The Waterloo School Board saw its first meeting of the Budget Task Force on Thursday, with a group of district employees, community members and board members beginning their talks about the school district’s budget and tax levy.

Discussion was largely explanatory, with folks on the board establishing their goals and running through some fundamentals concerning the makeup of the school district’s budget and tax levy.

Folks on the task force representing the district include Waterloo Junior High School Principal Justin Imm, guidance counselor Robert Lohman, technology media specialist Amber Cruser, WJHS teacher Holly Garrett and WHS teacher Julie Nold.

From the community are Ashley Beeler, Russ Thomas, Mitch North, Lloyd Jarden and Bryan Myers.

Waterloo School Board Secretary Amanda Propst and Nathan Mifflin – who originally proposed the task force in December – are serving as the board’s representatives, though school board president Lori Dillenberger was also present Thursday.

Mifflin opened the meeting by thanking those members present for volunteering to assist with the effort to study the district’s budget and potentially reduce the upcoming tax levy as much as possible.

He also responded to criticisms expressed at the latest school board meeting by board members Jodi Burton and John Caupert, who mainly spoke against Mifflin proposing the idea unbeknownst to most of the board.

“I feel like since the last board meeting, the conversation on this task force has been a little controversial, and I don’t mean this to be controversial,” Mifflin said. “What I really want is an opportunity for staff members and board members and community members, along with the superintendent, to be able to collectively work together and potentially see if we can ask for a little bit less money when it comes to our tax levy.”

Mifflin further reiterated a sentiment he had previously expressed in December, saying he isn’t looking for proposals to cut district spending in a way that would affect the classroom or student activity.

“I don’t mean by doing anything that would negatively impact teachers or students in any way,” Mifflin said. “I am not suggesting that we look at salaries or jobs or anything like that. That is not what I’m talking about whatsoever. That is off the table.”

After introductions among the group, Mifflin spoke about how he previously noted the district is requesting a levy 8-9 percent greater than last year’s, with that levy itself having requested 11-12 percent more in tax revenue from the year prior.

From there, he learned about the levy abatement process, allowing a taxing body to reduce its levy after it has been submitted.

While even slightly reducing the roughly $26 million levy is the ultimate goal of the task force, Mifflin noted that finding no room for a reduction is also a perfectly fine outcome.

“I would say that if we do this and we don’t find anything, that’s almost the best scenario,” Mifflin said. “That means everything we’re spending is right where it needs to be. That means everything we’re asking from the community is right where it needs to be. And I think it’s still a win because we can show the community that we tried to really take our due diligence and take an extra step.”

Much of the conversation that followed centered around how the tax levy and district budget are developed each year, with Waterloo Superintendent of Schools Brian Charron offering a thorough rundown.

Charron spoke about how the budget for each year is developed and ultimately approved around September each year, with the board approving the tax levy for the school year months prior in December.

District administration and the board, then, are left doing a lot of guesswork trying to anticipate how much the district will be able to receive based on the county’s equalized assessed valuation, with about 76 percent of district revenue coming from local property taxes.

“That is for revenue that is for next year’s budget,” Charron said. “When we file that levy, we don’t know what the value of property is. We are taking guesses at it unless the county officials communicate with the school superintendents and other taxing bodies about what trends we’re seeing. We don’t receive a lot of information, so we look at trends of what’s been happening with EAV in the community.”

As the district requests funds months in advance of the school year those taxes will be paying for, this leaves plenty more guessing to do when it comes to covering all of the district’s needs.

“There are just things that are out of our control that are in this budget,” Charron said. “I’ve prided myself since becoming superintendent in 2014 that we prepare a budget, I would say it’s a conservative budget. We try to predict every possible expenditure that we might face, and we try to only count on the revenue that we trust we’re gonna get.”

The matter can be further complicated when the time comes for collective bargaining between the district and staff union representation, as Charron said.

“I know our board’s gonna wanna look our teachers in the eye in mid-June and be generous, but we can’t give money that we don’t have,” Charron said.

Providing an overview of the district’s budgetary funds, Charron noted the education fund covers a tremendous range of district needs from teacher salaries to food, operations and maintenance handles upkeep and utilities, debt service is for paying off district bonds, the capital fund is for permanent facility improvements or additions and the tort fund for legal or insurance fees.

There is also the health and life safety fund that goes toward building renovations which require approval at the regional and state level and the working cash fund which effectively serves as the district’s savings as well as the more straightforward transportation fund and Illinois Municipal Retirement Fund.

Among these funds, education earns a maximum $2.19 per $100 of EAV. The O&M fund has a $0.50 max, transportation is maxed at $0.20, H/LS has a $0.05 max and working cash has a $0.05 max.

The IMRF, debt service, capital and tort funds each have no maximum, with the district levying whatever funds it requires to, for example, pay off any existing legal fees.

While later discussion further covered budget specifics and the irregularity of state funds, local EAV and district expenses, one particularly large topic of conversation was the state of Waterloo’s education fund.

It was noted among the task force that the education fund has struggled in recent years, requiring substantial support with transfers from the working cash fund.

These issues have arisen even with the $2.19 maximum – approved by voters in 2006 – which was indicated to be much higher than many other districts, in no small part due to the Waterloo Community School District No. 5’s push to catch up to and remain competitive with other districts’ teacher salaries.

Jarden, one of the more vocal members of the task force on Thursday, briefly remarked on the possibility of increasing this rate as it is the most important fund in the budget but still seems to be struggling.

“We’re currently overspending the ed fund versus what we’re allowed to put in,” Jarden said. “We’re here to cut, but I’m hearing we’re overspending the salaries of teachers, the most expensive, the most critical to the district, that we’re overspending the area that’s most important, and we can’t forecast where that’s even going because we’ve got a negotiation coming up.”

Among the discussion, Cruser was also among those present to offer some input, briefly reiterating concerns about any potential cuts that might wind up impacting regular district activity.

“Over all these years, we have made cuts in different places, and I’m not saying there’s not room for more cuts, but I think that there’s just an anxiety because we think almost everything does come back to the classroom or does come back to staff,” Cruser said. “I think it’s great we’re looking at it, but I do think it’s important while we’re doing that to make sure we know what repercussions does that have, who does that affect.”

The meeting adjourned as task force members were encouraged to review budget documents – one roughly 90 pages long and another more detailed version stretching to about 600 pages – for the next meeting, which took place Tuesday evening.

Additional task force meetings are planned for the next few weeks, with one set for Wednesday Feb. 25 at 6:30 p.m. in the Waterloo High School library

Read more on Tuesday’s meeting in next week’s issue of the Republic-Times.