4. Levies provide basic funding
100
90%
voter-approved operating levy
2012
% of MN districts with
80
60
40
20
0
1980 1990 2000 2010
5. Rising expectations, more
intense student needs
Percentage of our students in poverty more than doubled since
2001, to nearly 40%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
6. And yet, better results
Percentage of students proficient in reading
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Asian/Pacific Islander Hispanic Black White All Students
12. Priority: School-level services
District-Level Administra on
(3.2%) Student transporta on (6.8%)
School-Level Educa onal
Services (90.0%)
13. Cutting expenses
$1,652,952
$1,000,000
lower
maintain
class sizes
class sizes
-$608,696
-$3,000,000
-$14,700,000
2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013
14. If the operating levy passes
$9 million per year for 5 years to continue progress in:
o All student groups achieving at higher levels; closing
the achievement gap
o More students taking college-level courses
o More students staying in school and graduating on
time
15. If the operating levy fails
$14M in reductions over next two years, beginning
next year
o Fewer staff to help students achieve at higher levels (high
performers and those who need extra help)
o Fewer college-level courses; less support for students
preparing for college and careers
o Less assistance to keep students in school so they can
graduate on time
16. If the operating levy fails
Additional cuts to programs our community values in
a high quality education
o Fewer staff positions (cut approximately 200)
o Larger class sizes
o Fewer extracurricular activities (arts/music, academics,
athletics)
o Less classroom support for teachers
o Reduced customer service to families and community
members
17. Operating levy tax impact
$13 /month
For the typical home valued at $190,000
20. If the technology levy passes
Provide greater student access to technology for
learning; purchase needed equipment and materials
Train more teachers in the use of technology to
engage students in learning
Improve the technology infrastructure
21. If the technology levy fails
Students will fall behind their peers in the use of
technology and won’t have access to needed
equipment and materials
Students will be less prepared to use technology for
learning in college and careers
Infrastructure will be at risk
22. Voter-approved tech levies: dedicated funding
Hopkins $746
Minnetonka $617
Eden Prairie $548
Edina $520
Wayzata $489
Bloomington $223
Osseo $188 If tech levy approved
Anoka-Hennepin $65
Voter-approved tech levies
S. Washington Co. $52
(average per student)
Rosemount-AV-Eagan $43
Osseo Current $0
24. What strong schools mean
to local communities
Americans rank quality of schools second
only to crime when deciding where to live.
Schools directly affect a community’s vitality
and home resale values.
Source: National Association of Realtors
25. Prepared and paid for by ISD 279-Osseo Area Schools,
11200 93rd Avenue North, Maple Grove MN 55369.
This presentation is not circulated on behalf of any candidate or ballot question.
26. To learn more
www.district279.org
welisten@district279.org
27. Operating and Technology
Levy Requests 2012
The right thing for kids
The smart thing for our community
Editor's Notes
Thank you for this opportunity to share some information about the school district ’s operating and technology levy requests that will be on the ballot this November. Note: This presentation uses the most recent 5-year data that is available; in many cases, that means 2008-2012. If the 2012 data was not available at the time this PPT was produced, we used 2007-2011. Financial data is presented as actual audited figures, to the extent they are available, or budgeted amounts. All projections are based on current assumptions.
There are more than 20,000 reasons why these requests are important … and they’re in our schools every day. The operating and technology levy requests are about doing the right thing for kids and the smart thing for our community.
In Osseo Area Schools, we believe it is our responsibility to ensure that all students receive a high quality education that prepares them well for college or career. Our mission is to inspire and prepare all students with the confidence, courage, and competence to achieve their dreams; contribute to community; and engage in a lifetime of learning. With support from the state and our local community, we are committed to doing everything we can to ensure that all students, whether struggling or high performing, achieve that mission.
Let’s start with how the education funding system works in Minnesota. The State of Minnesota’s plan for funding K-12 education is, by design, a shared responsibility between the state and local taxpayers. Operating levies, approved by district voters, are used by 90% of Minnesota’s school districts to help pay for the day-to-day costs of running schools. Operating levies pay for things like teachers and other staff, transportation, utilities, and supplies. Operating levies always have a specific beginning and end, and they require voter approval. The money provided by levies is collected through property taxes paid by property owners. In 2007, Osseo School District voters approved an operating levy that currently provides about 14% of our annual budget. The requests on the ballot this November are for a second operating levy that would provide additional funding to continue our progress in delivering strong results for students and our community .
We’re putting those dollars to work at a time when the academic expectations for our children have never been higher. State and federal guidelines for what students are expected to know and do have become increasingly rigorous—and we have a duty to help our students meet and exceed those standards. At the same time, the needs of our community’s children continue to grow and become more intense. For example, the percentage of students in our district who live in poverty has more than doubled since 2001.
So what are taxpayers getting for their money as expectations continue to increase? In District 279, you ’re getting better results for students. I ’m going to provide just a few examples of some areas where your schools are delivering better results for students. The sample areas I’ll cover are proficiency, growth, increases in the number of students taking our most challenging courses, and improvements in on-time graduation. The first example is a measure of proficiency, which shows the percent of students who meet or exceed Minnesota ’s high academic standards. On the state tests in reading from 2008 to 2012, all student groups became more proficient and we saw large increases of 8 to 12 percentage points among our students of color, which means we’re making progress in closing the achievement gap. All student groups are doing better, and students of color are making accelerated growth to catch up to their higher-performing peers. There is no doubt that we still have lots of work to do to help all students achieve at high levels and to close the achievement gap. But as our data shows, we ’re on the right track and we’re making good progress. Note: American Indian numbers are not included in this graph because the small population results in strong fluctuations in the trendline.
The second example of better results is the progress students are making in meeting their individual academic goals. Measuring student growth toward those goals is important because it ensures that kids who are high performers continue to be challenged, while students who are struggling get the help they need to reach and exceed proficiency. Every one of our students has a learning goal that is specific to that student, and we carefully track the progress they’re making toward that target. Our five-year trend provides evidence that more students are meeting their individual growth goals in reading. The percentage of students meeting their individual growth goals increased 24 percent in reading, and improvements were made in all student groups. The five-year trend shows improvement in math, too, with a 9% increase in the overall number of students meeting their individual growth goal. Asian Pacific Islander and White student groups gained by 5 to 14 percent; Hispanic and Black student groups remained stable. Note: Growth is measured on the MAP test, a nationally normed test. American Indian numbers are not included in this graph because the small population results in strong fluctuations in the trendline.
Another way we measure progress is by looking at how many students are preparing for college by taking the most rigorous coursework available. Over the past five years, student participation in college-level Advanced Placement and International Baccalaureate classes has doubled.
Over the same time frame, participation in college-level classes by students of color has more than tripled, a factor that is also evidence of progress in closing the achievement gap. So more students are participating in college-level coursework, and we have evidence that more students are being successful, too. The number of Advanced Placement Scholars has more than doubled since 2008. Note: Overall participation is measured by classes taken. AP Scholar data is the most recent available: 2008-2011.
Just a few years ago, graduation requirements focused on basic skills; current requirements, however, focus on rigorous preparation for post-secondary education. Our Caucasian students have an on-time graduation rate that is already high, hovering around 90% every year. We have made progress with other student groups over the past five years, increasing the on-time graduation rates of students of color and students who live in poverty. Our success in helping more students graduate on time is important for our community because graduates earn more money over their lifetimes and are more likely to become economically self-sufficient. Note to presenter: Asian/Pacific Islander on-time graduation rates were up 9%; Black rates were up 12%; students in poverty rates went up 6%. We do not yet have graduation rate data for 2012, so the above data is for 2007-2011.
Our school district’s plan for increasing student achievement is working. All student groups are reaching higher levels of proficiency; students of color are making accelerated gains and closing the achievement gap; more students are preparing for college by taking the most rigorous courses available; and more students are graduating on time. Those examples provide clear evidence that state and local dollars are being used to get significantly better results for students and our community.
Education is a people-intensive industry and we need well trained professionals in our schools to work with kids every day. 90% of our expenses pay for services that are provided at the school level (only 3% pay for district administration), and because those services are delivered by people, the costs are largely related to salaries and benefits. Of course, the cost of transportation, supplies, insurances, and other items are going up, too. Providing the same amount of service costs more every year, but our income is not keeping up with those increasing costs.
Over the past five years, our district has reduced expenses by $18 million and has achieved $6 million in additional savings through cost avoidance measures like energy conservation, health insurance cost containment, and holding the line on purchased services. During two of those years, 2011 and 2012, we invested additional resources to lower class sizes. We now need to seek additional income because our projections show that approximately $14 million of additional reductions will be needed over the next two years in order to stay out of debt and to maintain enough cash on hand to cover two and a half weeks of operations. State law allows us to ask voters for an additional $9 million per year. If approved, this increase will help us continue the progress we’re making in student achievement gains; it will also significantly reduce the impact of any future reductions. Presenter notes: The cost containment figure includes the following: $3.8 million in cost avoidance by not allowing any increases in the area of purchased services $1.3 million in energy conservation/cost avoidance, and $ .8 million in bus rerouting savings Total: $5.9 million, rounded to $6 million
The operating levy is about continuing the progress we’re making to do the right thing for kids. The operating levy will provide $9 million per year in new income that will ensure that this successful work doesn’t lose momentum. It will also reduce the impact of any future expense reductions. The progress we’re making in achievement, college/career preparation, and on-time graduation is good for kids because it prepares them for success after high school, whether they continue their education right away or enter the workforce. Continuing our work to deliver those results is also the smart thing to do for our community. We know that when students do well in school, they graduate on time, enter college or the workforce, and go on to become contributing, tax-paying members of our community.
These positive results are at risk because there isn’t enough money to continue paying for what we are currently doing. Given our current budget projections, we’ll need to make approximately $14 million in cuts over the next two years if the operating levy fails. Starting next year, we will begin to eliminate staff positions, which will reduce support to all students, including high performers and those who need extra help; we won’t be able to offer as many college-level courses and electives; and there will be less assistance to keep students in school so they can graduate on time.
To reach $14 million in cuts, other programs and services will also be affected in areas that our community has told us they value as part of a high quality education. An independent survey showed that community members think our schools provide good value for the dollar. But if we make $14 million in cuts, we won’t be able to continue the programs and services that create that value. It will be increasingly difficult for our teachers to continue delivering these strong results if they don't have the resources they need to help students who struggle and to accelerate high-performing students . For example, staff reductions will mean fewer teachers and larger class sizes. Extracurricular activities in academics, the arts, and athletics will be reduced; and cuts in administration and operations will result in less classroom support for teachers and reduced customer service to families and community members. Note: We cannot predict impact on class sizes until we know exactly how many positions will be cut and where. However, we can state with certainty that some of those positions will be classroom teachers and the impact on the classroom (even with slightly declining enrollment) will be larger class sizes.
If the operating levy passes, the property tax increase on the typical home in our school district, valued at $190,000, will be $13 per month, beginning in 2013. The tax impact will vary by community, with some paying more and some paying less, depending on the value of their home. We have a tax calculator on our website so you can enter your home’s value and see what the tax increase would be on your own home. Note: “Typical” means “median”-- half of the homes in our district are valued higher, and half are valued lower.
In addition to approving a request for new operating funds to keep up the momentum in increasing student achievement, the school board also unanimously agreed to request a ten-year technology levy. The technology levy will provide $5 million per year for classroom technology equipment and materials; teacher training; and improvements to the technology infrastructure, which is the glue that holds all of our technology together. On the ballot, the technology levy will be called a Capital Project Levy. The technology levy is a separate ballot question that is independent from the operating levy. Either request can pass or fail without affecting the other one.
Technology has become an essential part of a basic education for all students. Today’s students are mobile, creative, and collaborative. They learn anytime and anywhere. Our responsibility is to teach them 21 st century skills and to provide access to 21 st century tools that prepare them for success in 21 st century careers. Think about today’s workplace. Every day, people in the workplace use technology to conduct research, solve problems, collaborate with others, and create products. Students also need to know how to use technology to do research, solve problems, collaborate, and create. These are some of the 21 st century skills students need to be successful in college and careers.
If the technology levy passes, students will have greater access to technology, providing more opportunities to create, collaborate, and actively engage in learning. The levy will pay for computers and mobile devices that promote interactive learning; replacements for classroom equipment, such as digital projectors and video/audio systems; science equipment; instruments and programs for writing music; and software and hardware for career and technical education. Funds will also be used to equip and empower teachers to take full advantage of technology-enhanced learning. Finally, funds will be used to strengthen the district’s technology infrastructure. You may be surprised to learn that the Osseo School District is the third largest employer in the area, following Boston Scientific and Target. Just like other major businesses, the school district needs a reliable technology infrastructure that ensures efficient operations.
If the technology levy fails, our students will fall behind their peers in other districts that have invested in their kids’ futures by approving dedicated technology funds. The key issue is that students need access to technology and they need support in using it to learn, collaborate, and create, all of which are critical skills they’ll need for college and careers. Finally, if the technology levy fails, the infrastructure that supports learning and essential operations will remain at risk. For example, when there’s a power failure, we need a back-up generator so classroom instruction and business operations are not disrupted. And when squirrels chomp on our above-ground fiber-optic cables, our classrooms lose their Internet connection. We need to bury the rest of our cables. This technology levy will not provide a computer for every student. Instead, it provides a common-sense approach for preparing today’s students for future success.
This chart shows large metro area districts that have voter-approved technology levies. As you can see, Hopkins has the highest levy, averaging $746 per student; Wayzata voters have approved $489 per student; and Osseo is among those that don’t have a voter-approved technology levy. If our voters approve the technology levy request, it will put Osseo at about $188 per pupil. Note: Smaller districts have technology levies, too, but this graph focuses only on the larger districts in the metro area.
If the technology levy passes, taxes on the typical home in the school district, valued at $190,000, will increase $6 per month beginning in 2013. The tax impact will vary by community, with some paying more and some paying less, depending on the value of the home. We’ll have a tax calculator on our website so you can enter your home’s value and see what the tax increase would be on your own home. Note: The tax impact for the tech levy is calculated differently than the operating levy. The online tax calculator will be the best way for people to see their specific tax impact.
The state expects communities to help financially support their schools, which is why state law allows us to ask voters for both the operating and technology levies that will be on the November ballot. This financial partnership ties students, families, schools, and communities together in a combined effort to benefit students and the local community. We have a lot of evidence that what we’re doing for students is working. We’re getting results that are the right thing for kids and the smart thing for our community. These comments from the National Association of Realtors help describe the relationship between strong schools and strong communities.
This is a difficult time for schools to be asking for additional funding from our community. Over the past five years, we’ve worked hard to do what we can by making cuts and finding ways to contain costs. When we walk into classrooms every day, we see OUR community’s priority: our children. These children, their families, and our community depend on us to ensure that every one of them receives a high quality education that prepares them well for college and careers. We have a responsibility to deliver continuous improvement in student achievement, which we are clearly demonstrating. We also have a responsibility to share our schools’ needs with our community so that between now and November 6th, voters can consider the results, evaluate the needs, and determine for themselves whether they merit their support.
More detailed information is available on our district website, district279.org. You’ll find the online tax calculator there, too. You may also submit questions to welisten@district279.org
