Q&A: St. Michael-Albertville Superintendent Talks about Operations Levy Increase

Like more than 130 school districts statewide, residents will head to the polls this November to vote on , which raises local dollars for the district.

Currently set at $500, the St. Michael-Albertville School Board approved a recommendation by a volunteer advisory committee to raise that amount to $695, raising a total of $2.4 million in local revenue, to be met with another $1.9 million in state funds. The increase raises $1.2 million in local money, and raises taxes on the average home in St. Michael about $88 per year, or $7.35 per month.

Superintendent Dr. Jim Behle talked with St. Michael Patch about renewing the operations levy–which has to be done every 10 years by state law–three years early, what the levy pays for currently and what the new money would mean for the district.

 St. Michael Patch: First, let’s look at the current operations levy. With $500 coming from each student, raised locally, where does that put St. Michael-Albertville in proportion to the state average? And why is there a need for more than 130 districts to extend or raise levies with ballot questions this year?

Dr. Jim Behle: Our levy, actually, was right at the state average of $447 back in 2004, when we passed the current operations levy on our second try, or just slightly above it. Now, the state average is at $863, so you can see we’re well below that. Districts have had to look for more local money because the Legislature held school funding flat for a couple of session there. We’re just not able to keep up.

Patch: But what about the $50 per pupil addition raised in this new budget passed by the 2011 Legislature? Doesn’t that increase help offset some of the costs?

Behle: It does. Right now, unlike a lot of districts, we won’t have to borrow money to meet our budget demands this year. But, even with that increase in state aid, there’s a possibility we would next year The state shifted the funding formula, and we’ve only been getting about 90 percent of what we’re budgeted from the sate. In 2012-2013, that shifting again, so there’s a shortfall there. Plus, we’re losing $500,000 from a federal program that ends next year, and that $50 per pupil doesn’t offset that loss.

Patch: What about cutting the district’s own spending first, before looking to raise revenue through a levy increase?

Behle: We’ve done that. We’ve actually had to do that because of the state cuts, so over the last four years, we’ve cut about $1.4 million from the budget. We’ve negotiated new transportation contracts, saving about $150,000, and we’ve trimmed some support and certified staff positions. The high school no longer has a dean of students, for example. We’ve cut staff at the district offices way down. And we’re making energy improvements at all our buildings where we can. There are costs we can’t control–like the price of fuel. But we’re certainly trying to save where we can.

Patch: If the levy passes in November, that raises the amount spent, per pupil, from $7,500 to more than $7,700 for education. Is that too steep? At what point is enough really enough?

Behle: We’re still getting a pretty good deal here. St. Michael-Albertville is spending far less than the state average per pupil, but our achievement is in the top 20 percent. (See attached chart, provided by the District). Elk River, for example, spends more per student. Monticello spends about $1,000 per pupil more than our district as well.

Patch: What part of this proposal do people struggle with the most? Is it ?

Behle: That’s part of it. What this operations levy increase covers is replacing old technology. We’re not giving every student an iPad. That’s just not something we can do as a district. The cost, plus the overall management of that– checking devices out, making sure no extra applications are downloaded, all of that–would be a logistical nightmare. So, no, that’s not an option. We’re looking at replacing some of our older computers, specifically at Big Woods, which has some of the older machines in the district. That’s about $300,000 of the $1.2 million raised by this levy. There would be some servers that we could also replace and renewal of some software licenses as well, allowing us to continue to use that software for our kids.

Patch: Why not wait to raise the levy in year 10, or 2014, as mandated? We’d have to vote at that point anyway, right?

Behle: We project our budgets out, so it’s something we’d like to do before we reach the end. We’re going to be deficit spending next year with the current levy. Even with the increase proposed, there’s a strong chance of deficit spending in 2015, or the third year of the new levy, according to our projections. But it raises enough money to keep us from borrowing.

Patch: What happens if it fails? Obviously, the current levy keeps going, but would the district be in trouble without this?

Behle: The district is very much financially sound. That is something people should know. We’re operating with a balanced budget. We’re not deficit spending now. But, yes, there would be prjoected cuts if it would fail. We’re looking at more than a million dollar deficit by 2013-2014, and possibly $3.6 million in 2015-2016. When you’re talking about a $40 million budget, that’s a significant shortfall. And when you get into the $1 million area you’re talking classroom teacher reductions at that point in time.

Patch: And that adds more kids to each classroom, which is something parents don’t necessarily like to see.

Behle: Right. We’re adding more to our class sizes now. Not necessarily because we have fewer teachers this year, but because our enrollment is increasing at a pace that we can’t add the proportional full-time-equivalent of teachers. We’ve been able to keeps our sizes down at the lower grades, but you can see at the fourth, fifth and sixth grade level the class sizes begin to get a bit larger.

Patch: But this levy doesn’t’ really address that, either?

Behle: The state per-pupil money mostly controls staff numbers.