Work Session: 4/1/25

Work Session Date: April 1, 2025
Board Members Present: Guessford, Beachley, Burkett, Murray, Evans, McCusker, Zentmeyer
Student Representative: Wong
Board Members Absent: none

Agenda Item / FY2026 General Fund Budget
Presenter(s)
Dr. David Sovine, Superintendent of Schools; Jeffrey Proulx, Chief Operating Officer; Eric Sisler, Executive Director of Finance; and Kameron Shives, Budget and Financial Reporting Analyst

Summary
Reportedly, in the four to five days prior to Tuesday’s budget work session, Dr. Sovine received several dozen specific questions from Board members. Most of the meeting entailed explaining the answers (over 40 slides with specific questions and the data/info to answer each). These questions about a number of specific special education programs (RISE, Connections, Step), instructional programs (library media, career and technology education), staffing details (lists of teachers, admin, and support personnel and their salaries), raises provided to the bargaining units in recent years, and costs related to operations and maintenance (Children’s Village, the Outdoor School, the Planetarium, transportation, and more).
No decisions were made. No consensus reached. Individual board members expressed “wants” which included a suggestion of a 1% cut across the entire budget, the funding of additional reading and math apprenticeships (doubled from 35 to 70 with the addition of math), the reinstatement of primary grade virtual classes (the formerly called ABLE program), the need to be more “goal oriented” in the budget to save money and to improve test scores, summer school programming at schools where it isn’t currently funded, and other individual Board members’ priorities (such as providing a raise to the lowest level of substitutes). The Board did not come to a clear consensus and did not provide specific direction to Dr. Sovine regarding what of those “wants” were to be added and what was to be cut in order to fund those added “wants”.
Here is the link to the 45 page slideshow answering these questions.

Meeting Details: 

 Dr. Sovine noted that staff compiled answers to all the BOE members' questions in a Power Point presentation to share with them today. WCPS Chief Operating Officer Jeff Proulx shared that the questions received from board members had been organized in a PowerPoint, beginning with revenue generating questions. See slides for specific details.
∙The slides detail how much of each area is related to state allocation and local allocation as specified under the Blueprint. 

∙Questions and answers related to the funding of the Career Ladder and CTE were explained. 

∙Proulx reviewed revenue related to the following: rental of WCPS buildings, miscellaneous revenue (salvage fees, electronic sales, etc.), cost recovery (i.e. insurance claims, Freedom of Information request fees, some transportation for homeless students in foster care, and some recovery of tuition reimbursement), and interest income. 

 ∙Proulx reviewed several slides with details related to "full time equivalent" staff in each of the bargaining units - Administrators, Teachers, and Support Personnel, by those funded through the General Fund and the Restricted Fund. He included the requested details about labor and benefits costs for the general fund, first related to salaries and benefits, and then for contracted services (like for school nurses and school resource officers). This slide includes figures for the COMPOSITE budget (restricted funds, general fund, and food service fund). 

∙Proulx provided the BOE with a list of positions at CES with current salary and provided a slide of the total numbers. 

∙Proulx reviewed the FY 25 Salary Resource Pool that would have provided a 5% increase for all units. Instead, due to limited available funding, only 4% was provided for ESP, 3% for administrators, and 3% for teachers. 

∙Proulx explained the level of substitute pay and reported out the number of full and half days utilized by substitute teachers last year. He then provided data related to the cost to increase sub pay - which is estimated to be about $700,000. The last sub increase was provided in 2022. Burkett interrupted that he had asked for increases of $5 and $10, not the $10 and $20 that Proulx provided. He only wanted to increase the rate for subs that make less than the minimum wage. Burkett wants to raise the pay or the lowest paid subs but not the other two tiers of sub pay as a way to move the lowest level of pay up to minimum wage. 

∙Proulx then explained turnover credit, which is the difference between the assumed savings from retirements and vacant positions to the next year's hire that would likely have a lower salary based on years of experience. 

∙Proulx then reviewed savings that could be realized by reducing all non-staff expenses by 2%. He noted that for areas related to Blueprint, WCPS could not reduce the 2% because to do so would jeopardize state funding that is tied to specific expenditures in specific areas. He also noted that we have not added inflationary percentages in several years, which would impact the consideration. 

∙Proulx shared data related to library media expenses that the BOE had requested. The Ed Tech coaches are included in the library media area that are funded under the department of instruction. 

∙Proulx then reviewed testing consultants and noted that both Power School and Schoolcity are no longer in use, the line in the budget is $0. 

∙Proulx provided details about what is funded under the line item "Principals and School Staff Communications" that fund telecommunications. 

∙Proulx reviewed the funding for professional development consultants and clerical additional employment line items with detailed answers. Proulx then reviewed the expenses related to Clerical sub expenses. He then reviewed the "professional services" expenditures in the maintenance budget (increases in this line are offset by decreases in other maintenance lines). 

∙Proulx explained the funding of the AP/IB tests that are paid in the spring on a sliding scale based on the students who take the tests. 

∙Proulx explained the staff mileage reimbursement costs that were provided. 

∙Proulx provided data related to contingency teachers who were budgeted and funded over the last 3 years and the allocations to school principals for a variety of purposes at each school. Athletics comprise about 30.5% of the school allocations. He shared details related to computer purchases as they relate to the WCPS Strategic Technology Plan. 

∙Proulx shared the answer to the question about anticipated purchases greater than $10,000 for FY26. WCPS does not do zero based budgeting and an exhaustive list is not available, but staff did note the knowns at this point. 

∙Proulx reviewed data related to the listing of the 154 vehicles, not including buses, that are titled to WCPS. 

∙Proulx reviewed the responses to questions related to Pupil Personnel Workers and explained COMAR's requirements related to the program. Proulx explained the work of Safety and Security Assistants. Board member Darrell Evans asked how much of what PPW's are expected to do overlaps with the job of Community Schools Managers . Dr. Webster provided the answer, noting that while they work in similar ways, they have a distinct set of expectations. Both address issues related to the "whole child," but PPWs are embedded in the day to day intervention with students, and Community Schools Managers are working at the program level creating partnerships and supporting wrap-around services. 

∙Proulx reviewed the costs to operate Children's Village.  Board members Charles Burkett and Mike Guessford asked for clarification about the footprint of Children's Village and the operational costs related to the Children's Village program. It was explained that the Children's Village Board takes care of the capital funds needed for the program. WCPS pays for the staff there, but not the building. Burkett asked how often Children’s Village is used. Proulx noted that every second grade class attends for two days and private schools also send students. Guessford asked about the revenue generated by the private schools paying to have students attend. Proulx said he would provide that in future. Board member Ashley McCusker asked why the cost of supplies and materials appear to be going up, and staff explained that it's related to a change in accounting practices required under The Blueprint for Maryland’s Future.  

∙Proulx reviewed costs to operate the Outdoor School and the Planetarium. 

∙Proulx provided details and costs related to the expansion of the  Apprenticeship Program for Reading and to add an Apprenticeship Program for Math. See slides for details. Board members Ashley McCusker and Mike Guessford asked for more details. Dr. Willow provided additional information. WCPS has funded 35 reading tutors that were grant funded for FY 2025. Dr. Sovine reviewed the reasons we have focused on reading tutors, noting that it is more complex to deliver a similar program for math tutors. Board member Darrell Evans asked for more data related to the results of the program for the reading apprenticeship program and noted that math tutors would be needed as well. 

∙Proulx provided details related to the addition of summer school programs for elementary and middle schools. 

∙Proulx reviewed the cost to add back the Elementary ABLE program - $609,455. Board President April Zentmeyer asked how this cost compares to the cost of a "brick and mortar" option, based on the potential enrollment. Proulx explained the reason why that is not easily answered. 

∙Proulx reviewed the cost of the following special education programs: RISE, CONNECTED, and STEP. Board member Ashley McCusker asked how many students each classroom serves, and was told the answer is 8-12 students. 

∙Proulx provided updates to additional budgetary considerations, including increases in school health services, employee pension payments, and staffing changes. 

∙Proulx provided the cost of addressing the long-standing transportation issue for Ruth Ann Monroe Elementary School and Eastern Elementary School as Tier 4 schools that has required teachers to stay past the contract day. He explained that students would be better served if the bus schedule ran earlier at those schools. The "fix" would move Eastern and Ruth Ann Monroe to a start time of 7:20 AM as a "Tier 1B" school and phase it in between FY26 and FY28. In FY 2026, 5 additional drivers would be hired to provide 5 new buses to the Tier 4 routes next year, and then more could be added in the next year. See the slides for more details. This plan would eliminate "double backs" that are part of the current regular routing.  Board member Mike Guessford asked about adding contract buses. Proulx said that to contract the services would not create savings. 

∙On the last slide, Proulx shared other revenue and reimbursement factors related to the Excellence in Public School Act and the closure of the late liquidation of ESSER II and ESSER III Funds related to the change in funding under the United States Department of Education that was recently announced. WCPS has about $3.34 million in encumbered funds in federal grants that are to fund the Williamsport High School and Marshall Street HC/HVAC replacements that are currently underway and some funds related to homeless grants ($125K).  

 

BOARD MEMBER COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS  AT THE END OF THE WORK SESSION 

Board member Charles Burkett: He asked if the Concentration of Poverty grant has to be applied for every year.
Response: Proulx explained the Concentration of Poverty grant must be applied for each year and is funded as part of the Blueprint For Maryland’s Future  

Board member Ashley McCusker: She asked how the allocation is provided.
Response: Proulx explained that the State makes the allocation yearly per school. 

Board member Burkett asked if the Concentration of Poverty grant has to be applied for every year, and Proulx explained the COP grant that is funded as part of the Blueprint. Board member McCusker asked about how the allocation is provided.
response: Proulx explained that the state makes allocation per school. 

Board member Burkett asked where we would get additional funds to fix the Tier 4 problem at Eastern Elementary and Ruth Ann Monroe Elementary. Board member Evans shared his confusion over this plan.
Response: Proulx explained that the redistricting process may change the routing needs once the Downsville Pike Elementary School is open.​

Student Member Daphne Wang – Regarding the Student Tutor Apprenticeship Program, she asked if it becomes too much of a burden on the budget if there was the possibility of pursuing the initiative as a voluntary, unpaid work experience program. She said she knew many students who would volunteer. 

Board member Charles Burkett: Commented that perhaps they could set a smaller stipend for that group. 

Board member Linda Murray – Encouraged visits to Fairview Outdoor Center and Children’s Village and praised the work that happens there. She thanked the staff and Dr. Sovine for answering the many questions submitted over four days prior to the work session. She noted that next year, she expressed hope that in future the Board members would ask questions earlier in the budget process. She acknowledged the many budget sessions that had been held during this budget cycle. 

Board member Darrell Evans - Expressed appreciation for the work of staff in answering the questions submitted and acknowledged that many questions were asked and answers had been provided. He commented that he thought “We a very good start with this budget.”  He said he sees a lot of good things in it and mentioned his support for “goal oriented” spending. He remarked that there was still a lot of spending that just increases “what we have currently been doing.” He said he would “like to us be more goal and outcome oriented.” He remarked that it was ‘easier said than done to cut 1% across the board and save 3 ½ million dollars.” He said he wanted to look at making some hard cuts and to shift that spending to other areas. He said he felt some are being left behind and that some of them are kids that are excelling and there is a need to expand upon their success by giving them more opportunities. He said he wanted to look specifically at where “we are spending this money’, and how specifically it helps to increase scores. He acknowledged that scores were going up, but said it was reasonable to expect them to be going up quicker. He remarked that the same things were being done “over and over again.” He said more difficult cuts and adjustment to the spending should happen to really focus on that is being given to kids. He said the supports being given to kids were not being changed and that more of the same was being done.  

Board member Victoria Beachley: She expressed agreement with Mr. Evans about the need for a “goal oriented budget” and acknowledged that it was hard for someone “not in it everyday” to suggest specific cuts. She expressed support for looking to see where reductions can be made so that there could be the addition of summer school and tutoring programs to support students where they have academic need. 

Board Vice President Mike Guessford: He thanked staff for their work in providing answers to the questions board members had. He thanked board members for asking difficult questions. He said the public asks board members questions and that board members need to ask more questions throughout the budget process. He said he liked the idea of a 1% cut across the board. He said, “I’ve advocated for that in the past.”  He said there was no need for new vehicles at this time. He does not support the proposed 12-month employee at Cascade Elementary School and said the Tech Ed coaches should be removed from the budget. He said he’d like to see “all the tutors” added as it was a very successful program. He said that test scores “have not been the greatest.” He said that reading tutors, adding math tutors and summer school would help to get kids caught up from COVID. He expressed support for the ABLE program and said that he wished “we had never gotten rid of the ABLE program.” He wants to see ways to increase the need for ABLE through advertising it.  He said he felt it benefits some kids to stay home and do their learning by computer. He said he’d like to see ABLE come back. He reiterated his support for a 1% reduction across the board reduction in the budget. He estimated that 1% to be $3.6 million and said some of these items being proposed could be funded with some money left over.  

President April Zentmeyer: She expressed her appreciation for the work done by the superintendent and staff and spoke about how the proceedings had added to the level of transparency for the public.  

Dr. Sovine: He reminded the Board that this is their budget, and asked them to help him as the superintendent to know how to move forward and direct staff on the work to be done so that in two weeks, the board could act on the budget at its April 15th Business meeting. Numerous times Dr. Sovine sought consensus by asking questions and reframing what he had heard from individual board members. He told the Board that to expand the Reading Apprenticeship program and add other items mentioned cuts would have to be made somewhere. He cited the need to reduce the budget or specific items and said he was “seeking to know the desire of the Board” so that staff could make the changes the Board wanted. Dr. Sovine said he could work with staff to bring back to the Board recommended cuts, unless the board wanted to provide the guidance on what to cut. 

Board member Ashley McCusker: She asked if math tutors would be included. 

Board Member Darrell Evans: He said he, personally, wanted the position of Student Intervention Specialist back in the budget. He said there was the need to see that Antietam Academy is full enrolled, so he wanted that position added back in. He said, “I was thinking we probably need more than 4 million dollars to add in.” He went on to say that he did not want to see an increase in the number of School Safety Assistants. He said he can’t justify increasing them, if there are no measures of success.  

Dr. Sovine, again, looking to have the Board reach consensus in order to move forward with the budget process asked for guidance by asking, “In what areas is there a preference for cuts?” He sought to know what the Board wanted to cut in a 1% across the board cut. Board member Charles Burkett: He asked if a substitute teacher was paid an hourly rate like a contracted employee…with no benefits. He was told substitute teachers were paid a flat per day rate. He went on to say that he was suggesting a $5 increase for half day and $10 increase for full-time substitute teachers. He said he was “on board” with the 1%, taking out the purchase of vehicles, taking out “the hall monitors” from schools that aren’t really having a problem. He mentioned surpluses and said that “could be taken into account as well.” He said it “could be fairly easy to find 1%” because “nothing comes out to ending in 00 at the end of the year.” This was in reference to comments that he said had been made about him saying there was evidence of fluff in the budget. He believes the evidence of the fluff is because of the accounting practice of rounding line item dollar amounts.  

President April Zentmeyer – She said she absolutely supports having 35 reading tutors and maybe math apprentices. With regard to making an across the board percentage cut as had been suggested and supported by some members she said, “One percent sounds great until you find out what’s going.” She in support of not adding additional School Security Assistants. She spoke in support of the addition of elementary ABLE and said there was a need to advertise it starting with home schoolers. She said she felt summer school was one of the most important things to do for kids. She ended by saying to Dr. Sovine, “So, there you go. So, what else can we tell you?” 

Superintendent Dr. Sovine: Working to bring the Board to consensus said, “The desire of the board is” and began listing what his understanding was of what additions and deletions were agreed upon by the majority of board members. There was some discussion as to the exact number of reading tutors and math tutors to be included in the budget.  

Board member Darrell Evans: Suggested they budget for 70 tutors “and take as many as you can get and then move money elsewhere.”    

Superintendent Sovine, in trying to find consensus, sought to confirm that the Board wanted a 1% across the board reduction in the budget. He sought to be clear on what the consensus was and listed the following: 1% cut across the board and no expansion of School Safety Assistants. 

In seeking agreement, he asked President Zentmeyer for the preference of the cuts. He asked if the Board would like to target some areas?  He asked if the Board wanted staff to suggest areas to cut. He recommended that the Board meet in work session before they meet on April 15th for the Business Meeting. He emphasized the need to have clear agreement so that the Board is prepared to vote on the adoption of its budget at that Business Meeting.  

President Zentmeyer asked for a show of hands in support of another Board work session..