St. Tammany Parish School Board
Minutes
Committee As A Whole Meeting
Business Affairs and Administrative
__________________________
October 4, 2012
The St. Tammany Parish School Board met as a Committee As A Whole in the C. J. Schoen
Board Room, Covington, Louisiana, at 7:00 PM, Thursday, October 4, 2012.
On roll call, there were present: Ray A. Alfred, Chairman and Members, Michael J. Dirmann,
Stephen J. “Jack” Loup, III, Charles T. Harrell, Roanne V. Tipton, Willie B. Jeter, Peggy H. Seeley,
Robin P. Mullett, Ronald “Ron” Bettencourtt, Robert R. “Bob” Womack, James “Ronnie” Panks,
Sr., John C. Lamarque, and Mary K. Bellisario.
Absent: Neal M. Hennegan, Elizabeth B. Heintz.
Mr. Alfred called on Mrs. Mullett for the invocation followed by the Pledge of
Allegiance.
Mr. Alfred stated no one requested time on the agenda.
Mr. Alfred stated that the next agenda item was the approval of minutes for the
Committee As A Whole Meeting held September 6, 2012. He asked if there were any additions or
corrections to the minutes. It was moved by Mr. Dirmann, seconded by Mr. Loup, to accept the
minutes.
Mr. Alfred asked if there were any public comments. There being none, the motion
carried unanimously.
Mr. Alfred called on Mr. Trey Folse, Superintendent, who introduced Mrs. Cheryl
Arabie, Superintendent of Curriculum and Development, who gave a Minimum Foundation
Program (MFP) Powerpoint Presentation.
A MFP Powerpoint Presentation was given by Mrs. Cheryl Arabie and attached to the
minutes as “Attachment 1.”
Mr. Dirmann asked if the Board received the same funding the last three (3) years even
though there were 1,056 more students.
Mrs. Arabie responded that was correct.
Mr. Dirmann stated in 2010-11 there were 35,501 students and in 2012-13 there were 36,557
students with a little difference in funding.
Mrs. Arabie responded the 2012-13 figure was the February 1, 2012 enrollment.
Mr. Dirmann stated legislators were wrong when they stated that voting for these changes
would not impact the System because financially it had impacted the System. He stated the public
needed to be made aware of the hardships and possible services that were going to be affected.
Mr. Bettencourtt asked if the portion of the local millage money that the State factored into
the calculations of what was taken from this System was just the classroom millage money, or did it
include the millage for building maintenance.
1
Ms. Fortenberry, Director of Business Affairs, responded yes, all of the ad valorem taxes,
sales taxes and other revenues were factored in to come up with that number.
Mr. Bettencourtt questioned the State not understanding the fact that buildings still had to be
maintained regardless of whether there were one or two less children.
Mrs. Bellisario questioned if the School System was paying for the 182 transfer students that
were not enrolled February 1, 2012, not enrolled last year, and not enrolled this year.
Mrs. Arabie responded absolutely. She stated an example of that would be looking at
students attending the Louisiana School for the Deaf and Visually Impaired and the Louisiana School
for Math, Science and Arts.
Mrs. Bellisario stated the point was the money was never received for these students but was
being taken away from the System.
Mrs. Arabie responded correct.
Mr. Lamarque questioned the amount of dollars it was costing for each student. He
questioned why the Belle Chasse Academy and New Orleans Military and Maritime Academy
received more MFP per student allotment than this System.
Mrs. Arabie responded these were taken directly from the MFP allotment and the paperwork
received.
Mr. Folse interjected that was $10,000 per student.
Mr. Lamarque stated it was onerous that the State was taking the MFP funding that they said
they were going to give the System, which was actually the taxes dollars that they were going to give
back to us. He stated the State was taking away the local ad valorem and sales tax percentage of that,
too. He questioned the State’s justification of giving $1,000.00 more per student to some of the
other schools.
Mrs. Arabie responded it was in their formula.
Mr. Lamarque asked whose formula was this. He stated the State gave the Board a formula
for MFP funding, funding they were taking away from us. He stated the State was also taking away a
percentage of all the money generated in this Parish, other than construction. He stated the State
divided that MFP figure by the total number of students, and that amount of per pupil money was
what they were giving away, more of our money that they were giving away. He asked how was the
State giving away more per pupil money to a school than we were supposed to give away to them.
He stated it did not make sense to him that the St. Tammany Parish Public School System got
$9,143.00 for every student but some schools got more than that amount.
Ms. Fortenberry responded the charter law had a fixed amount per student which was
$4,750.00, and then the local and state allocations were added in. She stated that was how it came up
to the $10,000.00. She stated it was a formula built into the charter school law therefore; those
schools got an extra amount.
Mr. Dirmann stated in Looking at the State MFP Dollars over the last three years slide the
Board was funded $5.9 million less, in addition to the $2.1 million being lost to fund the transfer and
voucher students. He questioned the reduction that the System had received in the MFP over the
last three years, the 1,056 increase in student enrollment and getting the same amount of money. He
stated taking the State allotment of $5,578.00 on the 1,056 students that was $5.89 million.
Ms. Fortenberry stated that was correct but there was Level-II funding based on revenue that
also came into play.
Mr. Dirmann stated when the Legislators said they were not cutting the System’s funding that
was not true.
2
Mr. Dirmann stated there was an outlay of cash to the transfer and voucher students of $2.1
million and then a reduced funding amount on the overall student population of about $5.9 million.
He stated that was a substantial reduction in funding whenever you transfer that into the cost of
classroom instruction and the services provided, whether it was a special needs child, transportation,
cafeterias, or other services provided on a daily basis within the School System. He stated it had an
impact, and it was not going to be a positive one; it was going to be a negative one. He stated it was
time that the public understood that only so much could be done with less but when there was
nothing left to work with then there was no alternative but reduce services. He thanked Mr. Folse
and the Administration team for their efforts and the information given to the Board Members to
enlighten them on what was taking place within the St. Tammany Parish Public School System.
Mr. Alfred questioned the Louisiana Virtual Charter Academy being given $9,853 per
student. He asked if a child was enrolled in that particular school and was also enrolled in one of the
System’s high schools, did the System get any dollars from those students.
Mrs. Arabie responded with the Louisiana Virtual Charter Academy, students were attending
the academy full time. She stated the Louisiana Virtual Charter Academy was online and offered all
the academics that were needed. She stated the Louisiana Virtual School was a school in which
some students had enrolled while attending the System’s high schools, and at this point in time was
not sure if any funding was lost for those students.
Mr. Folse stated every one of those students were full time students somewhere else other
than in the St. Tammany Parish Public School System.
Mr. Alfred asked since it was a virtual school with no buildings per se, why was the dollar
amount higher than the System’s allotment.
Mrs. Arabie responded the State was basing the dollar amount on the tuition set up for that
particular academy.
Mr. Folse stated he requested from the State Department the names and addresses of the
students to match up the number of students that were shown enrolled in these different schools, so
that as a School System, as good stewards of the public’s money, tracked the monies that followed
those students. He stated he had received the names and address of 47 students in the Scholarship
Program and was reviewing those names and address to make sure those students did qualify, based
on an address or coming from a C, D, or F school. He was working with Mr. Pastuszek, Board
Attorney, in obtaining the names and addresses of the other students enrolled at the other virtual sites
to track those as well. He stated he mentioned to the State Department he wanted all these students
back in the St. Tammany Parish Public School System and believed we had a school system we were
proud of and offered a high quality public education. He stated this was not to catch anybody but
was a way to find out which students were being lost, why we were losing them, and what could be
done as a School System to get those students back.
Mr. Alfred asked when these dollars would be taken.
Ms. Fortenberry responded the first quarter was taken this month. She stated it would be
divided into four (4) payments. She stated with the Local part, the State had taken up front and
divided the remaining portion into ten (10) payments.
Mrs. Seeley asked for clarification on whether the Louisiana Virtual Charter Academy was
run by the State.
Mrs. Arabie responded yes.
Mrs. Seeley asked if that money went back to the State.
Mrs. Arabie responded it goes to the Louisiana Virtual Charter Academy.
Mr. Dirmann asked if the February 1st student count of last year was the number being used
for the current MFP funding.
3
Mrs. Arabie responded February 1, 2012.
Mr. Dirmann asked with the new October 1, 2012 count if there an increase in student
enrollment from that previous date.
Mrs. Arabie responded yes.
Mr. Dirmann asked were the numbers included for the transferring students identified by the
State that were not in the System prior to that February 1, 2012 count. He asked if they were going
to be in included the October 1, 2012 count.
Mrs. Arabie responded no because these students were not enrolled in the System’s schools.
Mr. Dirmann stated they were not enrolled in the System’s schools to begin with.
Mrs. Arabie responded that was correct.
Mr. Dirmann asked why these students were not counted in the October 1, 2012 count if the
State was going to take money from the System for these students. He questioned a problem with the
formula due to the fact that student enrollment numbers were being used from February of the last
school year and many of those students were not in the System’s schools at all last year. He stated
the Board was getting billed for these students but they were not in the student count last year nor
this year so why weren’t we getting credit for these students in the October l, 2012 count.
Mr. Folse stated one of the reasons he asked Mrs. Arabie and Ms. Fortenberry to put this
power point together for the Board tonight was the unawareness of such. He stated this was new
territory for the System since in the past funding for those students not enrolled in the School
System, excluding the voucher students, was allocated from a funding source other than the St.
Tammany Parish Public School System; now it is. He stated there was $1.7 million being taken out
of the School System funds that in years past these students would have been funded from some
other source. He stated in providing awareness for the Board and other stakeholders, hopefully this
information could make Legislators more aware of the situation. He stated that this information
available to the Board tonight was a clear example of monies that were not coming in but still going
out of the School System, and how this had impacted the St. Tammany School System.
Mr. Dirmann stated there had to be accountability for the funding formula being used by the
State if St. Tammany taxpayers’ dollars were being taken and sent some place else. He stated the
Board was trying to do their part but the State Legislators, Department of Education, and others
involved needed to be accountable by answering these questions for the taxpayers and students of the
School System.
Mr. Harrell asked if the Louisiana Virtual Charter Academy was a “for profit” charter school
not a State agency.
Mrs. Arabie responded the Louisiana Virtual Charter Academy’s website showed they
outsource academic courses. She stated the Louisiana Connections Academy was set up by the
State, including the principal for the academy was one of the members at the State level. She did not
have any additional details for the Louisiana Virtual Charter Academy other than what was learned
from their website.
Mr. Harrell stated the St. Tammany Parish Public School System was getting $5,578.00 per
student from the State and the Louisiana Virtual Charter Academy was getting $9,853.00.
Mr. Folse stated the State was taking $9,853.00 from the St. Tammany Parish Public School
System, but it is not known exactly how much each one of those other individual sites would get.
Mr. Harrell stated the Louisiana Virtual Charter Academy had no food service, maintenance,
or transportation.
4
Mrs. Bellisario stated she thought the Connections Academy was owned by K-12,
Incorporated from Maryland. She stated it was a corporation “for profits”.
Mr. Folse thanked principals, assistant principals, teachers, and support staff for working
with less money but their effort had never been more than this year. He stated on behalf of himself
as Superintendent and the Board Members, they appreciated the efforts of everyone at the System’s
schools, and for them to make sure they continued to do the best job possible with the resources
being given.
Mr. Lamarque also thanked the citizens and taxpayers of St. Tammany Parish who had
always supported public education.
Under the Administrative section of the agenda, Mr. Alfred called on Mr. William
Brady, Assistant Superintendent, who wanted to preface the presentation on Act 861, the
Educational Act passed by the Legislature. He stated Mr. Kevin Darouse and Byron Williams,
Supervisors of Administration, would give a short presentation tonight giving Board Members
advanced knowledge of a four (4) hour in-service on this subject that it seems all employees would
be required to take. He stated the State Department of Education had not yet finalized the exact
procedures of how this program was to be rolled out but was anxiously awaiting them to do so.
He introduced Kevin Darouse.
An Act 861 Powerpoint Presentation was given by Mr. Kevin Darouse, Supervisor of
Administration and attached to the minutes as “Attachment 2.”
Mrs. Bellisario asked if the State provided any resources or funding to pay for this training.
Mr. Darouse responded no.
Mr. Bettencourtt asked if Act 861 included an employee bullying another employee or a
student bullying an employee.
Mr. Darouse responded an employee issue was a different level and there were people on
staff available to work with employee issues.
Mr. Alfred asked if there were any public comments. There were none.
Mr. Alfred called on Mr. Brady who stated that the Monthly Construction Report was
included in the Board Members’ packets, and Ms. Cameron Tipton and staff were present to answer
questions. There were none.
Mr. Alfred called on Mr. Brady who stated that the Maintenance and Custodial Report was
included in the Board Members’ packets, and Mr. Richmond and staff were present to answer
questions. There were none.
Mr. Alfred called on Mr. Brady who stated that the Risk Management Report was included
in the Board Members’ packets and Mr. Kirt Gaspard was present to answer questions. There were
none.
Mr. Alfred called on Mr. Brady who stated that the Transportation Report was included in
the Board Members’ packets, and Mrs. Cathy Aime and staff were present to answer questions.
There were none.
Mr. Alfred called on Ms. Fortenberry who stated the Monthly Purchasing Report was
included in the Board Members’ packets and Mrs. Stevens, Director of Purchasing, was available to
answer questions. There were none.
With no further business to come before the Committee As A Whole, Mr. Alfred declared
the meeting adjourned.
5
ATTACHMENT
1
ATTACHMENT
2