germantown school district notice of finance committee … · germantown school district notice of...

GERMANTOWN SCHOOL DISTRICT

Notice of Finance Committee Meeting November 28, 2016

6:00 P.M.

To Be Held at County Line Elementary School W159 N9939 Butternut Rd.

Germantown, WI 53022

AGENDA

I. Meeting Called to Order II. Roll Call III. Agenda Revisions and Approval IV. Approve Minutes

A. October 24, 2016 Meeting Date V. Consent - Review & Discuss

A. November Vouchers VI. Unfinished Business – Discussion with Appropriate Action

A. Alternate Bond Payment Schedules for Pending $84 million Referendum B. 2016/2017 Cash Flow Analysis C. Fund 46 Long Term Capital Improvement Trust Fund

VII. New Business – Discussion with Appropriate Action

A. Monthly Purchase Requests Exceeding $15,000 & Purchasing/Project Bid Results VIII. Reports

A. Voucher(s): Follow Up B. Monthly Financial Reports C. General Reports and Other Financial Happenings

1. 2016 OPEB (Other Post-Employment Benefits) Report IX. Adjourn Note: School Board members who are not members of the Finance Committee may be present at this Finance Committee meeting.


TO: Finance Committee FROM: Ric Ericksen, Director of Business & Auxiliary Services FC MTG DATE: November 28, 2016 AGENDA ITEM: IV.A. – Approve Minutes of the October 24, 2016 meeting ATTACHEMENTS: See next page(s). RECOMMENDATION: Approved as presented.

Page 1


Minutes of October 24, 2016 Finance Committee Meeting

Held at Germantown High School Upper Auxiliary Gym

W180 N11501 River Lane Germantown, WI 53022

1. The meeting of the Finance Committee was called to order by acting Chair Barney at 5:31 p.m.

Finance Committee Members Present: Borden, Barney, Soderberg, Absent Excused: Loth. Other Board members may have been present or arrived later. Also present was Ericksen, Holmes, Mohn and other administrators/staff may have been present or arrived later. Guests: None

2. Motion by Borden, second by Soderberg to approve the agenda as presented. Motion Carried.

3. Motion by Borden, second by Soderberg to approve the September 26, 2016 Finance

Committee minutes as presented. Motion Carried.

4. Motion by Borden, second by Soderberg to consent to Payment of Claims of the October 2016 vouchers. Soderberg abstained. Motion Carried.

5. Ericksen reviewed information as presented for the 206/2017 Final Budget and Tax Levy.

Motion by Soderberg, second by Borden to bring forward to the Board of Education with a positive recommendation to approve the 2016/2017 Final Budget and Tax Levy as presented in the Executive Summary and adjust the accounts identified on lines 13, 14, and 15 for final submission to the Department of Public Instruction as required Agenda Item VI.A. Motion Carried.

6. Ericksen mentioned purchases over $15,000 that would be brought to the next Finance

Committee meeting.

7. Ericksen reviewed canvasser information that needs to be presented during an open meeting, discussed sequence of events, mailings, certifications from the Dept. of Revenue, DPI, debt and payment schedules for pending $84 million Referendum, Agenda Item VI.B. No Action.

8. Ericksen reviewed background as presented regarding Agenda Item VI.C. – 2016/2017 Cash

Flow Analysis. General discussions ensued. No Action.

9. Ericksen reviewed background as presented regarding Agenda Item VI.D. – Fund 46 Long Term Capital Improvement Trust Fund. Additional information will be brought back next month. No Action.

10. Ericksen reported, provided information and/or update the Committee on all topics as shown in

the VIII Reports section of the agenda: Voucher Follow Up, Monthly Financial Reports, and

Page 2

General Reports and Other Financial Happenings. No Action.

11. Motion by Borden, second by Soderberg to adjourn the meeting. Motion Carried.

12. Meeting Adjourned at 6:23 p.m.

Page 3


TO: Finance Committee FROM: Ric Ericksen, Director of Business & Auxiliary Services FC MTG DATE: November 28, 2016 AGENDA ITEM: V.A. – Consent of October Vouchers – Review & Discuss Vouchers List(s) Review monthly bills and voucher payments. Only the FC needs to consent and approve monthly vouchers. Based on policy, it does not go to the full Board of Education. Report is posted at the google shared drive for the Finance Committee & at the district’s web site Finance Committee link Attachment(s): None RECOMMENDATION: Consent to Payment of Claims of vouchers as presented & reviewed.

Page 4


TO: Finance Committee FROM: Ric Ericksen, Director of Business & Auxiliary Services FC MTG DATE: November 28, 2016 AGENDA ITEM: VI.A. – Alternate Bond Payment Schedules for pending $84 million

Referendum Please see the October 24, 2016 and other Finance Committee meetings for previously reported information on this topic. Mr. Jerry Dudzik and Mr. Joe Murray of Springsted will be present to review the attached material and lead the committee on discussions on this topic. ATTACHMENT(S): Springsted documents. RECOMMENDATION: None, Informational Only

Page 5

TO: Mr. Ric Ericksen, Director of Business & Auxiliary Services

Germantown School District

FROM: Jerry Dudzik, Vice President Springsted Incorporated

DATE: November 9, 2016 RE: Next Steps - $84 Million Referendum First, congratulations on your successful bond referendum. It is Springsted’s pleasure to be working on this financing project for you from the beginning, and seeing the ultimate outcome which reflects the hard work of several people in the District and community. It was truly a team effort. Looking ahead to the upcoming financing steps, I’ve listed the general process below. A key piece of information that will be needed in the coming month will be a refined project spend-down from the District. The District should be able to collect updated monthly spend-down information through either your architect or your construction manager (CM). If a CM is used, the CM will have the more accurate data. The spend-down information will help us to understand: 1.) The local timing needs for the bond proceeds, and 2.) The related spend-down of funds against the federal spend-down requirements. Financing steps, from start to receipt of funds, is about a three-month process. The following chart summarizes the process. Page 2 of this communication demonstrates a detailed schedule of events for a spring financing, assuming project spend-down information has been updated and provided to Springsted. This is for demonstration purposes only.

Springsted Incorporated 710 Plankinton Avenue, Suite 804 Milwaukee, WI 53203-2400

Tel: 414-220-4255

Fax: 414-220-4251

[email protected] www.springsted.com

Page 6

Note: The above is for demonstration purposes only. Once an updated project spend-down schedule is provided to Springsted, the Schedule of Events will be completed to meet project timing. Please contact me with any questions.

Page 7

NOVEMBER 8, 2016 REFERENDA RESULTS

FAST FACTS:

- 67 Referenda were held by school districts across the State of Wisconsin- 82% of all referenda passed

Referenda Type Amount to Vote

Referendum to Issue Debt $1,139,735,000

Referendum to Exceed Rev Limit - Recurring $40,259,000

Referenudm to Exceed Rev Limit - Non-Recurring $157,955,000

TOTAL $1,337,949,000

RESULTS:

Upcoming Election Dates: Springsted Contacts: (414)220-4255

Jerry Dudzik [email protected] Murray [email protected] Heminover [email protected] Childers [email protected] Lifto [email protected]

August 14 - Fall Primary (if required)

Milwaukee, WI ■ St. Paul, MN ■ Dallas TX ■ Denver, CO ■ Des Moines, IA ■ Kansas City, MO ■ Los Angeles ■ Richmond, VA

Address: 710 North Plankinton Avenue, Suite 804, Milwaukee, WI 53203

February 21 - Spring Primary (if required)April 4 - Spring Election

Calendar Year 2017

Calendar Year 2018

November 6 - Fall Election

February 20 - Spring Primary (if required)

April 3 - Spring Election

Debt Passed:, 34,

81%

Debt Failed:, 8,

19%

Referenda to Issue Debt

Non‐recurring

Passed:, 11, 79%

Non‐recurring Failed:, 3,

21%

Referenda to Exceed Revenue Limit: Non‐Recurring

Recurring Passed:, 10,

91%

Recurring Failed:, 1, 9%

Referenda to Exceed Revenue Limit: Recurring

Passed82%

Failed18%

All Referenda ‐ Combined

Page 8

Rating Action: Moody's upgrades Germantown School District, WI's GO to Aa1from Aa2

Global Credit Research - 19 Aug 2015

Assigns Aa1 to $10.5M GO Promissory Notes, Ser. 2015A

New York, August 19, 2015 --

Moody's Rating

Issue: General Obligation Promissory Notes, Series 2015A; Rating: Aa1; Sale Amount: $10,500,000; ExpectedSale Date: 08-24-2015; Rating Description: General Obligation

Opinion

Moody's Investors Service has upgraded Germantown School District, WI's general obligation (GO) rating toAa1 from Aa2. Concurrently, Moody's has assigned a Aa1 to the district's $10.5 million GO Promissory Notes,Series 2015A. Post-sale, the district will have $15.6 million of outstanding GO debt, $13.6 million of which isMoody's rated.

SUMMARY RATING RATIONALE

The Aa1 rated reflects the district's large and affluent tax base located within the Milwaukee (Aa3 stable)metropolitan area; healthy financial profile supported by satisfactory reserve levels and prudent management;stable student enrollment; and modest debt and unfunded pension obligations.

OUTLOOK

Outlooks are generally not assigned to local government credits with this amount of debt outstanding.

WHAT COULD MAKE THE RATING GO UP

- Tax base expansion and strengthening of socioeconomic indices

- Continued growth of operating fund reserves and available liquidity

WHAT COULD MAKE THE RATING GO DOWN

- Material tax base erosion and/or weakening of socioeconomic indices

- Weakening of operating fund reserves and available liquidity

OBLIGOR PROFILE

The prekindergarten through high school district serves the villages of Germantown (Aa2 stable) and Richfield,as well as portions of three smaller communities with a student enrollment of 3,920.

LEGAL SECURITY

The bonds are secured by the district's GO unlimited tax pledge, which benefits from a dedicated property taxlevy that is not limited by rate or amount.

USE OF PROCEEDS

Proceeds from the current issuance will be used for various district improvements including energy efficiencyenhancements and facility remodeling.

PRINCIPAL METHODOLOGY

Page 9

The principal methodology used in this rating was US Local Government General Obligation Debt published inJanuary 2014. Please see the Credit Policy page on www.moodys.com for a copy of this methodology.

REGULATORY DISCLOSURES

For ratings issued on a program, series or category/class of debt, this announcement provides certainregulatory disclosures in relation to each rating of a subsequently issued bond or note of the same series orcategory/class of debt or pursuant to a program for which the ratings are derived exclusively from existingratings in accordance with Moody's rating practices. For ratings issued on a support provider, thisannouncement provides certain regulatory disclosures in relation to the rating action on the support providerand in relation to each particular rating action for securities that derive their credit ratings from the supportprovider's credit rating. For provisional ratings, this announcement provides certain regulatory disclosures inrelation to the provisional rating assigned, and in relation to a definitive rating that may be assignedsubsequent to the final issuance of the debt, in each case where the transaction structure and terms have notchanged prior to the assignment of the definitive rating in a manner that would have affected the rating. Forfurther information please see the ratings tab on the issuer/entity page for the respective issuer onwww.moodys.com.

The following information supplements Disclosure 10 ("Information Relating to Conflicts of Interest as requiredby Paragraph (a)(1)(ii)(J) of SEC Rule 17g-7") in the regulatory disclosures made at the ratings tab on theissuer/entity page on www.moodys.com for each credit rating:

Moody's was not paid for services other than determining a credit rating in the most recently ended fiscal yearby the person that paid Moody's to determine this credit rating.

Regulatory disclosures contained in this press release apply to the credit rating and, if applicable, the relatedrating outlook or rating review.

Please see www.moodys.com for any updates on changes to the lead rating analyst and to the Moody's legalentity that has issued the rating.

Please see the ratings tab on the issuer/entity page on www.moodys.com for additional regulatory disclosuresfor each credit rating.

Coley AndersonAssociate AnalystPublic Finance GroupMoody's Investors Service, Inc.100 N Riverside PlazaSuite 2220Chicago, IL 60606U.S.A.JOURNALISTS: 212-553-0376SUBSCRIBERS: 212-553-1653

Tatiana KillenAnalystPublic Finance GroupJOURNALISTS: 212-553-0376SUBSCRIBERS: 212-553-1653

Releasing Office:Moody's Investors Service, Inc.250 Greenwich StreetNew York, NY 10007U.S.A.JOURNALISTS: 212-553-0376SUBSCRIBERS: 212-553-1653

Page 10

© 2016 Moody’s Corporation, Moody’s Investors Service, Inc., Moody’s Analytics, Inc. and/or their licensors andaffiliates (collectively, “MOODY’S”). All rights reserved.

CREDIT RATINGS ISSUED BY MOODY'S INVESTORS SERVICE, INC. AND ITS RATINGS AFFILIATES(“MIS”) ARE MOODY’S CURRENT OPINIONS OF THE RELATIVE FUTURE CREDIT RISK OF ENTITIES,CREDIT COMMITMENTS, OR DEBT OR DEBT-LIKE SECURITIES, AND CREDIT RATINGS ANDRESEARCH PUBLICATIONS PUBLISHED BY MOODY’S (“MOODY’S PUBLICATIONS”) MAY INCLUDEMOODY’S CURRENT OPINIONS OF THE RELATIVE FUTURE CREDIT RISK OF ENTITIES, CREDITCOMMITMENTS, OR DEBT OR DEBT-LIKE SECURITIES. MOODY’S DEFINES CREDIT RISK AS THE RISKTHAT AN ENTITY MAY NOT MEET ITS CONTRACTUAL, FINANCIAL OBLIGATIONS AS THEY COME DUEAND ANY ESTIMATED FINANCIAL LOSS IN THE EVENT OF DEFAULT. CREDIT RATINGS DO NOTADDRESS ANY OTHER RISK, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO: LIQUIDITY RISK, MARKET VALUERISK, OR PRICE VOLATILITY. CREDIT RATINGS AND MOODY’S OPINIONS INCLUDED IN MOODY’SPUBLICATIONS ARE NOT STATEMENTS OF CURRENT OR HISTORICAL FACT. MOODY’SPUBLICATIONS MAY ALSO INCLUDE QUANTITATIVE MODEL-BASED ESTIMATES OF CREDIT RISK ANDRELATED OPINIONS OR COMMENTARY PUBLISHED BY MOODY’S ANALYTICS, INC. CREDIT RATINGSAND MOODY’S PUBLICATIONS DO NOT CONSTITUTE OR PROVIDE INVESTMENT OR FINANCIALADVICE, AND CREDIT RATINGS AND MOODY’S PUBLICATIONS ARE NOT AND DO NOT PROVIDERECOMMENDATIONS TO PURCHASE, SELL, OR HOLD PARTICULAR SECURITIES. NEITHER CREDITRATINGS NOR MOODY’S PUBLICATIONS COMMENT ON THE SUITABILITY OF AN INVESTMENT FORANY PARTICULAR INVESTOR. MOODY’S ISSUES ITS CREDIT RATINGS AND PUBLISHES MOODY’SPUBLICATIONS WITH THE EXPECTATION AND UNDERSTANDING THAT EACH INVESTOR WILL, WITHDUE CARE, MAKE ITS OWN STUDY AND EVALUATION OF EACH SECURITY THAT IS UNDERCONSIDERATION FOR PURCHASE, HOLDING, OR SALE. MOODY’S CREDIT RATINGS AND MOODY’SPUBLICATIONS ARE NOT INTENDED FOR USE BY RETAIL INVESTORS AND IT WOULD BE RECKLESSAND INAPPROPRIATE FOR RETAIL INVESTORS TO USE MOODY’S CREDIT RATINGS OR MOODY’SPUBLICATIONS WHEN MAKING AN INVESTMENT DECISION. IF IN DOUBT YOU SHOULD CONTACTYOUR FINANCIAL OR OTHER PROFESSIONAL ADVISER.

ALL INFORMATION CONTAINED HEREIN IS PROTECTED BY LAW, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO,COPYRIGHT LAW, AND NONE OF SUCH INFORMATION MAY BE COPIED OR OTHERWISEREPRODUCED, REPACKAGED, FURTHER TRANSMITTED, TRANSFERRED, DISSEMINATED,REDISTRIBUTED OR RESOLD, OR STORED FOR SUBSEQUENT USE FOR ANY SUCH PURPOSE, INWHOLE OR IN PART, IN ANY FORM OR MANNER OR BY ANY MEANS WHATSOEVER, BY ANY PERSONWITHOUT MOODY’S PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT.

All information contained herein is obtained by MOODY’S from sources believed by it to be accurate andreliable. Because of the possibility of human or mechanical error as well as other factors, however, allinformation contained herein is provided “AS IS” without warranty of any kind. MOODY'S adopts all necessarymeasures so that the information it uses in assigning a credit rating is of sufficient quality and from sourcesMOODY'S considers to be reliable including, when appropriate, independent third- party sources. However,MOODY’S is not an auditor and cannot in every instance independently verify or validate information receivedin the rating process or in preparing the Moody’s Publications.

To the extent permitted by law, MOODY’S and its directors, officers, employees, agents, representatives,licensors and suppliers disclaim liability to any person or entity for any indirect, special, consequential, orincidental losses or damages whatsoever arising from or in connection with the information contained herein orthe use of or inability to use any such information, even if MOODY’S or any of its directors, officers, employees,agents, representatives, licensors or suppliers is advised in advance of the possibility of such losses ordamages, including but not limited to: (a) any loss of present or prospective profits or (b) any loss or damagearising where the relevant financial instrument is not the subject of a particular credit rating assigned byMOODY’S.

To the extent permitted by law, MOODY’S and its directors, officers, employees, agents, representatives,licensors and suppliers disclaim liability for any direct or compensatory losses or damages caused to anyperson or entity, including but not limited to by any negligence (but excluding fraud, willful misconduct or anyother type of liability that, for the avoidance of doubt, by law cannot be excluded) on the part of, or anycontingency within or beyond the control of, MOODY’S or any of its directors, officers, employees, agents,representatives, licensors or suppliers, arising from or in connection with the information contained herein or theuse of or inability to use any such information.

Page 11

NO WARRANTY, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, AS TO THE ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS,MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PARTICULAR PURPOSE OF ANY SUCH RATING OR OTHEROPINION OR INFORMATION IS GIVEN OR MADE BY MOODY’S IN ANY FORM OR MANNERWHATSOEVER.

Moody’s Investors Service, Inc., a wholly-owned credit rating agency subsidiary of Moody’s Corporation(“MCO”), hereby discloses that most issuers of debt securities (including corporate and municipal bonds,debentures, notes and commercial paper) and preferred stock rated by Moody’s Investors Service, Inc. have,prior to assignment of any rating, agreed to pay to Moody’s Investors Service, Inc. for appraisal and ratingservices rendered by it fees ranging from $1,500 to approximately $2,500,000. MCO and MIS also maintainpolicies and procedures to address the independence of MIS’s ratings and rating processes. Informationregarding certain affiliations that may exist between directors of MCO and rated entities, and between entitieswho hold ratings from MIS and have also publicly reported to the SEC an ownership interest in MCO of morethan 5%, is posted annually at www.moodys.com under the heading “Investor Relations — CorporateGovernance — Director and Shareholder Affiliation Policy.”

Additional terms for Australia only: Any publication into Australia of this document is pursuant to the AustralianFinancial Services License of MOODY’S affiliate, Moody’s Investors Service Pty Limited ABN 61 003 399657AFSL 336969 and/or Moody’s Analytics Australia Pty Ltd ABN 94 105 136 972 AFSL 383569 (asapplicable). This document is intended to be provided only to “wholesale clients” within the meaning of section761G of the Corporations Act 2001. By continuing to access this document from within Australia, you representto MOODY’S that you are, or are accessing the document as a representative of, a “wholesale client” and thatneither you nor the entity you represent will directly or indirectly disseminate this document or its contents to“retail clients” within the meaning of section 761G of the Corporations Act 2001. MOODY’S credit rating is anopinion as to the creditworthiness of a debt obligation of the issuer, not on the equity securities of the issuer orany form of security that is available to retail investors. It would be reckless and inappropriate for retail investorsto use MOODY’S credit ratings or publications when making an investment decision. If in doubt you shouldcontact your financial or other professional adviser.

Additional terms for Japan only: Moody's Japan K.K. (“MJKK”) is a wholly-owned credit rating agency subsidiaryof Moody's Group Japan G.K., which is wholly-owned by Moody’s Overseas Holdings Inc., a wholly-ownedsubsidiary of MCO. Moody’s SF Japan K.K. (“MSFJ”) is a wholly-owned credit rating agency subsidiary ofMJKK. MSFJ is not a Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organization (“NRSRO”). Therefore, creditratings assigned by MSFJ are Non-NRSRO Credit Ratings. Non-NRSRO Credit Ratings are assigned by anentity that is not a NRSRO and, consequently, the rated obligation will not qualify for certain types of treatmentunder U.S. laws. MJKK and MSFJ are credit rating agencies registered with the Japan Financial ServicesAgency and their registration numbers are FSA Commissioner (Ratings) No. 2 and 3 respectively.

MJKK or MSFJ (as applicable) hereby disclose that most issuers of debt securities (including corporate andmunicipal bonds, debentures, notes and commercial paper) and preferred stock rated by MJKK or MSFJ (asapplicable) have, prior to assignment of any rating, agreed to pay to MJKK or MSFJ (as applicable) forappraisal and rating services rendered by it fees ranging from JPY200,000 to approximately JPY350,000,000.MJKK and MSFJ also maintain policies and procedures to address Japanese regulatory requirements.

Page 12


TO: Finance Committee FROM: Ric Ericksen, Director of Business & Auxiliary Services FC MTG DATE: November 28, 2016 AGENDA ITEM: VI.B. – 2016/2017 Cash Flow Analysis Update Our January 15 payroll and payroll voucher shortfall will be about $2.5 million. I requested that the Village of Germantown advance our statutory/scheduled tax settlement payment in an amount of $3.5 million from Tuesday January 17 to Friday January 13. They agreed thereby eliminating the problem and the need to borrow. I am very appreciative of this cooperation by Kim Rath, Comptroller and Village Officials. Previously Reported Our current cash flow analysis indicates a potential short fall in January of 2017. The amount could be as high as $1.2 million. Therefore, there may be short term borrowing needs. The business office will continue to monitor the situation and this item will remain on the Finance Committee agenda as necessary. ATTACHMENT(S): None RECOMMENDATION: None

Page 13


TO: Finance Committee FROM: Ric Ericksen, Director of Business & Auxiliary Services FC MTG DATE: November 28, 2016 AGENDA ITEM: VI.C. – Fund 46 Long Term Capital Improvement Trust Fund After considering my recommendation, the Building Committee agreed that this funding option should be tabled/put on hold indefinitely. I will like bring it back to the Building Committee for consideration in two years. Since this topic has been on the Finance Committee agenda in the past, the intent tonight is to report out to committee members. ATTACHMENT(S): None RECOMMENDATION: None

Page 14


TO: Board of Education TOPIC: Purchases Over $15,000 FROM: Ric Ericksen BOARD MEETING: November 28, 2016 DATE: November 23, 2016 AGENDA ITEM: N/A FC Date: November 28, 2016 FC Agenda Item(s): VII. A.

-- The intent is to review due diligence with respect to seeking competitive bids/quotes when possible. Vetting for the purpose of the purchases may have occurred at other committees. --

Under this category I wanted to report on one item that don’t quite make the $15,000 threshold but is significant none-the-less. The district has two vans at the high school that have upcoming expiring leases. One van is primarily assigned for athletic use and the other assigned to the alternative education staff for daily use. High school administration, in conjunction with business office oversight, administer and approve usage. Both vans are 8 passenger vans. Federal law requires that schools can only operate “up to” a 10-passenger van unless special driver licensing is obtained. At the time these vans were leased (back in 2008/2009) only 8 passenger vans were available. Ford has now produced a 10-passenger van. While the annual lease price will be greater than the current lease price by about $800-$1,000 per van, there will be an overall savings. The high school administration strongly supports upgrading to this vehicle capacity. Superintendent Holmes and I agree. The incremental cost will be covered by the elimination of having to contract with Riteway or third party van rental(s) for when high school away events hit the student threshold that requires an additional vehicle. Please know that the change will be noticeable. The vans are only available in white and are relatively bigger in size.

Page 15


TO: Board of Education TOPIC: Purchases Over $15,000 FROM: Ric Ericksen BOARD MEETING: November 28, 2016 DATE: November 22, 2016 AGENDA ITEM: FC Date: November 28, 2016 FC Agenda Item(s): VII. A.


$21,875.00: M.A.P. License Renewal

Recommendation to the Board of Education and Finance Committee: Bring forward to the Board of Education with a positive recommendation to renew the MAP licenses for the 2017 year in an amount not to exceed $21,875 to be funded out of the appropriate Teaching & Learning budget. Background/Attachment(s): Currently, in education, “assessment” often refers to “tests.” Although the two words have different definitions, they are often used interchangeably. An example of this is the home page at DPI for “Assessment in Wisconsin.” The following is an excerpt from the DPI website: The federal No Child Left Behind Act requires all states to test all students in English language arts (ELA) and mathematics in grades 3-8 and once in high school. Student performance on these assessments is reported in proficiency categories and used for accountability determination at the school, district and state levels. Wisconsin State statute also requires students to take a science and social studies test. These tests together create the Wisconsin Student Assessment System. As we continue the work of the District Initiative, the concept of assessments, grading, and testing are being explored. We will work toward a comprehensive assessment system which embraces other ways to assess a student’s progression. At this time, there isn’t another test to replace MAP as a universal screener. Here are the cost renewals for the Measures of Academic Progress (MAP) test over the last five years: 2010-11 $33,400 (included onsite admin workshop) 2011-12 $27,950 2012-13 $28,275 2013-14 $28, 639 2014-15 $13,750 2015-16 $25,725 During the 2016 license agreement, we used 1,712 licenses. If we renew for the 2017 year, we will be invoiced for a total of 1,750 in the amount of $21,875.00. Northwest Evaluation Association (NWEA) is the only vendor for the MAP test so it is unable to be competitively bid.

Page 16


TO: Board of Education TOPIC: Purchases Over $15,000 FROM: Ric Ericksen BOARD MEETING: November 28, 2016 DATE: November 22, 2016 AGENDA ITEM: FC Date: November 28, 2016 FC Agenda Item(s): VII. A.


Snow Plowing Contracts

DeAngelis Evergreen

Recommendation to the Board of Education and Finance Committee: Bring forward to the Board of Education with a positive recommendation to award a 3-year agreement for snow plowing contracts to both Evergreen Property Services and DeAngelis as quoted in the table below:

Vendor Per Snow 1” to 6” High Snow Fall Evergreen Property Services $255 (less than 3”)

$325 (>3-6”) Hourly Rate of $65 per truck Hourly Rate of $70 per skid

Per Snow 1” to 3” – All Sites Per Snow >3” to 12” – GHS DeAngelis $85 to $425 $475 to $650

Background/Attachment(s): A RFQ was sent in September to Evergreen Property Services, DeAngelis, and KEI. No other companies have request to be on our bidders list. Bid(s) was accepted from Evergreen Property Service for Kennedy Middle School. Bid(s) was accepted from DeAngelis for Amy Belle, County Line, McArthur, Rockfield, and the High School.

Page 17


TO: Finance Committee FROM: Ric Ericksen, Director of Business & Auxiliary Services FC MTG DATE: November 28, 2016 AGENDA ITEM: VIII. Reports

A. Vouchers - Previous Months Follow Up: none

B. Monthly Financial Reports:

All Financial Reports have been posted at both Google Shared Drive and Finance Committee web links when updated.

C. General Reports and Other Financial Happenings

1. 2016 OPEB (Other Post-Employment Benefits) Report

Linda Mont is a Senior Benefit Consultant at Key Benefit Concepts. This is the firm that has prepared our actuarial valuations of post-employment benefits over the years. She will be providing an overview of the most recent report. You will receive a bound copy of the full report and also a 2-page summary which includes excerpts from the report. The 2-page summary is attached for advance reference and will allow us to focus on the primary items from the report and compare the current liabilities to the past valuation. The full report is complex to read and is posted at the Finance Committee links under separate title. No formal action is required.

AGENDA ITEM: IX. Adjourn

Page 18

Key Benefit Concepts, LLC Page 1

Germantown School District Summary of Post-Employment Benefit Valuation Study

Addressing Liabilities as of July 1, 2015

Background & Certification

Valuation performed by Key Benefit Concepts, LLC in accordance with current Government Accounting Standards Board (GASB) guidelines for Statements 43 and 45 as they pertain to Other Post-Employment Benefits (OPEB)

The valuation is certified by Steven L. Diess, EA, MAAA and Elizabeth A. Moore, FSA, EA, MAAA

Definitions

Calculated liabilities based upon benefits earned by actives and retirees.

Actuarial Accrued Liability (AAL): Present value of benefits earned by actives and retirees up (prior) to the 7/1/2015 valuation date.

Normal Cost (NC): Present value of benefits earned in the valuation year (7/1/2015 to 6/30/2016).

Unfunded Actuarial Accrued Liability (UAAL): Portion of the AAL that has not been funded. The District has not established a trust to funds its OPEB post-employment benefits.

Annual Required Contribution (ARC): Amount determined by this study as the District’s annual cost (annual expense or district obligation). The ARC is comprised of the NC plus an amortized portion of UAAL.*

*Note: Study is based upon 30-year amortization period for OPEB liability Benefits and Factors OPEB

o The District will make contributions towards the medical premiums of eligible Administrators and Teachers upon their retirement as a benefit option until Medicare eligibility (or 96 months for Teachers; whichever occurs first).

o Eligible Support Staff may self-pay to remain on the District’s medical plan in retirement using accumulated unused sick leave. Upon exhaustion of these sick leave funds, retiree may elect to remain on the Districts group medical plan provided they self-pay the full amount (100%) of premiums.

o Implicit Rate Subsidy: Difference between the value of the benefit and premium

paid for coverage.

o Of the Administrators and Teachers currently waiving coverage in the District’s group medical plan, 50% were assumed to elect to participate in the District’s health plan upon their retirement and thus, receive a District-provided benefit. For the remaining 50% of Administrators currently waiving coverage and

Page 19

Key Benefit Concepts, LLC Page 2

assumed to not participate in the District’s group medial plan upon retirement, their District provided contributions were assumed to instead be placed into an HRA to purchase insurance in an outside plan. Therefore, no implicit rate subsidy was calculated on their behalf. However, Teachers waiving coverage upon retirement are not eligible for a post-employment HRA. Therefore, no OPEB liability was calculated on behalf of the remaining 50% of Teachers currently waiving coverage that were assumed not to participate in the District’s group medical plan upon retirement. Further, 10% of active Support Staff currently covered in the District’s group medical plan were assumed to continue to elect coverage on the District’s health plan in retirement on a self-pay basis.

Sick Leave Benefit

o The District also provides eligible Administrators and Support Staff with a sick leave benefit upon their retirement. Eligible retirees shall receive a cash payout for 50% of their unused sick day accumulated upon retirement.

o According to current GASB regulations, only the implicit rate subsidy incurred from use of the converted sick leave monies towards continued medical coverage is considered an OPEB and should be accounted for under GASB Statement 45. The sick days themselves, however, are still regarded as a termination benefit and should be accounted for under GASB Statement 16 as a compensated absence.

o Included in this valuation is the calculation of the implicit rate subsidy incurred from use of unused sick leave dollars for continued coverage in the group medical plan by Support Staff assumed to remain on the group plan in their retirement. This valuation does not include calculation of the sick leave dollars themselves.

Other Post Employment Liability

Level $ Level %

1 Normal Cost with interest to end of year $ 834,036 $ 834,036

2 Unfunded Actuarial Accrued Liability (UAAL) as of 7/1/2015 $ 11,588,346 $ 11,588,346

3 30-year Amortization of UAAL $ 670,155 $ 460,532

4 Annual Required Contribution (ARC) $ 1,504,192 $ 1,294,568

Changes in Liability

July 1, 2013 July 1, 2015

1 Unfunded Actuarial Accrued OPEB Liability* $ 16,809,109 $ 11,588,346

2 Total Medical Pay-As-You-Go (30 years)** $ 41,024,255 $ 30,761,193

* A 4.0% discount rate was used in both the 7-1-2013 and 7-1-2015 valuations. **Total OPEB Pay-As-You-Go reflects District’s premium contributions only. It does not include implicit rate subsidy

Page 20

germantown school district notice of finance committee … · germantown school district notice of...

Documents