCE REQUEST FOR TRAVEL Submission of two forms will be required to receive advance permission for out-of-district travel. The "Request for Absence for Professional Meetings" form will be completed and submitted in accordance with the iU/, lIDrtoiiArf +0** llllTAT - in xi In addition, the "Request for Out-of-Oistrict -'rdance with the instructions on that form. form (attached) will be submitted mac Travel" form (attached) will be submittea in ac -ruance w.w, ^structions on that form. No employee will be reimbursed fo. out-of-distr.ct -avei unless the required two forms are submitted and approved in advance. II This directive is effective immediately and until changed in writing.H WD o SV PC T W Jiy 3 LH 4 5 .cust 1 2 tember Stober 2 3 4 :vember 1 scember snuery '90 LH 1 2 3 ebruary .rch ril SV 2 SV 3 SV 4 y 1 2
ne Teacher Work Day - No School First Day of Student Attendance Last Day of Student Attendance Spring Vacation Parent Conference Th F M T W Th F 6 7 10 11 12 13 14 3 4 7 8 9 10 11 1 LH 4 5 6 7 8 5 6 9 10 11 I 12 I 13 WD 2 PC 3 1 6 4 7 5 8 6 4 1 1 SV 5 3 5 2 2 SV 6 4 1 8 5 5 9 7 4 9 6 6 10 8 5 9 7 10 8 10 7 7 11 9 6 11 8 8 12 10 o 7 12 9 9 13 11 8 1989-90 Calendar August 28 - June 7 Students - 178 Days July 3 - June 29 12.0 Months - 240 Days M T U Th F M 17 18 19 20 21 24 14 i 15 11 16 13 11 LH 12 17 14 12 15 i 16 12 12 16 14 11 13 13 17 15 12 Saturday, August 26, 1989, is a workday in the schools 16 13 18 15 13 17 17 14 19 16 14 18 14 15 14 15 18 16 13 18 15 20 17 15 19 16 16 19 17 14 20 18 15 I 21 18 23 20 18 22 19 19 23 21 18 SH LH SD 1 T W 25 I 22 19 24 21 19 23 20 20 24 22 19 26 I 23 20 25 22 SH 20 WD 24 21 21 25 23 20 Special Holiday Legal Holiday - No School Snow Day Inservice Day - No School Th 27 WD 24 21 F M T W Th F &O m z O 1/1 tz> o o o . -< tn tn m X) O m > tn > tn > CJ 2: > m -< tn o s: o > tn !> I _ 28 WD 25 22 26 27 LH 23 SH 21 25 22 22 26 24 21 31 28 25 30 29 26 31 1 20 i 30 27 31 28 29 4 3 16 20 20 2 1 SH 24 SH 22 26 23 23 27 25 22 27 LH 25 29 26 26 30 LH 28 25 28 SH 26 30 27 27 29 26 29 SH 27 31 28 28 30 27 30 SH 28 WD 29 31 28 1 18 1 1 1 SH 29 PC 30 29 1 2 13 20 20 20 16 22 5 178 5 1 2 1 7 2 5 1 1 5 16 3 65 10 Vacation Days - 240 Days j 20 I J ! 23 I i 20 ' 22 J 20 18 I 21 ! 20 22 21 22 21 250Little Rock School District I 1991-92 Revenue Projection and Budget Summary revenue-local taxes 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 1995-96 CURRENT TAXES aOtM) PULLBACK DELINQUENT TAXES EXCESS TREASURER FEES DEPOSITORY INTEREST \ '.TaiH *3
. .WJ REVENUE IN LIEU OF TAXES wise. ANO BENTS INTEREST ON INVESTMENTS MAY 1 4 ATHLETIC RECEIPTS Of: cf Dc-segrsgsucri M&nifcring REVENUE-COUNTY SOURCES COUNTY GENERAL REVENUE-STATE SOURCES I. PA SETTLEMENT PROCEEDS SETTLEMENT LOAN APPORTIONMENT VOCATIONAL HANDICAPPED CHILDREN EARLY CHILDHOOD ORPHAN CHILDREN transportation COMPENSATORY EDUCATION M TO M TRANSFERS ADULT EDUCATION revenue-other souRdes PUBLIC LAW 874 i TRANSFER FROM FEO GRANTS transfer FROM BONO ACCOUNT / TOTAL REVENUE. Little Rock School District Revenue Projection and Budget Summary EXPENSES 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 1995-96 CERTiFiEO SALARIES NON-CSRTIFIEO SALARIES aCNErlTS DESEGREGATION PURCHASED SERVICES MATERIALS & SUPPLIES other OBJECTS I CAPITAL OUTLAY DEBT SERVICE CCNTiNGENCY INCREASE IN FUND BALANCE BEGINNING FUND BALANCE ENDING FUND BALANCE > ITEM# PAGE# SETTLEMENT PLAN BUDGET DESCRIPTION 91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95DRAFT (FOR DISCUSSION ONLY) DESEGREGATION PLAN PROGRAMS REQUIRING FUNDS Deseg Prog # Plan Page # Description a' 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 31 32 33 34 35 49 5 5 12 20 28 28 39 44 46 48 58 63 82 86 114 129 129 143 148 148 224 226 227 1-9 93 34 35 28 114 106 1-56 131 125 00 Hippy 4-Year Old Program (Incentive School and other) Rockefeller Early Childhood Magnet Homework Centers Student Hearing Officer u' Office of Desegregation (and Student Assignment - p. 142) Extra-Curricular Participation: e.g., transportation Teacher Recruiter Staff Development Academic Support Programs, including remediation (PAL) (See 5/1 /92 order) Gifted and Talented Programs Multicultural Programs/Curriculum Academic Incentive Grants (amount not specified) Original Magnets (also page 4 in the Interdistrict Plan) Special Education Learning Center at Washington Security (required for "safe schools") Data Processing System for Student Information (also page 177) M-to-M Magnet Schools (Central, Dunbar. Washington. Henderson. McClellan) King Interdistrict School (also page 386) Stephens Interdistrict School (also page 386) Monitoring Activities (Evaluation Department plus CMIS-ABACUS) Desegregation Facilitator and Office (#6?) Computerized Transportation System Romine Interdistrict Theme McClellan Community School In-School Suspension Job Fair Testing Assistance - Disadvantaged Special Education - Equity Efforts Library Services Parent Recruiting VIPS - Recruiting Prejudice Reduction To Be Allocated Incentive Schools (Items numbered 50 and above) 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 149 152 153 153 153 153 154 156 Incentive Schools - Additional Programs Writing To Read Science Labs Computer Labs Foreign Language Computer Loan Program Extended Day Nifty Nutrition MAY i 4 U i V <Deseg Plan Programs Requiring Funds Page 2 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 158 171 171 171 171 172 172 176 176 176 178 178 179 190 193 194 153 Field Trips (also 173) Homework Centers Transportation (additional) Homework Hotline Mentors/Tutors Instructional Aides (additional) Extended Year I ncentive/Recognition Resident Counseling Service (Camp Pfeiffer) Monitoring Permanent Substitute (Recommended: therefore, required) Additional Compensation - extra hours Extended Week Staffing - Recommended Full-Time Positions (Recommended: therefore, required) Required Staff Development (also Page 204 - Paula Greer) Teacher Stipends for Inservice and Extra 5 Days Other Incentive School Academic Programs c:\memos\plancosl.wpdLITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72201 June 1, 1992 3VSD JUN 1 1992 Mr. Christopher Heller Friday, Eldredge and Clark 2000 First Commercial Bldg. Oiiice ci Desegregaiicn Monitoring Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Chris: Attached are budget projections for the Little Rock School District Desegregation Plan as specified in the January 21, 1992 Court Order. The Order's requirement for a revised 1991-92 budget is met by Exhibit A showing the projected cost of certain desegregation programs in this year through agreement with Mr. Bob Morgan of the Office of Desegregation Monitoring. A list of notes and assumptions is included and is an integral part of the document. These projections are estimates based on current information. Although the LRSD is committed to the programs of the Desegregation Plan, these figures should not be viewed as precise commitments of funds. It is our hope that the objectives of the Plan can be met in more cost-effective ways. Also attached is a procedure that the LRSD will use in future desegregation budgeting so that these costs can be more accurately known. The formats and procedures shown have been reviewed with Mr. Morgan, and we believe he understands and approves. We have stated to Mr. Morgan, however, that we view this as only a step in the process of working with his office on the definition and tracking of desegregation costs, and we will continue to work with him to perfect this process to our mutual benefit. Sincerely, 'Jim Ivey i \ '-Manager of Support Services Jl/ch Attachment co: R. R. Morgan, Office of Desegregation Monitoring w/attachment c:\project.upd\ FEB-22-93 MON 10:59 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX WO, 5013246576 LRSD Projected Revenue and Expense 1992/93 - 1996/97 Response to Federal Court Order Dated January 21, 1992 Assumptions/Notes: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. P.02 The years of the projection and the formats used were done through consultation with Monitoring (ODM). the Office of Desegregation Although the LRSD implemented the Tri- District Plan and double funded the incentive schools in 1990- 91, these figures are not included. These projections are estimates based on current information. Although the LRSD is committed to the programs of the Desegregation Plan, these figures should not be viewed precise commitments of funds. as . _ . It is our hope that the objectives of the Plan can be met in more cost-effective ways. The LRSD is in the process of negotiating labor contracts with teachers and support personnel at this time. Consequently, projection of any salary costs starting with 1992-93 cannot be done with accuracy, and for the District administration to do so precludes good faith negotiation. The ODM understands this problem but feels that projecting no increases presents an unrealistic picture. Consequently, they have asked us to use a 3% annual increase in these costs. We agree to do that but wish to publicly state that this represents no commitment or intent on the part of the LRSD. If the Court desires, we can present.updated projections when these figures are known. We have al^ used a factor of 1% for inflationary increases in non-salary costs. We The LRSD is currently working to produce a balanced budget for Although this cannot be completed until negotiations are settled, programs must be reviewed and some 1992-93. union must be cut in order to meet the legal requirement of balanced budget. The projections herein assume that a sufficient reductions will be made to balance the 1992-93 budget. These reductions will not result in violation of the Desegregation Plan nor of state law. These reductions are shown as a line item entitled "1992-93 Budget Reductions". the Court desires, we will define these reductions for the Court when they are known. If As stated in the previous paragraph, it is assumed that $7.7 million in expense reductions will be implemented in 1992-93 Additional shortfalls will occur if and carried forward. further reductions or increased revenues are not fouiid. We are assuming a millage increase of five mills in September, This will not be required if sufficient reduction can 1993. be found. Note that the projections do not show use of the Desegregation loan in the revenues. It is our intent to use that as a reserve in the event that we cannot get millage rates increased at the time desired. The $1.5 million available in 1992-93 may, however, have to be used to balance the budget.FEB-22-93 MON 11:00 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO, 5013246576 P.03 LRSD Projected Revenue and Expense Page 2 6. Program discussion. #51-75, Incentive School Programs, requires in the years through the 1991-92 school year, the cost of programs in the Incentive Schools exceeded the mandatory level of two times the area school instructional cost per student. Since the programs are now functioning and the mandatory level is increasing, the mandatory funding level ,, Therefore, will exceed program costs in 1992-93 and beyond. we have shown the cost of Incentive School programs in 1991-92 and have shown the mandatory funding level differential in 1992-93 and beyond. 7. The projections show the cost of programs that are funded by the revenue sources shown. Federal funds are utilized in some programs but are not shown in the expense. We don't show federal funds in our operating budgets and to do so here. believe, public. we 8. 9. 10. 11. 12 . 13 . 14 . Court desires. would create confusion for the court and for the We can provide information on federal funds if the Another program that will grow further is program. the 4-year old This has been projected based on the requirements of the Desegregation Plan and previous submissions. Any required new construction will be paid for with capital improvement funds from previous bond issues. of this is planned for. second-lien issues. we believe most Any additional will be covered with The 1993-94 reduction in Programs, equipment. equipment. reflects the program #10, completion of payments Academic Support for PAL Some funding is added for replacement of this The Desegregation Plan includes certain programs that require funds but are not included in the projections because they are funded by federal grants or because their cost is small and the cost information, broken out. of tracking them exceeds the value of the The costs are not omitted? they are just not The operating costs of the new King and Stephens Schools are shown as opening at the times requested in motions before the Court. If these motions are not granted, revised budgets if the Court desires. we can submit Operating costs in other schools are reduced somewhat upon the opening of these schools because 400 students will move to each of the new schools from others in the LRSD. The fifth and sixth positions (from the left) of the LRSD standard account code will be used for coding desegregation expenses. The Desegregation program numbers shown on the spread sheets are the codes to be used. The Order specifies that start-up costs be identified. since most of this has been expended in previous years, the only significant one remaining is the PAL cost discussed above.FEB-22-93 MON 11:00 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO. 5013246576 P. 04 Desegregation Budgeting Description - Future Year Procedures A. A list of Desegregation programs with 2'-digit program numbers and a description of costs to be charged to each program will be prepared. B. The program number will be coded in the fifth and sixth positions of the account number, so that costs may be charged to a Desegregation program from various operating units and functions for various objects and using money from various fund sources. C. After the normal budget planning process is complete W. a W ... awF J. i 4 * * J-* JW J. iff W.* ILl J- O C-S lUSIUO will be sent to each budget manager telling them what costs or types of cost may be charged to Desegregation and how they are to be coded. This will be agreed to by the Associate Superintendent for Desegregation and the Manager of Support Services. D, The Associate Superintendent for Desegregation will review Desegregation expenses monthly to assure proper charging.FEB-22-93 MON 11:01 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO. 5013246576 P. 05 Lime ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 1992-97 REVENUE PROJECTION AND BUDGET SUMMARY 05-2992 1991-92 1992- 93 1993-94 1994 - 95 1995-96 1996-97 REVENUE - LOCAL SOURCES CURRENT TAXES 40% PULLBACK DELINQUENTTAXES EXCESS TREASURERS FEES DEPOSITORY INTEREST REVENUE IN LIEU OF TAXES MISC. AND RENTS INTERESTON INVESTMENTS ATHLETIC RECEIPTS 38,196,979 21,081,833 3,900,000 140,000 400,000 224,667 420,850 300,000 65,000 39,088,120 21,736,595 3,500,000 140,000 365,000 225,000 461,000 300,000 85,000 40,093,227 25,253,744 3,805,000 141,400 368,650 227,250 484,050 309,000 86,700 45,616,117 25,996,645 3,819,150 142,814 372,337 229,523 508,253 318,270 88,434 47,086,512 26,766,307 3,933,725 144,242 376,060 231,818 533,665 327,818 90,203 48,506,276 27,518,335 4,051,736 145,685 379,820 234,136 560,348 337,653 92,007 TOTAL 64,749.329 65.900,715 70,769,021 77,091,642 79,490,349 81,825.996 REVENUE - COUNTYSOURCES COUNTY GENE.RAL SEVERANCE TAX 73,419 11,000 73,419 11,000 73,419 11,000 73,419 11,000 73,419 11,000 73,419 11,000 TOTAL 84,419 84,419 64,419 84,419 84,419 84,419 REVENUE - STATE SOURCES MFPA SETTLEMENT PROCEEDS SETTLEMENT LOAN APPORTIONMENT VOCATIONAL HANDICAPPED CHILDREN EARLY CHILDHOOD ORPHAN CHILDREN TRANSPORTATION COMPENSATORY EDUCATION M TOM TRANSFERS ADULT EDUCATION 28,118,907 8,637,482 4,500,000 73,419 1,474,485 629,752 147,050 3,000 2,983,190 874,311 1,798,665 624,119 28,118,907 8,926,606 28,759,387 8,094,112 29,419,061 6,042,591 30,102,462 9,629,942 30,862,449 683,125 TOTAL 49,364,380 73,419 1,500,000 675,000 147,050 3,000 3,100,000 875,000 2,490,900 653,094 73,419 1,545,000 742,500 154,403 3,000 3,348,000 918,750 3,248,910 672,687 73,419 1,591,350 816,750 162,123 3,000 3,615,840 964,686 3,760,540 692,867 73,419 1,639,091 898,425 170,229 3,000 3,905,107 1,012,922 4,140,580 713,653 73,419 1,688,263 988,268 178,740 3,000 4,217,516 1,063,568 4,491,150 735,063 46,562,976 47,560,167 47.142,246 46,488,830 44,984,560 REVENUE - OTHER SOURCES PUBLIC LAW 874 TRANSFER FROM FED GRANTS TRANSFER FROM BOND ACCT 44,625 111,453 800,000 40,000 112,000 600,000 35,000 116,480 400,000 30,000 121,139 300.000 25,000 125,965 200,000 20,000 131,024 100,000 TOTAL 956,078 752,000 551,480 451,139 350,985 251.024 TOTAL REVENUE 115,654,206 113,300,110 118,965,087 124,769,348 126,414,583 127,146,000 :== CCaS!:FEB-22-93 MON 11:01 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO. 5013246576 P, 06 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 1992-97 REVENUE PROJECTION AND BUDGET SUMMARY 05-29-92 1991-92 1992- 93 1993-94 1994-95 1995- 96 1996 - 97 EXPENSES SALARIES BENEFITS DESEGREGATION PURCHASED SERVICES SUPPLIES & MATERIALS OTHER OBJECTS CAPITAL OUTLAY DEBT SERVICE CONTINGENCY BUDGET REDUCTION 67,748,508 7,808,935 16,910,424 6,791,207 3,817,539 887,696 1,606,543 8,718,196 0 71,437,088 9,022,067 19,141,451 6,992.544 3.927,703 755,079 1,621,715 9,597,115 500,000 (7,700,000) 73,765,037 9,202,508 18,887,119 7,202,320 4,045,534 777,731 1.670.366 9.090,123 600,000 (7,931,000) 75,316,854 9,386,558 22,144,629 7,418,390 4,166,900 801,063 1,720,477 8,845,246 700,000 (8,168,930) 76,822.807 9,574,289 24,940,080 7,640.942 4,291,907 825,095 1,772,092 8,258,921 800,000 (8,413,998) 79,373,940 9,765.775 25,864,401 7,870,170 4,420,664 849,346 1,825,255 8,041,468 900,000 (8,666,418) TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES 114,289,046 115,294,762 117,309,739 122,331,190 126,512,136 130,245,103 INCREASE (DECREASE) IN FUND BALANCE 1,365,158 (1,994,652) 1,655,346 2,438,158 (97,553) (3,099,103) BEGINNING FUND BALANCE 634,842 2,000,000 5,348 1.660,696 4,098,855 4.001.302 ENDING FUNO BALANCE 2,000,000 5,348 1,680,696 4,098,355 4,001,302 902,199 lasiR t- 1 2 5 0 7 o 0 10 12 13 14 15 10 17 18 10 21 22 24 25 28 27 20 20 32 38 34 35 40 .51 -75 r L 5 5 20 28 30 40 48 03 02 80 114 120 120 143 148 148 224 227 1-0 03 34 35 28 100 I-50 tsi 125 00 Hippy * 4 Yr Old Programs Sttidsfit Hsarina Offtcar Offfcs of OossoMBSlioa ExiraCurricular Tsachar Recruiter Staff Development Academic Support Muihcultral Programs Incentive Grants Original Uagnela I Sp Ell Learning Center Security Data Processing System MIoM Magnet Schools King School Stephens School Monitoring ActivitKee Computerized Transportation R omine Theme Cummunity School j In School Suepenston Job Fair Testing Assistance Library Services Parent Recrailing VIPS - Recruiting Prejudice Reduction To Be AUucstad Incentive School Programs ^TOTAL SETTLEMENT PLAN BUDGET J' TTTPT < :3{<
8-7 70 1105 121 04 1 i 01 00 1580 75 42: 87 82 35 41 71/75 02 40 12 14/08/120 00 T 00 90 72/45 73 75 244,077 204,350 101,040 432,504 110.000 45,702 f 418.570 2,004,720 200.005 730.732 3.800.000 103,415 080,082 200.335 400.272 O 0 345.320 10.000 17,207 270.002 741.217 1.500 12,850 501.404 52.000 02,088/ 50,000 200.000 4,128,058 10,010.424 252.320 502.073 102.477 430.140 110,000 40.020 587.074 2.730.374 200,005 800.000 3,800.000 110,342 704.553 410,384 1.330,038 0 0 300.270 10.000 70.000 270,002 750,381 1,500 11.350 580,017 52,000 04,048 5.000 200.000 4,437,312 19,141,451 250,000 057.450 105,552 452,323 : 113,300 40.837 504.704 2.102.810 270.002 0 3.014.000 113,053 818,300 422,074 1.013,028
0 0 401.084 10,500 81.370 285.271 782,102 1,545 11,001 503,035 53.500 00,807 5.000 200,000 4.814.373 18.807,110 207,003 1,205,131 100.710 405.002 110,000 40.707 002,245 2,258.505 200,342 0 4.031,420 117,002 842,042 435.355 1.445,652 2,003,300 0 414,043 11.025 83.811 203.320 805.027 1,501 12,041 015.077 55,107 08.004 5,000 200,000 4,050.380 22.144,020 275.724 ? 1.104,723! 111.000 470,000 120.200 51.201 020.313 2.320,353 204.032 0 4,152.303 120,574 808,230 448,415 1.404.007 2.707,432 2.707,000 420.405 11.570 00,325 302.044 820,700 1.030 12.402 834,450 ' 50,822 70,071 5.000 200.000 4,307,023 24,940.060 203.005 1,232.112 115,330 404.205 123.000 52,010 030.022 2.300,143 303.700 0 4,270.033 124,101 804,277 401,888 1,484,110 2.815.720 2,815.280 430.250 12.155 38.015 311.723 854.000 1.088 12,775 053.490 58.520 73.100 5,000 200,000 4.030,500 25,804,401 ) m ro I ro I co ro OQ <n CD on COFEB-22-93 MON 11:03 SUSAN W WRIGHT FAX NO. 5013246576 P,08 Exhibit A 1105 1110 FOUR YR OLD PROGRA KINDERGARTEN 1120-99 REGULAR PROGRAMS 1210-99 SPECIAL ED PROGRAM 1320-99 VOCATIONAL PROGRAM 1410-99 ADULT EDUCATION 1510-99 COMPENSATORY ED 1910 GIFTED & TALENTED 2110-90 PUPIL SUPPORT 2210-99 STAFF SUPPORT SERVI 2310-20 ADM SUPPORT SERVlC 2410 PRINCIPALS OFFICE 2510-99 BUSINESS SUPPORT 2610-99 CENTRAL SUPPORT 3000'3 COMMUNITY SERVICES 5100 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT EXPENDITURE PROJECTION BY FUNCTIONAL AREA 1991-92 TEACHER SALARY 52,349.84 2,795,060.64 28,811,085.64 4,037,827,87 4,071,829.27 756,490.90 1,156,944.86 2,598,700.99 2,634,664.92 183,975.48 3,939,101.54 290,883.36 BONDED INDEBTEDNESS OPERATING FUND 44,337.94 325,000.00 7,562,955.21 1,224,081.75 1,238,599.52 698,543.12 537,715.75 214,094.16 1,102,812.86 2,077,880.91 734,945.29 1,861,405.13 16,625,075.77 2,194,315.26 839,750.00 8,718,196.00 DESEQ FEDERAL GRANTS MAGNET SCHOOLS TOTAL TOTAL 204,356.00 6,686,389.30 11,626.28 118,050.36 35,608.75 1,649,581.34 317,475.66 1,653,162.72 4,265.335.80 107,044.21 710,699.21 510,528.09 640,566.28 362,373.04 351,162.00 130,509.54 3,522,602.96 67,162.00 428,580.73 444,781.18 115,554.79 425.733.12 9,069,517.95 273,945.79 601,212.16 6,880.00 187,848.98 651,786.63 423,530.00 3.000.00 464,212.24 1.195,556.85 1,051,829.76 301,043.78 3,545.793.76 52,129,948.10 5,909,854.73 6,380,853.31 864,661.41 6,473,270.95 1,626,050.00 5,099,356.87 7,284,019.73 5,299,811.36 7,103,107.73 18,390,604.74 2,995.726.73 1,944,528.52 8.718,196.00 51,378,915.33 45,999,708.67 16,910,424.00 5,889,938.48 13,887,841.24 134,066,827.72.4 t RECE5VEP IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION AUG 3 1992 Office of Desegregation Monitoring LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT PLAINTIFFS V. NO. LR-C-82-866 PULASKI COUNTY SPECIAL SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 1, ET AL DEFENDANTS MRS. LORENE JOSHUA, ET AL DEFENDANTS KATHERINE KNIGHT, ET AL INTERVENORS NOTICE OF FILING On January 21, 1992, this court ordered the Little Rock School District to submit certain information concerning its desegregation budget. The required budget information was filed on June 1, 1992. The budget projections which were previously submitted have now been revised based on current information. The revised budget projections are attached to this Notice of Filing. Respectfully submitted. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT FRIDAY, ELDREDGE & CLARK 2000 First Commercial Bldg. 400 West Capitol Street Little Rock, AR 72201 (501) 376-2011 By: Christopher Helfer Bar No. 81083 kaihyXNotioc of Filing* CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that a copy of the foregoing Notice of Filing has been served on the following by depositing copy of same in the United States mail on this 31st, day of July, 1992: Mr. John Walker JOHN WALKER, P.A. 1723 Broadway Little Rock, AR 72206 Mr. Sam Jones WRIGHT, LINDSEY & JENNINGS 2200 Worthen Bank Bldg. 200 West Capitol Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Steve Jones JACK, LYON & JONES, P.A. 3400 Capitol Towers Capitol & Broadway Streets Little Rock, AR 72201 Mr. Richard Roachell #15 Hickory Creek Drive Little Rock, AR 72212 Ms. Ann Brown Heritage West Bldg., Suite 510 201 East Markham Street Little Rock, AR 72201 Christopher He k*ih> 'Nodas of Kilin^ 2 LRSD Projected Revenue and Expense 1992/93 - 1996/97 Revised 7-30-92 Response to Federal Court Order Dated January 21, 1992 Assumptions/Notes: 1. The years of the projection and the foirmats used were done through consultation with the Office of 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Monitoring (ODM). Desegregation Although the LRSD implemented the Tri- District Plan and double funded the incentive schools in 1990- 91, these figures are not included. These projections are estimates based on current information. Although the LRSD is committed to the programs of the Desegregation Plan, these figures should not be viewed as precise commitments of funds. It is our hope that the objectives of the Plan can be met in more cost-effective ways. The LRSD is in the process of negotiating labor contracts with teachers and support personnel at this time. Conseguently, projection of any salary costs starting with 1992-93 cannot be done with certainty. For the purpose of these projections, it is assumed that annual step and experience increases will be provided to all employees. We have also used a factor of 1% for inflationary increases in non-salary costs. The LRSD Board of Directors adopted a balanced budget for 1992-93 on July 23, 1992. None of the budget reductions will prevent LRSD from implementing its Desegregation Plan. The modifications to the Desegregation Plan proposed by LRSD and approved by the Court for Henderson and McClellan, however, will have to be adjusted in order to implement the proposed budget reductions at those schools. At this time, the LRSD takes no position as to the necessity for a millage increase, are as follows: The reasons for taking this position A) B) C) It is not practical to rely on a millage increase in the near future to balance the budget. The LRSD's ability to fund long-range capital improvement projects is linked to the issue of extended millage. The LRSD Board of Directors must set its priorities and develop a long-range plan and budget around these priorities. It is assumed that capacity for the incentive schools will be limited to a ratio of 20 students to 1 teacher. The projections show in summary the revenue and expense of the most significant federal programs.LRSD Projected Revenue and Expense Page 2 8. Another program that will grow further is the 4-year old program. This has been projected based on the requirements of the Desegregation Plan and previous submissions. 9. Any required new construction will be paid for with capital improvement funds from previous bond issues. We believe most 10. 11. 12. 13. of this is planned for. covered with second-lien issues or possible extended millage. The 1993-94 reduction Any additional improvements will be from bonds secured by Programs, equipment. reflects in program Some funding the completion #10, Academic Support is added of payments for PAL maintenance of this equipment. for replacement and The Desegregation Plan includes certain programs that require funds but are not provided separate accounting codes at this time. This means that cost infoirmation for implementation must be extracted from other budget line items. The opening dates of the new King and Stephens Schools are shown as approved by the Court. The fifth and sixth positions (from the left) of the LRSD standard account code will be used for desegregation expenses. identifying The Desegregation program numbers shown on the spread sheets are the codes to be used. 14. The Order specifies that start-up costs be identified, known "start up" costs are as follows: The A. Academic Support Program $1.0 million ends in 1992-93 B. Data Processing $.25 million in 1992-93 and $.50 million through 1996-97 in 1993-94 C. Four-Year Old Programs $34,500 for five new programs and $30,000 for playground equipment No other significant "start up" costs are projected. 15. Because of the new reporting codes used for 1992-93, reconciliation between 1991-92 and 1992-93 program budgets is imperfect. The District will provide any specific answers which may arise because of the change in accounting coding structure.Desegregation Budgeting Description - Future Year Procedures A. A list of Desegregation programs with 2-digit program numbers and a description of costs to be charged to each program will be prepared. B. The program number will be coded in the fifth and sixth positions of the account number so that costs may be charged to a Desegregation program from various operating units and functions for various objects and using money from various fund sources. C. Each budget manager will submit a proposal for spending allotted funds. These proposals will be conjunction with the Desegregation Plan audit. reviewed in Once specific plans for spending have been proposed, the Superintendent will prepare a proposal for Board approval. In addition the Superintendent will prepare a process for reguiring Board approval for changes in planned expenditures above a to-be determined spending authority. Once the types of expenditures have been programmed, the Purchasing Department will not be authorized to issue a purchase order except for those items programmed and approved. D. The Superintendent will immediately begin directing a process for Board involvement in the long-range planning and budgeting process. E. The Superintendent will direct the new administration team to conduct a proposals. Desegregation Plan audit and related budgetLITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 1992-97 REVENUE PROJECTION AND BUDGET SUMMARY 07-29-92 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994- 95 1995-96 1996-97 REVENUE - LOCAL SOURCES CURRENTTAXES 40% PULLBACK DELINQUENT TAXES EXCESS TREASURERS FEES DEPOSITORY INTEREST REVENUE IN LIEU OF TAXES MISC. AND RENTS INTEREST ON INVESTMENTS ATHLETIC RECEIPTS 38,196,979 21,081,833 4,250,186 140,858 241,476 224,667 406,878 354,446 100,857 39,088,120 21,694,578 4,250,186 140,000 300,000 224,667 461,000 300,000 100,857 40,093,227 22,453,744 4,577,692 144,200 309,000 226,914 484,050 309,000 102,874 41,416,117 23,196,645 4,615,022 148,526 318,270 229,183 508,253 318,270 104,932 42,786,512 23,966,307 4,753,473 152,982 327,818 231,475 533,665 327,818 107,030 44,206,276 24,718,335 4,896,077 157,571 337,653 233,789 560,348 337,653 109,171 TOTAL 64,998,181 66,559,408 68,700,700 70,855,217 73,187,080 75,556,873 REVENUE - COUNTY SOURCES COUNTY GENERAL SEVERANCE TAX 73,419 15,350 73,419 11,000 73,419 11,000 73,419 11,000 73,419 11,000 73,419 11,000 TOTAL 88,769 84,419 84,419 84,419 84,419 84,419 REVENUE - STATE SOURCES MFPA SETTLEMENT PROCEEDS SETTLEMENT LOAN APPORTIONMENT VOCATIONAL HANDICAPPED CHILDREN EARLY CHILDHOOD ORPHAN CHILDREN TRANSPORTATION COMPENSATORY EDUCATION M TO M TRANSFERS ADULT EDUCATION 27,264,460 8,637,482 4,500,000 73,426 1,513,699 824,870 147,050 3,000 2,379,879 858,743 1,770,486 697,589 27,042,713 8,926,606 1,500,000 73,419 1,341,887 821,449 229,403 3,000 2,692,563 548,034 2,490,900 697,589 28,394,849 8,094,112 73,419 1,500,000 903,594 240,873 3,000 3,300,000 575,436 3,600,000 718,517 29,814,591 6,042,591 73,419 1,545,000 993,953 252,917 3,000 3,564,000 604,207 5,200,000 740,072 31,305,321 3,829,942 73,419 1,591,350 1,093,349 265,563 3,000 3,849,120 634,418 5,460,000 762,274 32,870,587 683,125 73,419 1,639,091 1,202,683 278,841 3,000 4,157,050 666,139 5,733,000 785,143 TOTAL 48,670,683 46,367,563 47,403,799 48,833,751 48,867,755 48,092,076 REVENUE - OTHER SOURCES PUBLIC LAW 874 TRANSFER FROM FED GRANTS TRANSFER FROM BOND ACCT 9,385 129,428 394,675 40,000 262,000 600,000 35,000 272,480 400,000 30,000 283,379 300,000 25,000 294,714 200,000 20,000 306,503 100,000 TOTAL 533,488 902,000 707,480 613,379 519,714 426,503 TOTAL REVENUE OPERATING 114,291,121 113,913,390 116,896,398 120,386,766 122,658,968 124,159,872ssa^sEa LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 1992-97 REVENUE PROJECTION AND BUDGET SUMMARY 07-29-92 1991-92 1992- 93 1993- 94 1994- 95 1995- 96 1996-97 REVENUE-FEDERAL GRANTS CHAPTER I CHAPTER II TITLE VI B OTHER 3.272.693 224.423 558.810 1.076.226 4.474.288 215.020 569.986 1.097.751 4.563.774 219.320 581.386 1.119.706 4.655.049 223.707 593.014 1.142.100 4.748.150 228.181 604.874 1.164.942 4.843.113 232.745 616.971 1.188.240 TOTAL 5,132,152 6.357,045 6,484,186 6,613,869 6,746,147 6,881,070 REVENUE-MAGNET SCHOOLS 13,887,841 14,165,654 14,448,967 14,737,946 15,032,705 15,333,359 TOTAL REVENUE 119.423.273 120.270.435 123.380.584 127.000.636 129.405.115 131.040.941 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 1992-97 REVENUE PROJECTION AND BUDGET SUMMARY 07-29-92 1991-92 1992-93 1993-94 1994-95 1995- 96 1996-97 EXPENSES SALARIES BENEFITS DESEGREGATION SERVICES, SUPPLIES, EQUIP DEBT SERVICE CONTINGENCY 65,368,035 8,020,788 15,997,240 15,267,935 7,950,100 0 65,063,011 9,162,732 17,013,029 14,536,674 9,597,115 500,000 66,364,271 9,208,546 19,148,407 14,972,774 9,090,123 600,000 67,691,557 9,254,588 22,515,161 15,421,957 8,845,248 700,000 69,045,388 9,300,861 23,246,037 15,884,616 8,258,921 800,000 70,426,296 9,347,366 23,732,324 16,361,155 8,041,468 900,000 TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES 112,604,098 115,872,561 119,384,121 124,428,511 126,535,823 128,808,608 EXPENSES-FEDERAL GRANTS 5,132,152 6,357,045 6,484,186 6,613,869 6,746,147 6,881,070 EXPENSESMAGNET SCHOOLS 13,887,841 14,165,654 14,448,967 14,737,946 15,032,705 15,333,359 TOTAL EXPENSES 131,624,091 136,395,260 140,317,274 145,780,327 148,314,675 151,023,037 INCREASE (DECREASE) IN FUND BALANCE 1,687,023 (1,959,171) (2,487,723) (4,041,745) (3,876,855) (4,648,736) BEGINNING FUND BALANCE 634,842 2,321,865 362,694 (2,125,029) (6,166,774) (10,043,629) ENDING FUND BALANCE 2.321.865 362.694 (2.125.029) (6.166.774) (10.043.629) (14.692.365) FUND BALANCE ANALYSIS BEGINNING FUND BALANCE 2,321,865 362,694 3,874,971 5,833,226 6,956,371 INCREASE(DECREASE) IN FUND BALANCE RECORD LOAN REVENUE BUDGET REDUCTIONS (1,959,171) (2,487,723) 3,000,000 3,000,000 (4,041,745) 3,000,000 3,000,000 (3,876,855) 2,000,000 3,000,000 (4,648,736) 3,000,000 ENDING FUND BALANCE 362.694 3.874.971 5.833.226 6.956.371 5.307,635 * $1,500,000 recorded as revenue In 1992-931105 1110 FOUR YR OLD PROG RA KINDERGARTEN 1120-99 REGULAR PROGRAMS 1210-99 SPECIAL ED PROGRAM 1320-99 VOCATIONAL PROGRAM 1410-99 ADULT EDUCATION 1510-99 COMPENSATORY ED 1910 GIFTED & TALENTED 2110-90 PUPIL SUPPORT 2210-99 STAFF SUPPORT SERVI 2310-20 ADM SUPPORT SERVIC 2410 PRINCIPALS OFFICE 2510-99 BUSINESS SUPPORT 2610-99 CENTRAL SUPPORT 3000'S 4000 5100 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT EXPENDITURES BY FUNCTIONAL AREA 1991-92 TEACHER SALARY 138,077.08 2,760,904.00 28,381,519.29 3,989,261.59 4,023,283.53 1,013,772.90 1,143,799.80 2,570,622.02 2,667,369.46 198,491.86 3,895,984.12 287,255.96 COMMUNITY SERVICES NON PROGRAMMED BONDED INDEBTEDNESS OPERATING FUND 79,415.14 347,089.07 6,024,779.24 1,354,685.45 1,158,370.16 697,588.87 253,127.76 183,211.79 1,174,153.77 1,631,966.93 446,175.31 1,983,094.66 19,318,518.35 2,161,066.34 740,723.24 32,450.45 7,950,100.01 DESEG 94,937.48 6,072,099.95 10,538.70 107,559.18 35,631.06 1,589,524.16 309,073.21 1,479,959.60 441,244.35 107,262.02 1,041,101.85 465,561.53 504,079.83 3,738,667.07 TOTAL FEDERAL GRANTS MAGNET SCHOOLS TOTAL 302,717.88 338,788.30 130,394.89 3,123,267.62 55,541.49 371,072.25 301,061.72 88,318.56 429,905.44 8,567,902.51 276,198.03 592,044.13 5,333.69 181,901.87 658,847.84 414,539.17 4,792.23 302,192.60 114,004.58 1,207,390.15 1,050,413.66 503,364.75 51,070,341.61 45,536,516.54 15,997,239.99 5,132,152.12 13,887,841.24 312,429.70 3,537,898.51 49,046,300.99 5,933,401.65 6,220,045.30 863,614.82 5,985,026.13 1,564,454.95 5,083,769.09 6,494,896.88 1,174,230.08 7,193,730.95 21,414,826.09 2,913,883.83 1,546,995.67 7,950,100.01 131,624,091.50Prg # Pg# Description 1 5 2 5 5 28 6 28 7 39 Hippy 4 Yr Old Programs Student Hearing Officer Office of Desegregation Extra-Curricular 8 44 Teacher Recruiter 9 46 10 48 12 63 13 82 Staff Development Academic Support Multicultral Programs Incentive Grants 14 86 15 114 16 129 17 129 18 143 19 148 21 148 22 224 24 227 25 1-9 Original Magnets Sp Ed Learning Center Security Data Processing System M-to-M Magnet Schools King School Stephens School Monitoring Activities Computerized Transp Romine Theme 26 93 27 34 28 35 Community School In-School Suspension Job Fair 29 28 32 106 33 1-56 34 131 35 125 Testing Assistance Library Services Parent Recruiting VIPS - Recruiting Prejudice Reduction Plant Services 49 00 To Be Allocated Incentive Schools: 51 149 Office of Incentive Schools 52 152 53 153 Writing To Read Science Labs 54 153 55 153 56 153 57 154 59 158 61 171 64 172 Computer Labs Foreign Language Computer Loan Program Extended Day/Week Field Trips Transportation Instructional Aides 65 172 Extended Year 66 176 72 190 73 193 74 194 75 153 Incentivo/Recog nition Staffing Staff Development Teacher Stipends Other Academic Programs SUB-TOTAL INCENTIVES GRAND TOTAL SETTLEMENT PLAN BUDGET Unaudited 91 -92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96 96-97 214,295 278,772 284,347 290,034 295,835 301,751 811,591 88,332 452,998 31,072 45,924 400,069 2,846,490 164,490 658,575 3,738,667 56,291 703,830 200,727 354,920 0 0 373,686 0 17,267 295,276 914,101 4,063 0 588,441 22,367 62,714 0 268,247 0 13,314,433 261,482 1,096,193 1,325,132 2,682,807 15,997,240 1,202,033 1,238,094 1,520,236 1,810,843 1,847,060 99,087 101,069 103,090 105,152 107,255 433,133 441,796 450,632 459,644 468,837 0 0 0 0 0 42,204 43,048 43,909 44,787 45,683 447,446 456,395 465,523 474,833 484,330 2,785,221 1,840,925 1,877,744 1,915,298 1,953,604 240,315 320,000 3,800,000 110,307 617,038 411,583 721,442 0 0 391,495 10,000 85,816 115,000 748,258 1,500 11,350 716,504 27,000 65,863 5,000 200,000 13,886,365 63,147 15,000 15,000 15,000 7,500 5,000 863,000 37,500 20,000 549,695 260,000 21,500 914,823 59,500 225,000 55,000 3,126,664 17,013,029 245,121 320,000 3,876,000 112,513 629,379 773,930 543,085 2,603,300 0 399,325 10,200 87,532 115,000 763,223 1,530 11,577 730,834 27,540 67,180 5,000 200,000 15,927,943 65,041 15,450 15,450 15,450 7,725 5,150 888,890 38,625 20,600 566,186 267,800 22,145 942,267 61,285 231,750 56,650 3,220,464 19,148,407 250,024 255,024 260,125 320,000 320,000 320,000 3,953,520 4,032,590 4,113,242 114,763 117,058 119,400 641,967 654,806 667,902 789,409 805,197 821,301 553,947 565,026 576,326 2,655,366 2,708,473 2,762,643 2,707,000 2,761,140 2,816,363 407,311 415,457 423,767 10,404 89,283 115,000 778,487 1,561 11,809 745,451 28,091 68,524 5,000 200,000 19,198,082 66,993 15,914 15,914 15,914 7,957 5,305 915,557 39,784 21,218 583,171 275,834 22,809 970,535 63,124 238,703 58,350 3,317,078 22,515,161 10,612 10,824 91,068 92,890 115,000 115,000 794,057 809,938 1,592 1,624 12,045 12,286 760,360 775,567 28,653 29,226 69,894 71,292 5,000 5,000 200,000 200,000 19,829,446 20,213,235 69,002 71,072 16,391 16,391 16,391 8,195 5,464 943,023 40,977 21,855 600,666 284,109 23,494 999,651 65,017 245,864 60,100 3,416,591 23,246,037 16,883 16,883 16,883 8,441 5,628 971,314 42,207 22,510 618,686 292,632 24,198 1,029,641 66,968 253,239 61,903 3,519,088 23,732,324On January 21, 1992, the United States District Court ordered the LRSD to make certain submissions in order that ODM could determine that the LRSD's budgetary process would meet the following requisites: (1) accurately and comprehensively accounts for the expenditure of settlement funds
(2) demonstrates the link between the district's legal requirements and the fiscal underwriting of those requirements
(3) describes a desegregation budgeting process that can be demonstrated, justified, and verified
and (4) enables the district to determine what adjustments might be necessary in order to align finances with desegregation obligations. The LRSD filed its reply to that order on June 1, 1992 and began an ongoing process to satisfy the request of the court. By incorporating into the general ledger a code structure that ties the district's general ledger to the desegregation plan, a link has been established between the district's legal requirements (the desegregation plan) and its fiscal commitment (the budget). The district has committed to maintaining the code structure and to provide reports to the ODM for monitoring. The district has incorporated the new codes into the 1992-93 budget. The ODM continues to have concerns about the budgeting process that is used in the LRSD and its capability to determine its financial status. The LRSD is a multi million dollar enterprise. It is the state's largest school district and should set an example of strong fiscal management. Yet, the district operates its financial affairs like the smallest of school districts that have simplistic needs. The Arkansas Department of Education provides Handbook II as the basis for school district accounting and within the code structure there is ample flexibility to measure any aspect of school finance. The LRSD Policies and Procedures Manual has very little in the way of board policy relative to financial matters. There is no requirement for board approval of major expenditures. Therefore, major financial obligations are undertaken without full public disclosure committing the District to, not only current year obligations, but also to future payments. Examples include the purchase of computer equipment for the CMIT project and the expenditure of millions on the PAL program, as well as the open ended "double funding" of the incentive schools. The Board has not required, as a matter of policy, that new or changed needs that require substantial outlays be funded in the budget, and that the sources of the funds be identified. For example, if additional funds are needed for security personnel, which item in the budget will have to give up the money. The current financial system is essentially an accounting system that produces the accounting reports required by state law. However, it does not generally satisfy the high priority needs of the District itself. Major unmet needs include an improved ability to generate systematic short- and long-term expenditure projections, as well as an improved ability to allocate resources according to explicit District priorities, especially in relation to academic programs. In December 1990, a report submitted by a team from the National Curriculum Audit Team and commissioned by the LRSD Board stated in Finding 5.3 "School management practices show inadequate control of district resources." and in Finding 5.1 "the district may be not exercising appropriate stewardship such as in management of programs and personnel." The auditors found that "the budget was not used as a comprehensive planning document driven by curriculum needs. Visible and tangible linkages between budget priorities and curriculum priorities were not apparent" Neither is the desegregation plan used daily as an instrument to guide implementation of district policy. There is a disparity between the promise of the plan and reality yet there is no evaluation of the programs the school district offers to see "what works", and no changes are made to cut ineffective programs. In effect, the school district seems to have a large slump hole into which it pours money. In no way can the district offer that they have shown good faith efforts to improve the quality of the educational process. The lack of program orientation and other truly useful financial information may impede the District's efforts to provide an equitable and productive distribution of resources to all students. Program budgeting has the characteristic of a primary focus on the purpose for which funds are intended, e.g., McClellan Magnet Program, PAL Program, Alternative Programs, Gifted and Talented, etc., rather than on object code line items, e.g., textbooks, supplies, certified salaries, etc., or organizational units. When budget documents are presented to the board and public, there should be a comprehensive overview of each program and all of the resources allocated to them. The accounting codes used by the school district provide for the use of a function code which could be defined as program categories in a program budgeting system. School districts provide educational services to students in the form of academic programs such as reading, mathematics, science, social science, etc. Parents, teachers, and students view progress and achievement in the same terms. The financial and human resources to accomplish all of this in the LRSD are accumulated, budgeted, allocated, analyzed and reported in terms of funds, schools, functions and objects, but not the primary programs which embody the reasons for the district's existence. Thus, neither the public education constituencies nor the administrators themselves can readily discern the priorities of the district as reflected in the allocation of resources. The curriculum audit pointed this out to the district in its Recommendation 12: "Move toward greater involvement in budgeting with curriculum linkages. That recommendation is especially valid H considering the need to balance budgets with revenues in an effective and equitable manner. The recommendation identifies the major steps, found on pages 119-120 of the curriculum audit, necessary to install programmatic budgeting. Instead of concentrating their management efforts on improvement of internal processes and developing basic management information, the district has continued to ignore the direction of the court and its own commissioned audit. The Board of Directors at the direction of the previous administration renewed contracts for all personnel effective May 1, 1992 and passed responsibility to provide a balanced budget to the new superintendent. As a result, sweeping cuts were made to the budget that were inappropriate. At the time of the cuts. Superintendent Mac Bernd made promises to improve the financial process in order to be in better position for the next year. He stated in the budget document transmittalOnce this budget is adopted, the budgeting process will not end. We must begin to restructure the budgeting process so that full attention and resources are directed at improving student achievement rather than providing so many different programs which ultimately distract the District's focus to the other issues. It is my goal to place the entire District in the position of being accountable for improving student achievement. This will be done by concentrating our attention first on the core curricular areas. Next, programs which are designed to improve instruction and achievement in these areas will be linked to particular expected outcomes and goals. If a program does not have this linkage, I will be recommending in the Spring of 1993 that personnel contracts in these areas not be renewed for the next fiscal year. Finally for the district to operate efficiently and effectively it will be necessary to streamline the administration. Because contracts have been renewed for 1992-1993, this cannot happen this year. On the other hand, the District has several cost centers where investment in personnel might produce savings or generate revenues for the District. All of these items will be considered in the coming months. Now as the District approaches May 1, 1993, history seems to be repeating itself. The district is projecting large deficits for the next year yet has little good information on which to base cuts or deployment of personnel. Again, the plea of "wait until next year" is heard. We can no longer continue down this path. The administration was aware of problems and has not put adequate resources to correct them. The position control system does not reflect the authority for each position or the person assigned to that position. How can a district cut personnel when it can't even determine what positions it has? Where is the plan for allocating personnel to the needs of the children?Budget concerns: A. Financial Situation Terminal financial situation No plan for fixing terminal financial situation Deficit spending Exact situation unknown...no current year forecast No projections for out years...revenue/expense Loan repayment odds going down B. Process No detailed budget calendar Adding on expenses while in deficit (positions, salaries) Dont have history of cut/add options considered Increases hidden in budget document No published teacher staffing analysis for current year No published current school capacity plan for budget C. Quality of Effort Poor quality of effort...job descriptions Poor justifications prepared for add/cuts No formal response planned back to Budget Committee No detailed linking between budget and Budget Committee No documentation on new hardware/software costs Long term costs of contracting outD. Policies and Procedures Personnel Policies Absentee/Sick Leave Policy E. Leadership and vision/rp. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT EPS CODE: 06H APPROVAL OF BUDGET The published budget shall be reviewed and adjusted as necessary and presented for Board adoption as a working budget at the regular July meeting of the fiscal year for which it was prepared. Following Board approval, this budget shall be presented in prescribed form to the State Department of Education. Expenditures requiring a budget transfer in excess of $25,000 shall be approved by the Board. Revised: 2/25/93 16.I I LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT EPS CODE: DBH APPROVAL OF BUDGET The published budget shall be reviewed and adjusted as necessary and presented for Board adoption as a working budget at the regular July meeting of the fiscal year for which it was prepared. Following Board approval, this budget shall be presented in prescribed form to the State Department of Education. Expenditures requiring a budget transfer in excess of $25,000 shall be approved by the Board. Revised: 2/25/93 16.I I I LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT EPS CODE: DBH APPROVAL OF BUDGET The published budget shall be reviewed and adjusted as necessary and presented for Board adoption as a working budget at the regular July meeting of the fiscal year for which it was prepared. Following Board approval, this budget shall be presented in prescribed foirm to the State Department of Education. Expenditures requiring a budget transfer in excess of $25,000 shall be approved by the Board. Revised: 2/25/93 16.Bill HoaNey MEMORANDUM To: From
Subject
Date: Board of Directors Mac Bernd 1993-94 Budget Development Process April 22, 1993 j The purpose of this memorandum is to discuss the 1993-94 budget process in terms of the major steps that have been taken and will be taken so that our estimated 1993-94 deficit of 7.5 million dollars can be eliminated and a balanced budget can be submitted to the State of Arkansas. 1. The first step in the budget process was to hold community forums, to listen to the aspirations and concerns of our constituents. These forums were held in the fall of 1992L The main issues that surfaced from the forums were as follows: a. School safety and security b. Academic achievement c. Implementation of the Desegregation Plan d. Control of our own destiny both legally and fiscally. 2. After the Community Forums were completed, a Citizens Budget Committee began meetingJ These meetings began before the winter holiday and ended in April with a series of recommendations for the District to consider in light of near and long term budgetary concerns. The recommendations of the Budget Committee are attached to this memorandum. Recommendations that were used in the Financial Forecast are designated with an asterisk (*) in the Citizens Report. 3. As the Qitizens Budget Committee continued its work, a corresponding process involving the Superintendent's cabinet and other administrators was undertaken for the purpose of developing a budget that was balanced and reflective of the priorities identified in the desegregation plan and by the community. This group took the priorities of the Citizen's group into account during the process, but many of the Citizen's Committee recommendations are long term and will be considered for future years. 4. The steps outlined above have resulted in the Financial Forecasttthat we are outlining this evening. This forecast is presented to get direction from the Board so that personnel reductions can be accomplished before the May 1, 1993 statutory deadline. We are asking for a special meeting on April 28, so that the Board can take final action on the personnel reductions outlined in the Financial Forecast. A5. The next step in the process will be the development of the detailed Tentative Budget J^This document will be furnished to the Board on April 28th. As this is a detailed document which is quite comprehensive, we are not requesting action on it until the regularly scheduled meeting in May. The Tentative Budget will contain our most accurate estimates of revenues and expenditures in a detailed fashion. This is the budget that will be presented to the Federal Court for approval. It will not be the Final Budget because the complete picture of revenues and state funding will not be known in May. 6. The last step in the 1993-94 Budget process will be the development of the Final Adopted^ Budget which will be submitted to the Board of Directors in the July meeting. This is the Budget that will developed after the Federal Court has acted on the Tentative Budget After this Final Budget is acted upon by the Board, it will be submitted to the State of Arkansas for approval.DEFICIT REDUCTION PLAN FOR THE 1993 - 1994 SCHOOL YEARDEFICIT REDUCTION PLAN I. n. ADDITIONAL BUDGET EXPENDITURES REINSTATEMENT OF PROGRAMS m. REVENUE/EXPENSE FORECAST IV. BUDGET REDUCTION CRITERIA BUDGET RECOMMENDATIONS VI. POSITION REDUCTIONS1. ADDITIONAL BUDGET EXPENDITURE * 4 ASSISTANT PRINCIPALS AT INCENTIVE SCHOOLS $ 160,000 * 4 FULL-TIME SOCIAL WORKERS AT INCENTIVE SCHOOLS 132,000 * 1 SPANISH TEACHER 33,000 * POLICE RESOURCE OFFICER AT EACH SECONDARY SCHOOL (50% CITY 50% DISTRICT) 203,000 * KING STAFF - EXTENDED CONTRACTS ABACUS AND MISCELLANEOUS 350,000 * 1 SECRETARY FOR DESEGREGATION 21,500 TOTALn. REINSTATEMENT OF PROGRAMS PROGRAMS ESTIMATES * GIFTED & TALENTED 242,000 * COUNSELING 260,000 $ * MUSIC TEACHERS 551,000 * IRC AIDES 38,500 * COMMUNITY SCHOOLS 100,000 * PARENT RECRUITING 75,000 * SEVENTH PERIOD AT HENDERSON 303,000 TOTAL $ 1
569,5O{1 m. REVENUE! EXPENSE FORECASTLittle Rock School District Revenue/Expense Trends $120 it $100 - $80- -rn- c Q. K UI $80 - c (X $40 - $20 - b i $0 88-88 I 89-00 I 00-91 81-82 92-83 93-84 T n School Years Total Expenses Revenue Settlement Loan Settlement Payments Ail Dollar Amounts aro stated In Millions of DollarsLITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 1991-94 REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE PROJECTION (DRAFT 1) 04-22-93 ACTUAL 1990-91 ACTUAL 1991-92 BUDGET 1992-93 PROPOSED 1993-94 REVENUE - LOCAL SOURCES CURRENT TAXES 40% PULLBACK DELINQUENT TAXES EXCESS TREASURERS FEES DEPOSITORY INTEREST REVENUE IN LIEU OF TAXES MISC. AND RENTS INTEREST ON INVESTMENTS ATHLETIC RECEIPTS 31,899,357 20,601,593 3,214,974 118,998 317,646 120,412 317,978 141,376 91,322 38,196,979 21,081,833 4,250,186 140,858 241,476 224,667 406,878 354,446 100,857 39,088,120 21,694,576 4,250,186 140,000 300,000 224,667 461,000 300,000 100,857 41,027,982 21,420,949 4,277,692 145,690 303,000 245,162 484,050 340,000 102,874 TOTAL 56,823,656 64,998,180 66,559,406 68,347,399 REVENUE- COUNTY SOURCES COUNTY GENERAL SEVERANCE TAX 73,971 16,232 73,419 15,350 73,419 11,000 73,419 15,000 TOTAL 90,203 88,769 84,419 88,419 REVENUE - STATE SOURCES MFPA SETTLEMENT PROCEEDS SETTLEMENT LOAN APPORTIONMENT VOCATIONAL HANDICAPPED CHILDREN EARLY CHILDHOOD ORPHAN CHILDREN TRANSPORTATION COMPENSATORY EDUCATION M TO M TRANSFERS ADULT EDUCATION 22,037.764 10,356.778 6,000.000 73.971 1.265.710 602.063 0 8.820 2,885.960 609.943 1,007.481 624.119 27.264.460 8.637.482 4.500.000 73.426 1,513.699 824.870 147.050 3.000 2.379,879 858,743 1.770,486 697,589 27,042,713 8,926,606 1,500,000 73,419 1,341,887 821,449 229.403 3,000 2,692,563 548,034 2,490,900 697,589 27,142,713 8,094,112 0 1,341,887 1,210,000 240,873 3,000 2.700,000 575.436 2.883.425 768.715 TOTAL 45,472,609 48,670,684 46,367,563 44,960,160 REVENUE- OTHER SOURCES PUBLIC LAW 874 TRANSFER FROM FED GRANT TRANSFER FROM BOND ACCT 28,585 95,588 613,166 9,385 129,428 394,675 40,000 262,000 600,000 30,000 250,000 400,000 TOTAL 737,339 533,488 902,000 680,000 TOTAL REVENUE OPERATlNfl 103,123,807 114,291,121 113,913,388 114,075,978< LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 1991-94 REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE PROJECTION (DRAFT 1) 04-22-93 ACTUAL 1990-91 ACTUAL 1991-92 BUDGET 1992-93 PROPOSED 1993-94 REVENUE-FEDERAL GRANTS CHAPTER I CHAPTER II TITLE VI B OTHER 2,886,618 227,900 468,964 1,735,885 3,275,099 224,423 558,810 1,164,511 4,288,755 215,020 589,011 1,253,733 4,288,755 215,020 589,011 1,253,733 TOTAL 5,319,367 5,222,843 6,346,519 6,346,519 REVENUE-MAGNET SCHOOLS STATE/LOCAL 12,571,785 13,887,841 14,278,796 14,707,160 TOTAL 12,571,785 13,887,841 14,278,796 14,707,160 TOTAL REVENUE 121,014,959 133,401,805 134,538,703 135,129,6571 EXPENSES SALARIES BENEFITS DESEGREGATION SERVICES,SUPP,EQUIP DEBT SERVICE CONTINGENCY 56,996,869 7,312,664 14,598,558 17,053,677 6,646,769 0 65,368,035 8,020,788 15,997,240 15,267,935 7,950,100 0 65,063,011 9,162,732 17,013,029 14,536,674 9,597,115 500,000 67,930,687 9,454,597 . , 19,279,615 15,436,968 8,870,123 1,000,000 TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSE 102,608,537 112,604,098 115,872,561 121,971,991? EXPENSES-FEDERAL GRANT 5,319,367 5,222,843 6,346,519 6,346,519 EXPENSES-MAGNET SCHOOL 12,571,785 13,887,841 14,278,796 14,707,160 TOTAL EXPENSES) 120,499,689 131,714,782 136,497,876 143,025,670? INCREASE (DECREASE) IN FUND BALANCE 515,270 1,687,023 (1,959,173) (7,896,013) BEGINNING FUND BALANCE 119,574 634,844 2,321,867 362,694 ENDING FUND BALANCE 634,844 2,321,867 362,694 (7,533,319) 1rV. BUDGET REDUCTION CRITERIA A. COMPLIANCE WITH DESEGREGATION PLAN B. MINIMIZE IMPACT TO PROGRAMS C. STREAMLINE ORGANIZATIONAL PYRAMIDV. BUDGET RECOMMENDATIONS 1. USE DESEGREGATION LOAN $ 3,000,000 2. TRANSFER FUNDS FROM FOOD SERVICE 500,000 3. TRANSFER FUNDS FROM INSURANCE FUND 500,000 4. DEVELOP THE OPERATING BUDGET 1,000,000 '7 5. IMPLEMENT CAFETERIA HEALTH CARE PLAN 311,000 6. REFINANCE LEASE-PURCHASE AGREEMENTS 400,000 7. MISCELLANEOUS 325,000 8. POSITION REDUCTIONS 1.500.000 TOTALS ^36? VL POSITION REDUCTIONS GROUPS FTES ADMINISTRATIVE/MANAGERS 8.5 SECRETARIAL 7.0 CLERICAL 4.0 COMPUTER AIDES 50.0 MEDIA/LIBRARY CLERKS .STAi. 33 ___ * % SKILLED TRADE 4.0 MATH TEACHERS TOTAL 81.5 LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT CITIZENS BUDGET COMMITTEE Subcommittee Reports March 31,1993 Item Page Staff Appreciation 1 Legend 1 I. Academic Achievement 2 II. Desegregation 3 III. Non-Academic 6 IV. Physical Plant 10 V. Revenue 11 VI. Staffing 12 VII. Transportation 14 VIII. Safety and Discipline 15STAFF APPRECIATION The Citizens Budget Committee is extremely appreciative of the efforts of District employees who furnished information and assisted in the the committee's report. Without the employees cooperation, support, and willingness to be candid, the Committee could not have completed Its work. We owe all employees of the District a warm thank you for their assistance. LEGEND * Indicates that the recommendation was taken Into consideration in the 1993-94 budget / 1I. ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT The following are recommendations to help reduce the budget but still maintain an emphasis on academic achievement for all students. A. B. c. A concerted effort needs to be made to determine the success of the academic programs that exist at the present time. To accomplish this goal, we suggest that: (1) the school f district arxJ our committee determine the criteria needed to deem a program successful/unsuccessful and (2) teachers and principals throughout the district fill out an anonymous questionnaire that focuses on what programs they want to keep and/or implement Rationale: We feel that the success of our schools is, in large measure, dependent on those who are responsible for the delivery of services. Thus we need to help teachers and principals to become empowered individuals by asking them to be a part of the solution rather than part of the problem. We want the teachers and principals of the district to become active participants in solving the problems that face the district and one way to do this is by seeking their input concerning program services. Classes that have less than 15 students need to be canceled or if there are several students at more than one school who want to enroll in a particular class (e.g. German V), then those students need to take the course at one school. This will cost the district the travel expense for transfering and/or transporting students from school to school. Rationale: We feel that offering courses that reach only a few students is not cost effective. By consolidating, we hope that the district can still offer most, if not all, of its courses. Some portion of the money that has been allocated for narrowing the gap between black and white achievement levels needs to be used for programs that foster professional development of teachers and academic progress for all students. Rationale: The district has been given money to narrow the gap and that is what it needs to be used for. We realize that more money does not necessarily mean achievement levels will automatically rise. However, we do see the need to invest in our teachers because without quality teachers we wSI not have quality students. / 2II. DESEGREGATION What is the District vision/mission statement? Our perception
The Little Rock School District must embrace the Desegregation plan wholeheartedly, provide the best education possible for each child in the district, encourage total parental involvement, value teacher input and be responsive to the community as a whole. In order to do this: the Superintendent must communicate to all levels of the employee population clear expectations for implementing the Desegregation Plan with reinforcement permeating to all segments of the District Each employee should be able to articulate the components which impact them. In addition, each employee should be held accountable for their particular area of expertise. Recommendations for 1993-94 budget reductions: A. Eliminate ail staff which reports to the Associate Superintendent for Organization and Learning Equity and move a support staff person from Planning, Research arxl Evaluation to serve as Administrative Assistant. B. Reduce staff in Planning, Research arxJ Evaluation by two staff persons by not filling current vacancies. C. Evaluate the 4-y6ar old program to determine rate of white retention and petition the court before future expansions. D. Lobby for LRSD to become Lead Agency for Head Start. E. Student Assignment Office Coordinator must be able to recognize problem areas of racial imbalance during the student assignment process, articulate to parents components of plan compliance, and correct. We noted several examples of assignments not in compliance. Review procedures as outlined in Plan arxJ require personnel to comply. Disparity in treatment because of race and economics was apparent during our visits. Attitudes arid awareness level of treatment must be reviewed with each staffing office. F. Review new school construction to determine school closings which would feed students Into new interdistrict magnets and reduce double funded incentive schools. Martin Luther King (692) impact: Ish (187), Mitcheil (264), Rightsell (249) Stephens impact: Stephens (209), Garland (256), Fair Park (243) Determine facflity utilizations G. Combine ALL recruitment functions/eliminate one position through better utilization. Teacher recruitment Parent recruiting VIPS recruitment Private school recruitment 3Desegregation (continued) _H. Review Data Processing for effectiveness and flexibility, multiple usage and access for District users. ABACUS: including existing training program implemented by Staff Development Office 1. J. SIMS WP Use before and after normal school hours for teachers, PTSA, students Review total computer operations for safety and computer security procedures, particularly reviewing system glitches, including: computer capacities < user help/assistance customer help line 4 simplify present data input and document preparation Develop a starxiardized SYSTEM MANUAL for user on-site help. In-house trouble shooter to handle day-to-day access and response. Review cunent telephone operation for computer interface, call routing and data transmission efficiencies. Develop systemwide searches by subject name to be used in data capturing. Review staffing levels at all schools to determine optimum level of student/pupil operations. Bring class sizes Into line with state/district standards. Review teacher class loads (example: teacher teaching at least 4 of 6 periods at high school level). Rnal decisions on courses being offered should be made by final registration. Review Staff Development operations including better utilization of current district personnel with planned future elimination. Perform more functions al principal/school level. Curriculum Coordinators could function as resource for staff development. Biminate teacher stipend for training (negotiation) utilize days and time already paid for through present contracts. 4 Desegregation (continued) K. Combine department heads and eliminate one position. What are the positions? Are persons in these positions functioning effecliveiy? L Add Grantwrfter reporting to Superintendent. M. Salary must come as a result of grants submitted. This means that this position must pay for Itself plus generate new dollars for the District Eliminate KLRE/KUAR affiliation unless or untB it becomes an educational component of the District N. One-time incentive for early retirements (example: $3000 for 27 yrs, etc. - PN Agreement). 0. Planning Research and Evaluation now produces reports and recommendations which are not being utilized and Implemented. R^efine Planning, Research, and Evaluation impact In order that findings are implemented. P. Develop a coordinated nxinitoring efforts which wfli minimize disruptions in classroom. Biracial Committee Parent Advisory Committee Include written summary of events, observations, eliminate in-room teacher/student confrontations. Q. Review Gifted and Talented Program for maximum pupil/teacher exposure. & Restore time to 150 minutes per student. Restore to prior budget levels. Concentrate program implementation above 3rd grade level
focus on basic skills prior to 3rd grade. Increase teacher requirements to Master's level: 3 year limit on acquisition. Committee Conclusions A. Monitoring is not our adversary, each individual in the District should be able to participate in the monitoring function because the Plan should be a part of day-to-day operations of every entity in the District B. WE BEUEVE THAT THE JUDGE HAS GIVEN DIRECTIVES ON ALL ASPECTS OF THE PLAN: THEREFORE. REVIEW ALL GOALS AND OBJECTIVE FOR EFFECTIVENESS AND IMPLEMENTATION - REPORT BACK TO DISTRICT BY APRIL 1, 1993 AND GIVE STATUS OF ALL PROGRAMS DESCRIBED IN PLAN. MAKE CONCRETE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CHANGE OR IMMEDIATE IMPLEMENTATION OR EUMINATION BY MAY 1. 1993. 5III. NONACADEMIC A. STATEMENT OF UNDERSTANDING It is the understanding of this cluster that the Little Rock District School Board and the administration have previously cut $7.6 million from the current budget and are at an Impasse as to finding further areas of budget reductions. Also, the duster understands that a reduction of $5.6 million is needed to balance the budget for the 1993-94 budget year, unless the court reinstates the $7.6 million in budget reductions then the deficit would increase to $13.2 million. B. PURPOSE This cluster was formed as a subcommittee to evaluate the non-academic areas falling within the Little Rock School District budget The cluster's evaluation was to seek recommendations for helping to achieve an overall budget reduction for the district C. APPROACH Definition of Subject Area One of the early on determinations centered around defining what constituted nonacademic activities. The duster decided that any area that did not require teacher certification should be considered non-academic. Applying that criteria, the following areas were asked to provide someone to present a brief overview of where the area fit into the operations of the school district: * SCHOOL FOOD SERVICES - Ms. Jackie Boykin - PLANT SERVICES - Mr. Doug Eaton < INFORMATION SERVICES - Mr. Bob Connolly * PURCHASING - Mr. Charles Neal - HUMAN RESOURCES - Ms. Rita White VOLUNTEERS IN PUBUC SCHOOLS - Ms. Debbie Milam < KLRE/KUAR - Ms. Regina Dean FINANCIAL SERVICES - Mr. Mark Milhollen - NEW FUTURES - Ms. Unda Young ATHLETICS - Ms. Ouida Carter X COMMUNICATIONS - Ms. Dianne Woodruff There are other areas we did not interview even though they satisfied the above criteria. These areas fell under the purview of another duster and we made every effort to avoid duplication of request being made to the district staff. These areas are as follows: - PLANNING, RESEARCH & EVALUATION - The duster on academics and student achievement. - CURRICULUM. STAFF DEVELOPMENT, INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER - The duster on academics and student achievement. 6Nonacademic (continued) - STUDENT ASSIGNMENT. C.A.R.E.. DESEGREGATION/EQUITY. PARENT RECRUITERS - The cluster on courts/desegregation. < HEARING OFFICE - The cluster on safety and discipline. < TRANSPORTATION - The cluster on transportation. D. GENERAL RNDINGS Achieving the desired results will mandate some difficult and unpopular decisions. The obvious spending cuts have been addressed in previous budget reductions. This cluster feels strongly that not only are spending cuts necessary, but an overall evaluation of the district from an operations audit prospective is critical to any long term productivity gains. A restructure of the district to achieve efficiency, cost savings. Job consolidation of duties and resources, and redistribution at duties and responsibilities is essential. The need to flatten the organization chart and eliminate the multiple layers of management are superb examples of this necessary restructure. If the district does not restructure and eliminate unproductive spending, the budget crisis will be ongoing. A cursory review indicated the need for an overall salary evaluation of negotiated salaries. It appears that the district is burdened with relatively high administrative salaries considering the local administrative and executive salary market. It is recommended that an immediate salary freeze be implemented until the budget crisis has been addressed in a manner that will allow for salary increases as a structured item in a balanced budget. It is further recommended that a hiring freeze be placed on replacement of nonacademic personnel until the positions are included In a balanced budget. All car allowances shoiJd be eliminated Immediately and business mileage should be reimbursed at 28 cents per mile with adequate documentation. The board should consider proposing an early out and/or a voluntary severance program to reduce nonacademic labor cost An across the board cut of five percent in each area over and above the following specific recommendations is proposed. E. SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS The following areas were reviewed and the cluster offers the following specific recommendations for consideration. Implementation of the specific recommendations does not eliminate the need for application of the general recommendations to these areas. School Food Services This program Is totally self funded and operates without cost to the district. It is recommended that this area be left status quo. 7Nonacademic (continued) Plant Services This area was found to be a major area needing further evaluation and significant restructure and consolidation. Consolidation of the procurement and distribution of all janitorial supplies with the purchasing department is recommended. Contracting as many functions as possible will eliminate the need for staff and the associated benefit cost. Areas of consideration include, but are not limited to, the plumbing crew, grounds crew, carpenter crew, and electrical crew. Use of students for routine upkeep and any other conceivable areas is encouraged. This would be less costly to the district, provide needed employment for students, provide a learning experience and also give students a sense of pride. - All vacated properties should be sold to supply income and reduce cost as well as staffing necessary to maintain these properties. Information Services Due to the limited time for review and lack of technical expertise, the cluster does not wish to make recommendations In this area. Purchasing Automation and staff reductions are the key recommendations in this area. The organization chart for purchasing is similar to that of a major corporation. All the accounting functions currently residing in the purchasing department should be immediately transferred to the district accounting office. No new positions should be filled in this area and elimination of a minimum of two positions through consolidation and automation is proposed. Human Resources Immediate consolidation for a staffing reduction of two clerical positions is recommended. It appears automation may be critical to reach the efficiency required with fewer personnel. Volunteers in Public Schools The five percent reduction as recommended in the general recommendations is proposed for this area. No further recommendations are made for this area except a comprehensive operations review be corxfucted as soon as practical. KLRE/KUAR Termination of the agreement between UALR and the district and discontinuing the district's involvement with the radio station is recommended. The costs associated with terminating the agreement are recognized, but felt to be justified because of present and future cost savings. & 8 Nonacademic (continued) Financial Services Time restraints precluded a review of staffing requirements in financial services. Upon the completion of the conversion of computer systems, a complete operations analysis Is strongly urged. New Futures The $400,000 cost of this program to the district generates approximately $2 million of funding from outside sources. Therefore, discontinuing the program is not recommended. Athletics This area is perceived to be one of the most community sensitive and costly areas to the district. The duster is cautious In specific recommendations in this area, but is quite definite in conveying the position that continued funding and enhancement, as has been the historic pattern, wBI have a decidedly detrimental impact on the ability of the district to fulfill its primary function education. After much deliberation, the cluster suggest that the athletic department be given the opportunity to present an athletic offering that is cost effective and equitable yet accomplishes a minimum of a five percent budget reduction. The committee would offer the following for consideration: < Consolidation of teams between schools eliminating the duplicate staffing and facilities requirements. Elimination of any new athletic programs. Elimination of programs that are not self funding and that do not achieve a minimum participation level. Communicatioi A comprehensive restructure based on the proposals of Ms. Woodruff is supported. The communications department should concentrate on external communications and the burden of internal communications should be placed on the Human Resources Area. It is highly recommended that restructuring be used to improve productivity as opposed to replacing Ms. Woodruff as department head. F. EVALUATION Time constraints and higher priority demands placed on data processing have precluded assessment of dollar values on specific recommendations. / 9 IV. PHYSICAL PLANT A. Mission To review the facilities and physical plant budget of the Little Rock School District to determine possible cost savings. B. Observations Staff has made good progress In the use of technology to manage utility costs. Some older facilities, because of general physical decline, or inefficient size, have outlived their educational value. With the opening of the Martin Luther King school, the Little Rock School District has a "window of opportunity" to maximize use of a modem facSity and attract students. C. Recommendations Continue to Tine tune" utility management. Promote Martin Luther King to the county In such a way that 100% enrollment Is attained. This will not only ensure the most efficient use of this facility, but will also provide a platform, or "laboratory" for some "flexibility* in the management of the Little Rock School District. Close and liquidate the current Instructional Resource Center building. 0 Close Ish and Garland schools. This is an extremely emotional issue. However, the committee feels strongly that these students will be better served from at least two positions: 1) if the Martin Luther King school is properly promoted to the county, the students moved from Ish and Garlarxl will be in a Desegregated School and 2) they will also benefit from the added self-esteem of attending school in a modem facility. This recommendation may reduce District costs by approximately $1.38 million. The Marketing of this is absolutely critical. Any property which has become obsolete and for which there Is no foreseeable future use should be liquidated for operating cash where possible. In the case of Ish and GarlarxJ, which have tremendous community value, these properties should be offered to the community for some alternative use. If appropriate organizations do not step forward in a reasonable time, then perhaps the best plan would be to transfer the properties to the Little Rock Parks for the purpose of razing the buildings and creating parks. 10 V. REVENUE A. Mission Target long-term strategic planning Initiatives for the district with the primary goal of increased student enrollment In the district which will enhance revenue. B. Strategic Planning The LitUo Rock School District should obtain the services of an expert in strategic planning for public schools in order to help facBitate a strategic planning process with the school board and District administration. Orre of the most strategic tasks ahead for the district is to stop the out migration of students. Within the past four years, there have been approximately 1.000 students who have left the District This out-migration must cease in order for the District to remain viable. Strategies also will need to be developed In order to attract some of the 11.000 students who attend private schools in the district C. Little Rock Public Education Fund One of the objectives of the strategic plan should be the recruitment of school officials and community leaders to form a Little Rock Public Education Fund. This independent group would focus on the long-term economic development of the district It would bring the Districts needs to the business, civic and philanthropic communities for a collaborative effort This approach has been successful in other public schools across the country. The education furxl would also be charged with seeking federal, state and local education grants
private foundation grants: and gifts from local, state and national industries. It would oversee the equitable distribution at these funds. The education fund would Institutionalize the best programs and the best schools, making them the norm for the entire district D. Review Physical Plants Determine disposable physical assets within the district and arrange for their disposal through the use of a local real estate agent who would aggressively market the property. Determine underused assets and develop a strategy in order to rent these assets to the general public. A property manager should be able to rent empty buildings, kitchens, buses, theaters, auditoriums, shops and garages on weekends and during the summers. 11 VI. STAFFING A. Mission To review ways the LRSD can reduce staffing costs without consequential or adverse educational impact. B. Short term "band-aids' (appropriate for the coming budget year) Evaluate dosing small schools that are not cost effective. Review consolidation possibilities. Review need for new schools and their subsequent staffing requirement Review the value of all noncertified positions. Determine and make staff cuts wherever arxl whenever a vital function is not realized or will not be significantly impacted. Administration < Duplicity of function in different departments? < Absolute staffing requirement within each department for a vital function to be maintained? < Can some functions be more cost-effectively performed via contracts with the private sector? < Emphasize site-based management. Academic < Review the need for Instructional Aides. 0 Review the need for certified personnel in areas where lower cost non-certlfied personnel might suffice. I.e. study halls. Review potential reductions in paid leave-of-absence policy. Little Rock School District personnel have reinstatement rights for two years. In the meantime, other personnel must be hired arxJ trained to fill the position of the absentee. Can the leave-of-absence policy be reduced without negative impact on education? Adjust per-pupil ratio to North Central/State standards. How many classes are being / funded without a significant pupil count? Offer an incentive for early retirement. Replace only the vital personnel and then at reduced salary levels. Review value and impact of each position as natural employee attrition occurs. . (!) Review sick leave policy. Are we encouraging absenteeism? Little Rock School District absenteeism runs as high as 15% while national average is approximately 6.5%. Review substitute teacher pay. Could under-utilized teachers be used as substitutes? 12 Staffing (continued) C. Long-term solutions for a proper and healthy staffing environment. From the ground up... Contract professional services to research from the ground-up ways to eliminate duplicity of function and streamline the total management structure. Evaluation of the many and various programs to determine if they are delivering the original and desired impact of an equal high quality education. < Conduct focus groups of all personnel to determine ways the Little Rock School District can function more smoothly and efficiently. 13 VI. TRANSPORTATION Objective: Identify immediate and long term solutions to reduce the total operating cost. A. With the use of the present automated routed system, reduce the number of 65-passenger bus runs by five (5). Because of the increased routing efficiency, the following minimum savings can be realized: 5 driver positions Tire savings Fuel savings $50,000 9,000 14.000 B. C. D. E. F. Total Minimum Savings $73,000 With proDerlv administered driver training, and the use of Tach Sheets or Tattle-Tail" sheets, which would be keyed Into a new "Fuel Processing Transaction" program, using existing personnel, (based on the estimated 92-93 projected fuel cost), a substantial fuel savings will be realized. Fuel savings cost Computer program cost Cost Savings $48,000 (20.000) $28,000 Review and revise hiring practices
to include listing job availabilities with the Arkansas Employment Security Division and local colleges. Progressive ideas should be aggressively implemented to reduce the 20-30% driver turnover rate and absenteeism. Cost Savings $100,000 Cut the number of full time subs (drivers) from 24 to 14 by natural attrition. Cost Savings $100,000 Reduce the number of aides from 35 to 30 by natural attrition. Cost Savings $50,000 Begin a 5-year change-out period from bias to radial tires, which will decrease the fuel cost each year by approximately 4% and increase safety and longevity. Cost Savings (each year) $27,000 G. Purchase a minimum of 20 diesel buses per year (retiring 20 unleaded buses per year). Cost Savings of 50% fuel efficiency increase per bus minimum. 14VII. SAFETY AND DISCIPUNE The following are recommendations to help reduce the budget but still maintain an emphasis on academic achievement for all students. A. Present Budget $140,000 - Sonitrol 50.000 - Running office-drug dog, auto expense, off-duty police, drug testing of $190,000 employees, hand held safety alarm systems, etc. B. Present Staff Director 3 Supervisors (1 night building security - answers all fire arxf intrusion alarms) Secretary C. Proposed Cuts * Drug Dog - $3,500 * Drug Testing - cut $5,000 (less frequency of tests and decrease number of substances tested) D. Recommended Cut Combine job of Director of Safety and Security and Risk Manager position into one job which would eliminate the Risk Managers salary of approximately $40,000 including benefits. E. Other Recommendations * Budget for 14 additional school resource officers. * We strongly recommend that we continue to pursue collaborative efforts to expand and improve safety and discipline in LRSD through grants and other resources (a committee member has agreed to assist with this). * Violence prevention curriculum should be developed at the elementary school level to prepare students for their transition to junior high school. 15AREA AFFECTED Curriculum 'S Transportation - Plant Services - Food Services Associate Superintendent School Operations IRC Personnel Communications - LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 PERSONNEL BUDGET REDUCTIONS explanation NO. OF POSITIONS Through secretarial pooling, we can eliminate four (4 positions. will be re-allocated and remaining duties will be absorbed by remaining staff members and coordinator for incentive schools. Contract driver training services with the possibility of our insurance company doing it. Eliminate one clerical position and assign the duties to shop foreman, mechanics. and secretaries. EPA Coordinator duties will be handled by Reduce custodial supervisory staff by two. Principals will assume supervision of Doug Eaton. custodians. Construction management will be subcontracted and made a part of the project bid. Eliminate one secretary and assign duties to the remaining secretary. Eliminate one data entry person. aximinate one data entry person. Duties will be reassigned to remaining personnel. Eliminate one administrative secretarial position, r .- - Duties will be assigned to remaining pool. Eliminate one position in instructional technology. Reassign duties to remaining staff. Eliminate recruiting coordinator position. Teachers of Tomorrow Program will be coordinated by the Curriculum Division. Reassign some aspects of position control to the Financial Services Department, secretarial position. Eliminate one Eliminate the Communications Assistant Restructure some of the office duties. Sub-contract production of materials. position. Some 4 3 3 5 1 1 1 2external information and PR requests will be channeled directly to schools. 1 Gibbs Assistant Principal Assistant Principal position will be reduced to .5 FTE. MRC concurs. 1/2 Media Clerks The revised curriculum contains resource guides which identify materials needed to support the teaching of the curriculum. These guides were not available when media clerks were scheduled as full time employees. Reduce media clerks to 5 hours per day benefits stay intact. 33% Computer Lab Attendants Restructure so academic support and regular teachers use labs for computer assisted instruction. Develop a team of 10 people who will act as technology support people to work out of IRC. Develop inservice for teachers to effectively use labs. 50 Plant Services Skilled Trade Eliminate 3 positions. Existing duties to be reassigned to other departments. 3 Primary Remedial Math Teachers Eliminate pull-outs for math in grades 1-3. Reassign 8 teachers. 8Little Rock School District NEWS RELEASE May 21,1993 For more informatiorL: Jeanette Wagner, 324-2020 LRSD BOARD OF DIRECTORS mi] IILES BUDGET WORK SESSION The Little Rock School District Board of Directors has schedule 1 a bj^get work session Saturday, May 22, at 7 aan. The session will be held m the board room at the LRSD AdministTative Offices BIO West Markham Street. tr-mr ftlAOffice of Desegregation Monitoring Unrted Statss District Court Eastern District of Arkansas Ann S. Brown, Federal Monitor 201 East Markham, Suite 510 Heritage West Building Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (S01) 376-6200 Fax (501) 371 -0100 June 7, 1993 Gary Jones, Mgr of Resources and School Support Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Gary: Attached are Budget Document Suggestions that I hope you will find useful. Sincerely, ^<4- Bob Morgan Associate Monitor cc: Bill Mooney Mark MilhollenBudget Document Suggestions Executive Summary: Should include the reductions, add backs and reinstatements. Budget Summary: Projections should be extended to 1998-1999. That is a five year projection. The expense category for desegregation should be eliminated and the expense amounts should be allocated to salaries and supplies. Object Code Summary: Include actual 1992-1993 expenditures by object code. Add a column for FTE. Function Code Summary: Review and include additional function codes (programs). Include actual 1992- 1993 expenditures by function code. Add a column for FTE. Program Budget: Report by function and object only. Further breakdown by school can be provided in the department budget. Include actual 1992-1993 expenditures. Add a column for FTE. Department Budget: The department budget should be in the order: department, function and object. Include actual 1992-1993 expenditures. Add a column for FTE. Incentive School Budget: Eliminate this section Magnet School: Include the 1992-1993 Magnet Review Committee budget. In the format of the department budget project the 1993-94 budget for each magnet school. Add a cover page showing revenues from the state and the three school districts. Food Service
The food service budget shows a transfer to the operating budget of $5(X),000 which is justified for e recapture of overhead expense from prior years. Should not the budget also reflect a budget year overhead expense amount? Capitol Projects: The computation of the capital amounts being spent is left to the reader. Include an additional column to show the planned expenditure. Desegregation Budget: Eliminate the total break on object code to reduce the size of the section. Include an explanation of each item and show how to follow the item back to the department budget.LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT 810 WEST MARKHAM STREET LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 RSCEJV Office ci Dssegrecatien McnUcring JuN 5 1993 June 24, 1993 TO: Board of Directors FROM: C. M. Bernd, Superintendent of Schools SUBJECT: ADMINISTRATOR PAY Now that the Board and virtually all other employee groups have agreed on contracts for the 1993-94 school year, it is necessary for the Board to administrators. make decisions concerning the District's In my opinion, the District must address the issue of recruiting and retaining talented managers. To that end, I suggesting that compensation for the positions of Associate Superintendent and Manager of Resources and School Support be set at $68,000 for the 1993-94 fiscal year. I am also suggesting that compensation for the positions of Assistant Superintendent, Controller, Student Hearing Officer, and Desegregation Facilitator be set at $61,000 for the 1993-94 fiscal year. Further, I am advocating a 1.5% base salary increase for all 12- month administrators except those listed above. In addition, I suggest that all 12-month administrators be placed on a 250 day contract with paid vacation days credited according to years of experience as an administrator in the Little Rock School District and Pulaski County Special School District at the time of the merger in 1987 as follows
days
15+ years, 25 days. 0-7 years, 15 days
8-14 years, 20 For all administrators whose contracts are less than 12-months, I suggest a 3% base salary increase. Finally, accumulate contract. am sick advocating that administrators be allowed to leave up to the length of the If a contract is reduced. individual's the accumulated sick leave cannot be greater than the length of the current contract. I It is my recommendation, following: therefore. that the Board adopt the A $68,000 annual salary for the positions of Associate Superintendent and Manager of Resources Support for FY 1993-94
and SchoolA $61,000 annual salary for the positions of Assistant Superintendent, Controller, Student Hearing Officer, and Desegregation Facilitator. 1.5% base salary increase administrators for FY 1993-94
for all 12-month A A 250 day contract for all 12-month administrators with paid vacation days based on experience in LRSD and PCSSD of 15 days for 0-7 years of service
20 days for 8-14 years of service
and 25 days for 15 or more years of service
A 3% base salary increase for all administrators on a less than 12-month contract
and The ability for administrators to accumulate sick leave up to the length of the individual's contract.Little Rock School District June 28, 1993 RECEIVED JUN 2 8 1993 Mr. Chris Heller Friday, Eldredge and Clark 2000 First Commercial Building Offica of Desegregation Monitoring Little Rock, AR 72201 Dear Chris: As a prerequisite to the July 7 and 8 court hearings to review budget matters, I submit the following exhibits as required by Judge Wright's order dated June 15, 1993: 1-A Budget Changes Supported by "Business Cases" 1-B Major Deficit Reduction Actions 1-C 1993-94 Certified Teacher Salary Increases Matrix 1-D Budget Revision (Draft 4) 1-E Action Plan Based upon my interpretation of the order, the attached exhibits should complete our required filings for the June 28, 1993 court submission date. Sincerely, Mark D. Milhollen Controller MDM/cfh Attachments I I 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 (501)374-3361c: Ann, Polly, Bill & Bob FRIDAY, ELDREDGE & CLARK HERSCHEL H. FRIDAY, P.A. ROBERT V. LIGHT, P.A. WILLIAM H. SUTTON, P.A. JAMES W. MOORE BYRON M. EISEMAN, JR.. P.A. JOE 0. BELL. P.A. C. ECHOLS, P.A. A. 8UTTRY, P.A. h ERICK S. URSERY, P.A. H.T. LARZELERE. P.A. OSCAR . DAVIS. JR.. P.A. JAMES C. CLARK. JR.. P.A. THOMAS P. LEGGETT. P.A. JOHN DEWEY WATSON, P.A. PAUL B. BENHAM III, P.A. LARRY W. BURKS, P.A. A. WYCKLIFF NISBET. JR.. P.A. JAMES EDWARD HARRIS. P.A. J. PHILLIP MALCOM. P.A. JAMES M. SIMPSON. P.A. MEREDITH P. CATLETT. P.A. JAMES M. SAXTON. P.A. J. SHEPHERD RUSSELL III. P.A. DONALD H. BACON. P.A. WILLIAM THOMAS BAXTER, P.A. WALTER A. PAULSON II, P.A. BARRY E. COPLIN. P.A. RICHARD 0. TAYLOR. P.A. JOSEPH 8. HURST, JR.. P.A. ELIZABETH J. ROBBEN, P.A. CHRISTOPHER HELLER. P.A. LAURA HENSLEY SMITH. P.A. ROBERT S. SHAFER. P.A. WILLIAM M. GRIFFIN III. P.A. THOMAS N. ROSE, P.A. MICHAEL S. MOORE. P.A. DIANE S. MACKEY. P.A. WALTER M. EBEL III. P.A. A PARTNERSHIP OF INDIVIDUALS ANO PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2000 FIRST COMMERCIAL BUILDING 400 WEST CAPITOL LITTLE ROCK. ARKANSAS 72201-3493 TELEPHONE 501-376-201 1 FAX NO. 501-376-2147 June 28, 1993 yon KEVIN A. CRASS, P.A. WILLIAM A. WA006LL. JR., P.A. CLYDE 'TAB* TURNER. P.A. CALVIN J. HALL. P.A. SCOTT J. LANCASTER. P.A. JERRY L. MALONE. P.A. M. GAYLE CORLEY. P.A. ROBERT B. BEACH. JR., P.A. J. LEE BROWN. P.A. JAMES C. BAKER. JR.. P.A. H. CHARLES GSCHWEND, JR.. P.A. HARRY A. LIGHT. P.A. SCOTT H. TUCKER. P.A. JOHN CLAYTON RANDOLPH. P.A. GUY ALTON WADE PRICE C. GARDNER THOMAS F. MEEKS J. MICHAEL PICKENS TONIA P. JONES DAVID 0. WILSON JEFFREY H. MOORE T. WESLEY HOLMES ANDREW T. TURNER SARAH J. HEFFLEY JOHN RAY WHITE DAVID M. GRAF PAMELA D. PERCEFULL CARLA Q. SPAINHOUR JOHN C. FENDLEY. JR. COUNSEL WILLIAM J. SMITH WILLIAM A. ELDREDGE, JR.. P.A. B.S. CLARK WILLIAM L. TERRY WILLIAM L. PATTON, JR., P.A. GHiCS of Desegrog. WNITEH'S DIRECT NO. (5011 370-1553 Via Hand Delivery Ms. Ann Brown Office of Desegregation Heritage West Building, Monitoring Suite 510 210 East Markham Little Rock, AR Street 72201 Re
Little School Rock School District vs. Pulaski County Special District No. 1, et al.
USDC No. LR-C-82-866 Dear LRSD This Enclosed please find three of the booklets being filed by the as required by the Order of the Court dated June 15, 1993. booklet contains those documents submitted in response to paragraph l.A. through I.E. of the Order. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Sincerely yours. L . JUN 1^3 Ann: D Jerry L. Malone JLM/lwg Enclosures Stephens Inc. Mark McBryde Vice President August 26, 1993 Mr. Mark Millhollen Little Rock School District 810 West Markham Street Little Rock, Arkansas 72201 Dear Mark: In connection with the Districts refunding bond issue (that refunds the bonds dated May 15, 1988), I am enclosing four schedules. A summary of these schedules appears below. Schedule 1 This represents the outstanding balance on the May 15, 1988 issue. Schedule 2 This represents the refunding issues "Original" schedule. Schedule 3 This schedule marked "Converted" represents the final repayment schedule for the refunding bond issue. Schedule 4 This report identifies the savings realized by refunding the May 15, 1988 bonds ($742,881.07). A per year breakdown of the savings appears below and on the next page. School Year Savings 1993/1994 1994/1995 1995/1996 1996/1997 1997/1998 1998/1999 1999/2000 2000/2001 2001/2002 $ 65,577.32 48,722.50 46,622.50 48,837.50 50,110.00 50,452.50 49,857.50 48,550.00 46,683.75 Investment Bankers 111 Center Street Suite 2300 Post Office Box 3507 Little Rock, Arkansas 72203 501-377-2306 Fax 501-377-3465School Year Savings 2002/2003 2003/2004 2004/2005 2005/2006 2006/2007 2007/2008 $ 49,080.00 50,465.00 45,955.00 45,780.00 49,447.50 46,690.00 If you have any questions regarding these schedules, please call. Cordially, Mark McBryde MM/mc Enclosures cc: Bob Beach DATE PRINCIPAL Schedule 1 Little Rock School District Debt Outstanding - Series 1988 DEBT SERVICE SCHEDULE COUPON INTEREST PERIOD TOTAL FISCAL p3TAL 12/ 1/93 6/ 1/94 12/ 1/94 6/ 1/95 12/ 1/95 180,000.00 205,000.00 220,000.00 6.200000 6.200000 6.200000 174,532.50 168,952.50 168,952.50 162,597.50 162,597.50 354,532.50 168,952.50 373,952.50 162,597.50 382,597.50 523,485.00 536,550.00 6/ 1/96 12/ 1/96 6/ 1/97 12/ 1/97 6/ 1/98 240,000.00 255,000.00 6.350000 6.500000 155,777.50 155,777.50 148,157.50 148,157.50 139,870.00 155,777.50 395,777.50 148,157.50 403,157.50 139,870.00 538,375.00 543,935.00 543,027.50 12/ 1/98 6/ 1/99 12/ 1/99 6/ 1/ 0 12/ 1/ 0 275,000.00 300,000.00 320,000.00 6.600000 6.750000 6.900000 139,870.00 130,795.00 130,795.00 120,670.00 120,670.00 414,870.00 130,795.00 430,795.00 120,670.00 440,670.00 545,665.00 551,465.00 6/ 1/ 1 12/ 1/ 1 6/ 1/ 2 12/ 1/ 2 h/ 1/ 3 345,000.00 370,000.00 7.000000 7.100000 109 ,,630.00 109,630.00 97,555.00 97,555.00 84,420.00 109,630.00 454,630.00 97,555.00 467,555.00 84,420.00 550,300.00 552,185.00 551,975.00 12/ 1/ 3 6/ 1/ 4 12/ 1/ 4 6/ 1/ 5 12/ 1/ 5 400,000,00 435,000.00 465,000.00 7.200000 7.200000 7.200000 84,420.00 70,020.00 70,020.00 54,360.00 54,360.00 484,420.00 70,020.00 505,020.00 54,360.00 519,360.00 554,440.00 559,380.00 h/ 1/ 6 12/ 1/ 6 6/ 1/ 7 12/ 1/ 2 h/ 1/ 8 505,000.00 540,000.00 5,055,000.00 ACCRUED 5,055,000.00 Dated 6/ 1/93 Bond Years Average Coupon Average Life NIC % STEPHENS INC. RUNDATE: 7.200000 7.200000 37,620.00 37,620.00 19,440,00 19,440.00 37,620.00 542,620.00 19,440.00 559,440.00 556,980.00 562,060.00 559,440.00 3,174,262.50 3, 174,262.50 8,229,262.50 8,229,262.50 with Delivery of 02-10-1993 6/ 1/93 44,907.500 7.068446 8.883778 7.068446 % Using 100.0000000 10:39:35 FILENAME: LRSD KEY: OLD88DATE PRINCIPAL Schedule 2 Little Rock School District Series 1993 Refunding Issue Original Schedule DEBT SERVICE SCHEDULE COUPON INTEREST PERIOD TOTAL FISCAL TOTAL 12/ 1/93 6/ 1/94 12/ 1/94 6/ 1/95 12/ 1/95 225,000.00 175,000.00 245,000.00 5.140000 5.140000 5.140000 67,783.75 129,785.00 129,785.00 125,287.50 125,287.50 292,783,75 129,785.00 304,785.00 125,287.50 370,287.50 422,568.75 430,072.50 6/ 1/96 12/ 1/96 6/ 1/97 12/ 1/97 6/ 1/98 270,000.00 285,000.00 5.140000 5.140000 118,991.00 118,991.00 112,052.00 112,052.00 104,727.50 118,991.00 388,991.00 112,052.00 397,052.00 104,727.50 489,278.50 501,043.00 501,779.50 12/ 1/98 6/ 1/99 12/ 1/99 6/ 1/ 0 12/ 1/ 0 300,000.00 325,000.00 345,000.00 5.140000 5.140000 5.140000 104,727.50 97,017.50 97,017.50 88,665.00 88,665.00 404,727.50 97,017.50 422,017.50 88,665.00 433,665.00 501,745.00 510,682.50 6/ 1/ 1 12/ 1/ 1 6/ 1/ 2 12/ 1/ 2 6/ 1/ 3 365,000.00 390,000.00 5.140000 5.140000 79,798.50 79,798.50 70,418.00 70,418.00 60,395.00 79,798.50 444,798.50 70,418.00 460,418.00 60,395.Q0 513,463.50 515,216.50 520,813.00 12/ 1/ 3 6/ 1/ 4 12/ 1/ 4 6/ 1/ 5 12/ 1/ 5 415,000.00 445,000.00 465,000.00 5.140000 5.140000 5.140000 60,395.00 49,729.50 49,729.50 38,293.00 38,293.00 475,395.00 49,729.50 494,729.50 38,293.00 503,293.00 525,124.50 533,022.50 6/ 1/ 6 12/ 1/ 6 6/ 1/ 7 12/ 1/ 7 6/ 1/ 8 500,000.00 525,000.00 ACCRUED 5,275,000.00 5,275,000.00 Dated 9/ 1/93 Bond Years Average Coupon Average Life NIC % STEPHENS INC. RUNDATE: 5.140000 5.140000 26,342.50 26,342.50 13,492.50 13,492.50 26,342.50 526,342.50 13,492.50 538,492.50 529,635.50 539,835.00 538,492.50 with Delivery of 08-24-1993 2,297,772.75 20,335.13 2,277,437.62 7,572,772.75 20,335.13 7,552,437.62 9/28/93 44,703.750 5.140000 8.474645 5.140000 % Using 100.0000000 10:02:56 FILENAME: LITTLE KEY: ORGPage 1 Stephens Inc. Schedule 3 Amount of Issue Name of Issue ] Date of Issue Principal Due s 5,385,000.00 Little Rock School District Original Schedule Converted Average Payisent: 526,676.64 DATE 12/ 1/1993 6/ 1/1994 12/ 1/1994 6/ 1/1995 12/ 1/1995 6/ 1/1996 12/ 1/1996 6/ 1/1997 12/ 1/1997 6/ 1/1996 12/ 1/1998 6/ 1/1999 12/ 1/1999 6/ 1/2000 12/ 1/2000 6/ 1/2001 12/ 1/2001 6/ 1/2002 12/ 1/2002 6/ 1/2003 12/ 1/2003 6/ 1/2004 12/ 1/2004 6/ 1/2005 12/ 1/2005 6/ 1/2006 12/ 1/2006 6/ 1/2007 12/ 1/2007 9/ 1/1993 12/ 1 PRINCIPAL 295,000.00 255,000.00 270,000.00 285,000.00 295,000.00 310,000.00 330,000.00 345,000.00 365,000.00 380,000.00 400,000.00 430,000.00 450,000.00 475,000.00 500,000-00 5,385,000.00 Avg Interest Rate Interest Due COUPON 4.2000 4.2000 4.2000 4.2000 4.2000 4.2000 4.3000 4.5000 4.6500 4.8000 4.9000 5.0000 5.1000 5.1000 5.1000 12/ 1 and 4.5897 6/ 1 INTEREST PAYMENT BALANCE PRIOR DEBT TOTAL DEBT REVENUE COVERAGE 62,630.62 119,066.25 119,066.25 113,711.25 113,711.25 108,041.25 108,041.25 102,056.25 102,056.25 95,861.25 95,861.25 89,351.25 89,351-25 82,256.25 82,256.25 74,493.75 74,493.75 66,007.50 66,007.50 56,887.50 56,887.50 47,067.50 47,087.50 36,337.50 36,337.50 24,862.50 24,862.50 12,750.00 12,750.00 476,696.87 487,777.50 491,752.50 495,097.50 492,917.50 495,212.50 501,607.50 501,750.00 505,501.25 502,895.00 503,975.00 513,425.00 511,200.00 512,612.50 512,750.00 2,120,170.62 7,505,170.62 5,090,000.00 4,835,000.00 4,565,000.00 4,280,000.00 3,985,000.00 3,675,000.00 3,345,000.00 3,000,000.00 2,635,000.00 2,255,000.00 1,855,000.00 1,425,000.00 975,000.00 500,000-00 7,985,614.90 8,462,311.7716,160,004.00 7,792,277.40 8,280,054.9016,160,004.00 7,205,568.15 7,697,320.6516,160,004.00 6,982,444.75 7,477,542.2516,160,004.00 6,143,877.00 6,636,794.5016,160,004.00 6,161,434.50 6,656,647.0016,160,004.00 5,929,839-50 6,431,447.0016,160,004.00 5,486,936.00 5,988,686.0016,160,004.00 5,444,044.50 5,949,545.7516,160,004.00 5,400,787.50 5,903,682.5016,160,004.00 5,117,030.00 5,621,005.0016,160,004.00 5,062,286.75 5,575,711.7516,160,004.00 5,001,645.50 5,512,845.5016,160,004.00 4,950,845.50 5,463,458.0016,160,004.00 0.00 4,888,932.50 5,401,682.5016,160,004.00 89,553,564.4597,058,735.07 1.9096 1.9517 2.0994 2.1611 2.4349 2.4276 2.5127 2.6984 2.7162 2.7373 2.8749 2.8983 2.9313 2.9578 2.9917 Purchaser: Account managed by Merrill Lynch Agent: Stephens Inc. Legal: Friday, Eldredge & Clark Trustee: First National Bank of Lawrence CountyDATE PRINCIPAL Schedule 4 Little Rock School District Series 1993 Refunding Issue Converted Schedule - Adjusted PROPOSED DEBT SERVICE COUPON SAVINGS REPORT BB8SBSBBBBSSSB INTEREST TOTAL PRIOR D/S SAVINGS CUMULATIVE SAVINGS 12/ 1/93 6/ 1/94 12/ 1/94 6/ 1/95 12/ 1/95 295,000.00 255,000.00 270,000.00 4.200000 4.200000 4.200000 62,630.63 119,066.25 119,066.25 113,711.25 113,711.25 476,696.68 487,777,50 523,485.00 536,550.00 46,788.13 46,788.13 48,772.50 95,560.63 6/ 1/96 12/ 1/96 6/ 1/97 12/ 1/97 6/ 1/98 285,000.00 295,000.00 4.200000 4.200000 108,041.25 108,041.25 102,056.25 102,056.25 95,861.25 491,752.50 495,097.50 492,917.50 538,375.00 543,935.00 543,027.50 46,622.50 48,837.50 50,110.00 142,183.13 191,020.63 241,130.63 12/ 1/98 6/ 1/99 12/ 1/99 6/ 1/ 0 12/ 1/ 0 310,000.00 330,000.00 345,000.00 4.200000 4.300000 4.500000 95,861.25 89,351.25 89,351.25 82,256.25 82,256.25 495,212.50 501,607.50 545,665.00 551,465.00 50,452.50 49,857.50 291,583.13 341,440.63 6/ 1/ 1 12/ 1/ 1 6/ 1/ 2 12/ 1/ 2 6/ 1/ 3 365,000.00 380,000.00 4.650000 4.800000 74,493.75 74,493.75 66,007.50 66,007.50 56,887.50 501,750.00 505,501.25 502,895.00 550,300.00 552,185.00 551,975.00 48,550.00 46,683.75 49,060.00 389,990.63 436,674.38 485,754.38 12/ 1/ 3 6/ 1/ 4 12/ 1/ 4 6/ 1/ 5 12/ 1/ 5 400,000.00 430,000.00 450,000.00 4.900000 5.000000 5.100000 56,887.50 47,087.50 47,087.50 36,337.50 36,337.50 503,975.00 513,425.00 554,440.00 559,380.00 50,465.00 45,955.00 536,219.38 582,174.38 6/ 1/ 6 12/ 1/ 6 6/ 1/ 7 12/ 1/ 7 6/ 1/ 8 475,000.00 500,000.00 5.100000 5.100000 24,862.50 24,862.50 12,750.00 12,750.00 511,200.00 512,612.50 512,750.00 ACCRUED 5,385,000.00 5,385,000.00 S3BSSS3BBBBBSSB 2,120,170.63 18,789.19 2,101,381.44 SBBBBSBSBBBBSB 7,505,170.63 18,789.19 7,486,381.44 BBBBBBBBBBBBZB Dated 9/ 1/93 Bond Years Average Coupon Average Life with Delivery of 9/28/93 556,960.00 562,060.00 559,440.00 8,229,262.50 8,229,262.50 BKBSSBBBBBSBBB 45,780.00 49,447.50 46,690.00 627,954.38 677,401.88 724,091.88 724,091.88 18,789.19 742,881.07 NIC % 43,766.250 4.844305 8.127437 4.828512 % Using 100.1283603 Net Present Value Savings at: 5.1400% Equals 525,255.39 or or 9.7540% of Par of the Current Issue 10.3908% of Par of the Prior Issue STEPHENS INC. RUNDATE: 08-24-1993 10:27:40 FILENAME: LITTLE KEY: NEWOCTOBER 1993 COURT DIRECTIVES UPDATE Stephens Interdistrict School: The court rejected the LRSDs site proposal, stated that PCSSD must be satisfied with the site, directed the parties to reach a consensus on an alternative site by October 15, 1993, and instructed LRSD to report to ODM on the districts use of the old Stephens building. (DCO 9-27-93) Granted LRSD an extension to reach an agreement with the parties on the site and directed the parties to report to the court by 5:00 p.m. on November 15,1993. (DCO 10-18-93) Scheduled Stephens hearing, if necessary, for December 7, 1993
pleadings are due November 19, 1993 and replies are due November 29. (DCO 10-19-93) Plan Audit: The court required LRSD to correct the audits deficiencies and to submit a "complete, accurate, and self-explanatory desegregation audit" by 5:00 p.m. on October 25, 1993. (DCO 10-7-93) ADE Hearing: Scheduled for November 17 and 18
pleadings are due October 29,1993 and replies are due November 8, 1993. (DCO 10-19-93) PCSSDs Racial Balance Hearing: Scheduled beginning on January 25,1994
pleadings are due January 7,1994 and replies are due January 17,1994. (DCO 10-19-93)NOVEMBER 1993 COURT DIRECTIVES UPDATE ADE Hearing: The court excused the LRSD board members from the ADE hearing. (DCO 11-15-93) The court entered a bench ruling finding : 1) Allens monitoring plan was the plan pursuant to the settlement agreement
2) ADE failed to implement the monitoring plan and the settlement agreement, with the exception of paying money to the parties
and 3) Joshua was entitled to attorneys fees through the November 18,1993 hearing. The court also ordered ADE to: 1) Develop an action plan by March 15,1994 detailing how it will comply with the settlement agreement and the monitoring plan, including goals, timelines, and the names of people responsible for complying with the settlement agreement and the plan. 2) Submit monthly progress reports, beginning December 17,1993. (DCH 11-18-93) 3) Meet with Joshua to determine attorneys fees Attorney Fees: Scheduled a hearing for December 13,1993 regarding Torrences attorney fees claim from Hollingsworth. (DCO 11-4-93) LRSD Board Attendance at Hearings: Board members required to attend hearings in which the LRSDs obligations under the plan are at issue. (DCO 11-15-93). 1993-94 MRC Budget: Approved the 1993-94 MRC budget and required the following for future budgets: 1) That each member of the MRC receive a copy of this order and the attachment, the March 16, 1992 order
2) That future budget requests be accompanied by business cases and comply with the March 16, 1992 order
and 3) That the MRC take affirmative steps to ensure that the LRSD submit its budget sufficiently early in the academic year to allow timely consideration and submission of the magnet schools budget. (DCO 11-16-93)LRSD Board Report: Required the board to file a report with the court by December 3, 1993 at 5:00 p.m. explaining how: 1) Board members are being more involved in the budgeting process
2) Board members are preparing themselves to make specific budget decisions
3) Board members financial approval is being sought and received
and 4) Which specific line item budget transfers the board has approved since the 1993- 94 budget was finalized in August 1993. (DCO 11-16-93)AUGUST 12,1993 HEARING TRANSCRIPT DERECTTVES LRSD Budget Process: "Establish a budget process that links the Plan with expenditures so the effectiveness of the Plan can be evaluated." (T 8-12-93, pg 14) Once the Plan Audit and budget process are in place and administrators are responsive to the Plan, well cut down on hearings and the board wont have to attend, unless there is a specific reason. (T 8-12-93, pg 23) Keep up the process (an impact statement and review process) to assure the court that when you modify programs there is no impact on the Plan or that the modification is proper. (T 8-12-93, pgs 122-123) LRSD Quarterly Reports: File quarterly-reports with the cabinet, board, and court. (T 8- 12-93, pg 126). LRSD July 1993 Action Plan: Keep to the plan, "we will be watching you to make sure you do these things you plan to do and that you dont push back too many things." (T 8-12-93, pg 44, 46) Inform new board members of the districts action plan. (T 8-12-93, pg 84) 1993-94 LRSD Budget: The court will make sure desegregation programs are funded. The district should develop a budget and budget process that can be monitored. (T 8-12-93, pg 74) Budget decisions should rest with the board, but the "Court will do it if she has to." (T 8-12- 93, pg 76) 1994-95 LRSD Budget: "Think what youre going to do before next May and take a look at these quarterly reports...so that you can make some planning decisions for them next year as you go." (T 8-12-93, pg 120) LRSD Desegregation Plan Audit: The court and Walker would like a copy of the desegregation program inventory. (T 8-12-93, pg 100) Include court orders in the audit. (T 8-12-93, pgs 108, 140,149, 154) If you cannot meet an order or you want the court to change an order, petition the court. (T 8-12-93, pg 140) Include the courts directive that the McClellan Community High School Advisory Council should help the district monitor the effects of the budget cuts. (T 8-12-93, pg 149)Include the court orders regarding a recruitment tracking system. (T 8-12-93, pg 154,157) Area School Grants: The plan requires the district to complete a needs assessment on these grants. (T 8-12-93, pg 109). Incentive School Scholarships: The court suggested that Joshua file a motion requesting a hearing on the scholarships (T 8-12-93, pg 9) King Reserved Seats: "It would be a good idea if you would make a firm policy on [the number of PCSSD seats reserved at King.]" (T 8-12-93, pg 17) Interdistrict Schools: Goal to strive for-is 50-50 racial balance. (T 8-12-93, pg 70) Plan Obligations: Make the new administrators fully aware of the plan obligations (T 8-12- 93, pg 22) Inform new board members of the districts desegregation requirements. (T 8-12-93, pg 84) Ish Incentive School: "I dont want you do anything to that building that would prevent it from reopening." (T 8-12-93, pgs 40, 41) LRSD Junior High Study and PCSSD Crystal Hill Jr. High: The court will consider the junior high study when considering PCSSDs motion to build a junior high school at Crystal HUI. (T 8-12-93, pg 95) Include Walker in working on the study, and "if [the district] does not contact you about [the study], you contact them." (T 8-12-93, pg 97). LRSD Communications Assistant: "The court is going to watch this." (T 8-12-93, pg 137) VEPS Budget Cuts: "We will watch this." (T 8-12-93, pg 160). Board Member Review Session: Schedule a review session for Moore and JacovelU. (T 8-12-93, pg 169)CORR38 REVISED 06 DEC 93 LRSD BUDGET CYCLE ANALYSIS FOR POSSIBLE HEARING DATES 170 Prepare initial financial forecasts 12/01/93 12/30/93 171 Issue budget preparation instructions 11/30/93 12/03/93 172 Develop budget prep training material 11/18/93 11/30/93 173 Conduct budget prep training sessions 12/06/93 12/17/93 268 Complete fast-track evaluations 08/30/93 12/31/93 96 Generate program inventory report 01/07/94 01/07/94 174 Budget managers submit budget requests 01/14/94 01/14/94 175 Begin budget development 01/18/94 01/18/94 78 Publish needs assessment report 01/31/94 01/31/94 168 Submit business cases/programs to Board 02/14/94 02/14/94 POSSIBLE INFORMATIONAL HEARING 02/14/94 02/28/94 272 Review non-deseg program evaluations 02/15/94 03/15/94 176 Revise financial forecasts 03/01/94 03/15/94 177 Submit proposed budget to Board 03/24/94 03/24/94 POSSIBLE MAJOR HEARING ON DOCUMENT 03/24/94 03/31/94 178 Conduct Board work sessions 03/28/94 04/15/94 179 Revise budget 04/18/94 04/30/94 180 Notify certified personnel 04/01/94 04/30/94181 Board approval of tentative budget 05/02/94 05/26/94 POSSIBLE MAJOR HEARING ON DOCUMENT 05/26/94 05/31/94 182 Notify classified personnel 05/03/94 05/31/94 183 Board adoption of budget 07/01/94 07/28/94 184 Submit budget to state 08/01/94 08/26/94TO: GARLAND INCENTIVE SCHOOL 3615 WEST 25TH LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72204 FtB 2 4 Office c? Descyr ! J n Moc
'or
j Mr. Mark Milhollen, Director of Finance FROM: Robert L. Brown, Jr., Principal DATE: February 16, 1994 SUBJ.: Variance in Budget Responses After the end of a hectic day, I had time to reflect on the events that I have been involved in as it relates to the allocation of financial resources for Garland's theme. In retrospect, I find the responses given to be conflicting. In fact, it is now necessary for me to inform my parents that another answer has been given to explain what happened to the money that was earmarked to purchase multimedia hardware. On October 5, 1994 at 3:00 p.m., a scheduled meeting with Estelle Matthis and Larry Robertson was convened in her office. You attended the meeting and provided the basis for Estelle's response and explanation as to what happened to the money. In your budget summation of Garland's previous expenditures, you concluded your presentation by stating that we went over our budget allocations for the 1993-93 school year. According to your report, there was no money to roll over or bring forth into this current year. Estelle indicated that the $45,000.00 dollars that she approved was tied to the $45,000.00 that Gary Jones told you to include in this year's budget. I informed my PTA Board of this in an effort to answer their questions on the money issue. I told them that according to Mr. Milhollen, we had no money left from the previous year. I told them that Mrs. Matthis indicated that the additional $45,000.00 she approved was not additional money but was what she could do to reflect the commitment made by the previous administration. Yesterday, your response to the lost of approximately $36,000.00 from our current budget was in stark contrast to the above account. Yesterday's meeting included Larry S. Robertson and Mr. David Jones. You stated that the decision to allocate funds for Extended Year and Inservice Stipends was based upon the fact that we didn't spend all of the allocated amount for each code. The combined total for the twocodes last year equals $60,000.00. The total for this year is $24,244.76. After asking for clarification on your response, you again affirmed that you allocated the latfer amount because we did not spend the money last school year. I argued our cause based upon the events which transpired last year. After we hire^a theme specialist, Mr. David Jones, Mrs. Hart directed us, under the authority of Janet Bernard, to get some equipment in our building because of the impending Court procedures. It was considered most important for us to find funds to begin the implementation process. After visiting your office, you helped me to find money in our account, including the Extended Year allocation. With your approval, we made the transfer requests in order to purchase the technology. The Purchasing Department did not complete the process. My stated position is that we should not be penalized for not spending the money if our intent to spend was made to the appropriate department, especially since you were a part of that process. These two accounts vary greatly. In fact, they are really opposites. How can this be? staf
This project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.

<dcterms_creator>Little Rock School District</dcterms_creator>