1. Budget Committee’s Proposed Budget Oxford Hills School District FY 2014

2. Local Control? Items We Have No Control Over in the Budget Process State Property Valuations Minimum required local share Special education programming & funding laws Cost sharing between district towns Vocational budget Fixed costs (health insurance 11% increase, fuel) Governor’s proposed budget (loss of revenue sharing & shift of retirement costs to local budget)

3. What is not in the budget? Does not address large class sizes ($725,000) Does not include the local share of approved Revolving Renovation Fund projects ($81,000 / year for 10 years) Continues to defer maintenance (paving, roofs $923,828 etc.) Other needs not met as submitted by cost center managers $2,976,000

4. What is in the budget? $1.1 million increase (2%) in expenditures $150,000 Replacement of portable space at the middle school $419,000 for teacher retirement $350,000 in negotiated salary increase $438,000 in health insurance cost increases -$250,000 in various reductions Maintains existing programming  (5 th 6 th grades at WP and Otisfield attend at Paris and Oxford  (Waterford pre-K – 2 nd, Harrison 3 – 6)

5. Budget Committee’s Proposed Budget Based on Governor’s Proposed Budget RevenueBudget Committee's Proposed BudgetFY 2014 updated 3/21/13 FY 2013 FY 2014Inc (Dec)% Inc (Dec) Carry Over$1,041,619$923,000-$118,619-11.39% State Subsidy$16,982,024$16,715,665-$266,359-1.57% Federal Stabilization Funds$0 Federal Jobs Bill$0 Other$182,278$192,500$10,2225.61% Local Allocation EPS Local Allocation$16,956,682$18,058,866$1,102,1846.50% Additional Funds$0 Total Local Costs$16,956,682$18,058,866$1,102,1846.50% Total Revenues$35,162,603$35,890,031$727,4282.07% Projected Expenses $35,890,031.33 2.07%

6. Assessments based on Changes in Property Values Only FY 2013% of TotalFY 2014Increase AssessmentFY 2013Total (Decrease) Harrison 3,571,40721.06% $3,553,364 $(18,043)-0.51% Hebron 587,7343.47% $582,035 $(5,699)-0.97% Norway 3,153,44718.60% $3,083,097 $(70,350)-2.23% Otisfield 1,912,52311.28% $1,974,911 $62,3883.26% Oxford 2,883,10317.00% $2,907,010 $23,9070.83% Paris 2,371,39213.99% $2,434,283 $62,8912.65% Waterford 1,792,18110.57% $1,747,862 $(44,319)-2.47% West Paris 684,8954.04% $674,120 $(10,775)-1.57% Total $16,956,682100.00% $16,956,682 $-0.00%

7. Assessment Budget Committee’s Proposed Budget

8. Minimum Mill Rate Requirement

9. State Subsidy by Town FY 2009 - FY 2014 FY 09FY 10FY 11FY 12FY 13 Harrison992,570769,916336,04800 Hebron1,493,1491,441,4371,420,8281,470,4841,558,890 Norway4,086,3124,106,1403,959,2924,088,5624,081,821 Otisfield941,218946,486657,499510,189536,983 Oxford3,769,4463,531,9583,312,1582,943,8443,234,701 Paris5,655,7615,301,8785,180,2384,953,9185,221,460 Waterford1,113,2881,032,112657,031419,482196,874 West Paris2,121,3432,264,6502,279,3042,150,7082,154,120 Total20,173,08719,394,57717,802,39916,537,18516,984,849

10. Six Year History  The proposed budget is $186,914 less than the approved budget for FY 2009 and $622,297 less than the approved budget for FY 2010.  State subsidy is $3,457,422 less than it was in 2009, and we no longer have any federal ARRA funds to offset the loss.  Local assessments have increased $2,804,793 since 2009. The total increase is 18% or an average of 3.68% per year.

11. Six Year History

12. How far under EPS Will We be based on the proposed budget?

13. History of Being Under EPS

14. Minimum Mill Rate Projection

15. The Largest School Systems in FY 2012-2013

16. Regional Comparison of Over/Under EPS - FY 2013

17. Per Pupil Spending 2012 MSAD #17 ranks 202 out of 220 school systems in per pupil spending. 92% of school systems in the state spend more per pupil. Of the 25 largest school systems in the state, MSAD #17 ranks 24 th in per pupil spending. District’s enrollment has remained flat while statewide enrollments are declining.

18. Regional Comparison of Per Pupil Spending If MSAD #17 spent the state average amount per student, the budget would be $5,844,300 higher.

19. Minimum Mill Rate Analysis

20. State Valuation Analysis

21. Key Considerations How we got here ?  Three years of flat assessments, while district property valuations increased. How do we fix it?  District submitted and testified on behalf of LD 367  We are planning for a “ramp up” to the required minimum share What happens if we don’t fix it?  Potential loss of state funding that would be redistributed to other school districts.

22. Local Strengths Strong partnerships with Community Concepts, Healthy Oxford Hills, Education Exchange, Stephens Memorial Hospital, and many business partners Supportive community One of the largest scholarship foundations in Maine with more than $7 million endowed and over $500,000 in scholarships awarded annually Adequate facilities Committed, experienced, long serving staff The only comprehensive high school model providing integrated academic, technical, and college experiences

23. Efficient AND Effective O $151,000 in energy costs saved in FY 2013 through performance contracting O Grants O Innovations, interventions and enrichment activities are being supported through grants large and small (PEP, 21 st Century, Fruit & Vegetable Grant, and many more) O School wide title programs have maximized the use of our federal resources O Active and Supportive Boosters groups, PTAs and PTOs

24. Efficient AND Effective O Graduation Rates O Increased each of the last three years (69% to 86%) O One of only 14 schools in the state that graduated 100% of its students not considered economically disadvantaged O Technical Programming O Only truly comprehensive high school in Maine O 45% of students participate in technical school programs O Student Achievement O 5 elementary schools had grade levels that showed 10% to 31% increases in students meeting reading and math standards O 37 students received KVAC all academic honors O Girls ski team won the KVAC Class A title O Overall GPA for student athletes was 3.2 O 20+ Students selected for District II Music Festival 7-12 O 430+ students participate in band, orchestra, chorus grades 7 – 12 O Adult Education Program serves 900+ students per year

25. Next Steps April 2 - 25 Preliminary Budget Hearings May 1Budget Committee meets to review feedback from preliminary hearings and recommends a budget to the Board of Directors May 6Board of Directors adopts a budget June 6Budget Hearing and Budget Meeting June 11Budget Validation Referendum www.sad17.k12.me.uswww.sad17.k12.me.us Click on the budget link on the left of the home page.