LIBERTY

LIBERTY-BENTON LOCAL SCHOOL

FEBRUARY DISTRICT BOARD REPORT

DENNIS L. RECKER, SUPERINTENDENT

I continually address not only our levels of intellectual growth of students in the elementary and middle schools, but show how this leads to higher expected levels of performance. The highlight of this information is when our students then exceed even their expected levels of performance in the areas of English, Reading, Social Studies, Math and Science. For the past 12 years, we’ve had actual academic achievement improve at a rate 50% greater than expected, based on the published results of the group testing results.

Of these children tested, we see that between 76-80% of the individual students in each class meet or exceed their expected performance levels.

We’ve been able to now look at ACT data and get the same type of reports for our seniors. ACT is able to predict, based upon coursework taken and grades received, the percentage of students who test below, at, or above their expected levels at the college level. This research was first requested by us for the class of 2001. Note the following performance trends:

Class of 2001 Above Expected Below Expected

English 14% 24%

Math 6% 14%

Reading 12% 22%

Science 8% 14%

Class of 2003 Above Expected Below Expected

English 16% 6%

Math 28% 6%

Reading 22% 6%

Science 16% 3%

Class of 2004 Above Expected Below Expected

English 22% 10%

Math 20% 0%

Reading 24% 7%

Science 12% 0%

This pattern of performance leads me to believe that our ability to improve students performance to this high level is not a matter of change, or “good class” versus “not-so-good class” of students, but is a systemic condition now in place, based on our level of instruction and our expectation of students participating in the most rigorous program they are able to handle.

Please read the two studies enclosed regarding Full-Day versus Half-Day Kindergarten in Ohio plus the impact of tangible personal property taxes in the future. The Kindergarten study praises what we’ve done for our children, but the tax study predicts we’ll be eliminating this program or be asking our community to provide additional funding. This makes me wonder, if we must all learn to do more with less, why don’t we simply not give anyone any money and all our needs would be met because everyone would be required to provide everything at no cost. If doing more with less is the ultimate long term goal, the “ultimate”, rationally, must be to do everything for nothing. All kidding aside, we are the highest performing school for the least cost per pupil. Sometimes L-B should also be recognized for its effectiveness as well as its performance. (Item A)
The question was posed at the last board meeting regarding the improved performance of our student from 5^th to 7^th grade, as to whether this was because of “better” students becoming a part of the L-B school system. From grade 5 to 7, we picked up 16 new students. For these 16 students, the SAS in grade 7 was 101.90. Since the entire 7^th grade had an average of 106.6, if the 16 scores were separated from the aggregate of scores, the SAS increases to an average of 107.6 for students who are long term attendees, which bears out an even stronger level of performance.

Our new additions to L-B are doing very well, with 75% of these students exceeding their expected levels of performance, as compared to the 77% of long term students exceeding their expected levels of performance. The long term trend is that for 80% of our students, the longer they attend here the more significant their academic gains. Our new students, based on our performance history, should excel in terms of academic growth.

At the time of actual testing, the 7^th grade performed at 9^th grade, 1^st month level. The newest additions performed in the aggregate, at 8^th grade, 8^th month. Separating the long term attendees, shows those students performing at an average of 9^th grade, 2^nd month, with an expected performance level of 8^th grade, 4^th month.

As an entire class, the seventh grade tested in 7^th grade, second month, performed at 9^th grade, first month, sharing a performance 8 months greater than what was expected of them, yet also performing 1 year and 9months greater than the typical 7 grade student.

Also, our students are being compared to an Iowa Test of Basic Skills norm group, which is the most rigorous of groups to be compared against.

I was able to have a personal meeting January 18 with Dick Maxwell, the State of Ohio’s “authority” on school funding. He was the person I originally met with when we were the first Ohio school to utilize the 20 mil floor, emergency issue, and income tax funding back-drop to maintain fiscal stability over time. It’s been eleven years without a voted increase in taxes, and we still have a 4 month cash balance. This is nearly unheard of in Ohio schools today. I’d asked if any other district has this type of “track record” and I was told that there is none that comes to mind.

As a board of education, we need to be aware of potential problems that may impact our district.

The singular upcoming event yet to happen is my reference earlier to the passage of a TEL or

TABOR amendment.

I’m enclosing information on this amendment which gives both sides of the issue, along with the

text of the proposed amendment. The articles by “Coalition for Ohio’s Future”, “Coalition on

Homelessness and Housing in Ohio” are the “con” perspectives and the “Citizens for Tax

Reform” are the “pro” perspective. An “analysis” of how this would impact us is provided in the

article by John R. Corlett, Senior Fellow, the Center for Community Solutions.

All of this makes for interesting reading, but we need to be pre-emptive in our decisions regarding local school funding, because if and when this becomes law, we will be impacted.

What makes this so surreal is that we’ve created a funding system locally that is balanced, fair,

and has had the desired effect of lowering reliance on property tax. (Item B)

I met with Mr. Maxwell because of the future we face from a fiscal standpoint. We have a number of unknowns in terms of revenue losses to tangible personal property and the implications of statewide Commercial Activities Tax (CAT). While the claim is made that we have a “hold harmless” mechanism, frankly there will be no reimbursement if there is no money, especially since any new amendment will “trump” current law.

Add to this equation the possibility of an amendment to the Ohio constitution to restrict government spending, ala Colorado’s Tax Expenditure Limitation (TEL) initiative, and we face some difficult financial times. (Colorado just voted to suspend their law for five years, due to the destructive consequences of the law.) Since people vote on emotion more so than “reason”, I believe that this amendment will become law, and that schools will be especially “hard hit”.

For this reason, we need to again “look ahead’. My belief is that the existing tax issues “in place” as of 1-1-07 will remain, and become the “baseline” for future increases or reductions in tax revenue. This is an assumption, because if the amendment passes, companion legislation will need to be created, with retro-active implications on our actual funding levels. While the impact is an unknown, it will probably be detrimental to our overall financial picture, given the history of other states.

Therefore, we should seriously consider “re-establishing” an income stream based on a “new” baseline for Liberty-Benton that will sustain us for up to eight to ten years. At that time, the “devastation” that could well affect other governmental bodies will not affect us as badly, and we could, “to a point”, make ourselves somewhat immune to the negative consequences other taxing entities will experience.

While we’ve been excellent stewards of the districts’ finances, our current “blessing” of a cash balance becomes a “curse” overnight. As the cash balance dwindles, we need more revenues to make up the loss. The problem is that is the new law comes into place, we’ll be hit even harder because we’ve not passed any additional operational issues the past eleven years and the ability to pass new revenues will become nearly impossible if the legislation is as destructive as we are being told.

Also, when you look at the five year forecast, you see expenditure increase of 0.5% (1/2 of one percent) for FY03 and 0.1% (one tenth of one percent) for FY05. This shows that we made some significant reductions that prolong the life of our cash balance.

If we do anything to keep us solvent, any tax issue will need to be done this calendar year. As an FYI, I was toying with the possibility of a 2.5-3.5 mil emergency issue for 3 years, to expire with our current emergency issue, and then renew them as one issue 3 years hence. The other part would be an additional .25% on income for 4 years, which would then be renewed with our current .75% issue. This combined method of property tax and income tax would provide an additional $700,000 per year.

Based on our current 5 year forecast, our projected balance of $730,740 in FY 2010, would end up being a positive balance of $2,300,000 by putting the above in place. In theory, this would protect us until FY2012, based on current “numbers”. However, this timeline could be shorter if ours state aid is reduced.

The “strength” of this theory is that it places us in a stronger financial position relative to other schools. If we linger too long, with a projected shortfall of 1.065 million in FY08, not only do we face the equivalent of a 7 mil tax issue, but a “law of the land” that will not allow us to even pass this type of issue.

As time passes, we tend to lose sight of what has actually occurred. We find ourselves becoming higher performing academically and more “cost effective” over time, based on our relative wealth as a district.

For example, in FY1996, we collected $1,330,615 in real estate taxes for school operation. At $77,218 per mil, we paid 17.23 mils for actual operation.

In FY 2005, we collected $2,284,063 in real estate and public utility taxes for school operation. At $150,000 per mil, we paid 15.23 mils for actual operation.

Now, in FY1996, add $768,664 for our emergency issue, at $77,218 per mil, equals an equivalency of 9.95 mils. Therefore, 17.23 + 9.95=27.18 mils for our overall operational costs.

Next, in FY2005, we collected $747,130 for our emergency issue. At $150,000 per mil, this is an equivalent of 4.98 mils. Therefore 15.23 + 4.98 = 20.21 mils for our overall operational costs.

This is how my “theory” which was implemented in 1992, has “panned out” for the district.

I’m in contact with our county auditor and treasurer to discuss what I believe to be our “next step” to remaining solvent, in the face of some devastating legislation.

Anyways, as we plan for the future, we will probably need to make some decision this calendar year of 2006, which have implications for 2012.

With the national and international concern of a potential pandemic of avian flu, the Hancock County and Findlay City health departments must create a plan, in conjunction with the emergency management agency, law enforcement, and those who can provide the necessary conditions for mass immunization. LBHS is a primary site, and I’m working with these agencies to utilize our facility, if needed. The goal is to immunize all county and city residents with a 72 hour “window”.

Given a mindset of “when” rather than “if”, we provide a service to benefit our fellow man, and to help protect our community.

With the various funding sources, we need to see where our dollars come from locally, the level of taxpayer “effort”, our total school income on a similar value metric, which we use as a mil of value, and our total expenditure, in terms of mil “equivalency”. We then need to see how we “stack up” with our fellow schools. What is fun about this is how this “blows up” the theory of economy of scale. Note the following for FY2006:

Dollar Value Local Income includes Real Estate Tax Total Income Total Expenditures

Per Mil Personal Tangible, School Income Tax All Sources

$67,550 Arcadia $2,427,250=35.9 mils $5,149,066=76.2 mils $4,817,690=71.3 mils

$59,734 Arlington $1,875,300=31.4 mils $5,144,693=86.1 mils $5,139,351=86.0 mils

$76,098 Cory-Rawson $2,477,416=32.6 mils $5,441,247=71.5 mils $5,510,781=72.4 mils

$857,618 Findlay $29,050,214=33.9 mils $52,675,023=61.4 mils $53,565,087=62.5 mils

$155,184 Liberty-Benton $4,761,288=30.7 mils $10,520,627=67.79 mils $10,667,124=68.7 mils

$80,073 McComb $2,523,266=31.5 mils $6,063,679=75.73 mils $6,300,998=78.7 mils

$232,244 Van Buren $6,043,655=26.0 mils $7,561,455=32.6 mils $7,522,031=32.4 mils

$27,156 Vanlue $918,603=33.8 mils $2,733,849=100.7 mils $2,768,387=101.9 mils

Of the eight schools, L-B ranks 7^th in locally generated revenue in terms of local taxpayer

support, 6^th in the amount of total income on an equivalent millage basis, and 6^th in the amount of

expenditure on an equivalent millage basis. On January 23, 2006 Findlay City’s board realized

the need for an additional 2.5 mils, which would now place them at 33.9 + 2.5=36.4 mils in

“local share” cost.

Valuation Per Pupil = Total District Value divided by State Formula ADM (Tax Base per pupil)

Arcadia - $123,148

Arlington - $94,846

Cory-Rawson - $108,541

Findlay City - $140,254

Liberty-Benton - $116,894

McComb - $106,360

Van Buren - $243,664

Vanlue - $95,700

Total Cost per pupil for 2004-05, based on actual forecast data and EMIS student count:

*Arcadia $4,363,044 divided by 513.52 = $8496.35 per pupil

Arlington $4,894,881 divided by 648.1 = $7552.66 per pupil

*Cory-Rawson $5,467,602 divided by 695.09 = $7866.03 per pupil

**Findlay City $51,052,791 divided by 5815.85 = $8778.22 per pupil

Liberty-Benton $9,836,585 divided by 1335.3 = $7366.57 per pupil

*McComb $5,782,496 divided by 765.62 = $7552.20 per pupil

*Van Buren $7,085,270 divided by 912.93 = $7761.02 per pupil

*Vanlue $2,690,317 divided by 316.4 = $8502.90 per pupil

Findlay City/

Hancock County Avg $91,172,986 divided by 11,002.86 = $8286.30 per pupil

To be average with the county, L-B needed to spend an additional $919.73 per pupil, or an

additional $1,228,115 for the 2004-05 school year.

*Those schools passing additional tax issues in calendar year 2004 and/or 2005

**This school passed a needed 4.9 issue in 2004 and needs additional 2.5 mil issue in 2006

Having been given the relative financial health of L-B, the basis for our financial stability to

date, and our cash balance now being our “safety net’ in the short term, plus the potential danger

of never being able to generate adequate resources, we need to see “where we stand in terms of hypothetical “days of cash” relative to the other county schools, six of which have passed additional operating issues the past two years.

Taking line 5.05 of the 5 year forecast, FY2007, and dividing by 260 days, gives us a projected daily cost. Dividing this projected daily cost into line 10.01 Fund balance, produces our “days of reserve”.

How do we compare county wide for the upcoming 2007 fiscal year?

School Daily Cost Fund Balance Days cash Months cash

Arcadia $19,709 $577,755 29 1.4

Arlington $20,540 $3,092,814 150 7.0

Cory Rawson $22,019 $54,631 2 0.1

Findlay $213,715 $(509,654) -2 -0.1

L-B $43,106 $4,623,866 107 5.0

McComb $25,694 $155,743 6 -0.3

Van Buren $30,496 $1,888,760 62 2.9

Vanlue $11,004 $63,735 6 0.3

The history of past issues in other schools shows that if you get to deficit spending, without changing course by either increased revenues or reductions (if possible), it is nearly impossible to regain a stable financial position.

Again, my belief is that we need to try to maintain a balance equivalent to 120 days cash, but that’s just me.

When I came “on board” in 1990, we had a projected daily cash balance of less than two days, if memory serves me, for fiscal year 1992. We were able to create a funding plan, which thankfully the board supported, which has allowed us not have a voted tax increase since 1994. (First collected in 1995.)

Lisa Dobbins has done a tremendous job in her tenure with us. We need to review our earlier history of the 90’s and the future impact of inaction. We have the ability to protect the district another six to eight years, if we choose to, and if our voters approve.

If you get a chance, read the enclosed January 7 “Lima News” article. This shows how the “timing” of tax issues is so critical. In Lima’s case, the additional emergency issue, tied in with a sub -20 mil floor, led to a doubling of their anticipated real estate tax burden.

In L-B’s case, given the same “apparent” scenario, our real estate tax dedicated for school purposes actually decreased. The reason is our emergency issue “went on the books” when we were at an effective millage rate of 22 mils. For us to continue this trend, that is why we’ll need to address adding a small issue in the near future. Today, we are just at the equivalent total of 24 mils.

Another huge difference between L-B and Lima is that we receive less than 50% of our costs in state funding while Lima receives 70% of their revenues in state funding.

The long term funding implication for us is that the small increase we ask for could allow us another 8-10 years of seeing our local taxes for school purposes decrease, rather than hitting the “floor”, with no “offset”, which would then have the effect of automatic tax increases, similar to Lima and other schools. (Item C)

Much of our responsibility for our school is not just in approving recommendations for hiring and operations, but to provide a solid future for the children of our school district. We are only 2 of eight Hancock County Schools that have not had to request additional operating revenues the past two years. We've not VOTED any additional support since 1994.

We requested an additional 3.3 mils in 2004, because we had over a $75,000 deficit, but this issue was not approved. We followed up by eliminating costs, rather than re-submitting the issue to the voters. We had a projected deficit of $217,897, for FY05 but through the cost reductions we implemented, were able to increase our balance for fiscal year 2005.

As I look into the future, however, I am concerned that we’ll face some difficult financial times due to statewide legislation and/or a constitutional amendment which would even further restrict our ability to generate operational funding.

I met with our county auditor and treasurer for nearly two hours on January 26 to present a scenario that would protect Liberty-Benton in the future. They now see my idea as sound, rational, and pre-emptive, as a way to protect the district.

The board has a great deal of responsibility and accompanying authority in maintaining a viable school. I believe, from the previous information in this report, that one could rationally argue that we are spendthrifts and foolish in our expenditures. We have the highest levels of performance for the “best price”.

I’m asking that we consider protecting Liberty-Benton for up to the next six to eight years by implementing a financial structure that “blunts” the impact of a constitutional amendment. I say this because the facts show us able to provide our constituents a stable collection or actual reduction in real estate taxes paid for local school purposes. This was made possible by our actions in 1992.

We need to look at another “course of action” for 2006 to maintain our ability to provide the high quality of education we now have at L-B.

Consider the following course of action. Since we are projected at having expenses 1.06 million dollars greater than income for FY08, we increase our school income tax by 0.25%. This would provide, over an estimated revenue stream of a bit over $300,000 per year. Since full collection takes 18 months to occur, that would lower our “deficit spending” by nearly $450,000 based on Lisa’s prospectus. This 0.25% would be for a period of 4 years, “piggy-backing” on our current 0.75% income tax issue. We could then renew, if you choose to do so, a 1%, eight year issue in 2010.

The other phase is to vote for a 3 year period, an emergency tax issue in the range of 3 to 3.5 mils. However, we would not ask for collection on this until we need it. Our current emergency issue, voted on at 9.8 mils, collects at 4.39 mils. Because we’d vote dollars, the new issue would also decrease as a millage value. I could see us not having to ask for this revenue until FY08 or FY09. Three years from now, we’d take the 4.39 + 3.5 mil issues, and vote those as one issue for a 5 year period in 2009. We also will have had a triennial update, so in all likelihood the millage rate needed would drop further.

This is crucial because we may find ourselves unable to vote any substantially needed revenues due to the upcoming amendment. Even though we, as a school district, have protected our children and our local constituents, this statewide action could prove devastating to us. This action I’m asking for consideration protects the children, protects our ability to remain solvent, and puts the local school in a position to control, to a point, its financial destiny.

I asked the board of education to do this type of “funding scheme” in 1994. We passed a 7.6 mil bond issue, but collected only 2.3 mils. We then replaced the difference as we retired old debt. This is similar in nature. Again, this will work.

Lori McDaniel, elementary teacher is requesting leave of absence. (Item D)
Enclosed are copies of “The Board”. (Item E)
Enclosed is a newsletter from elementary and middle school teachers. (Item F)
Enclosed is updated directory information. (Item G)
Enclosed is a copy of the Fulbright Report on Jose Martinez. (Item H)
Enclosed is a copy of a study of the power of data to improve student achievement. (Item I)

____________________________________________________________________________________

In one of my readings, I came across this article from Southwest Airlines. (Item J)
Accompanying this is a significant study of students performing well in college when comparing Advanced Placement programs to “home-grown” rigor. Not only is this enlightening, it makes one more appreciative of what we currently have in place. The results shown are what I’ve been saying for years, but this third party 2005 research project makes our perspective even more credible. (Item K)
Since we are, superintendent and as a board, responsible for policy development at the local level, we end up crafting policies that mirror state and/or federal law. Pay close attention to the listed “10 Essential Elements of a Longitudinal Data System”. I say this because at L-B, we’ve been doing longitudinal studies for the past 12 years.

Of these “10 Essential Elements”, we have addressed item 2, Student-lead enrollment, demographic and program participation. As students enter our system, we can get a baseline performance on them and then measure their progress, the same as we do for our native population. This is part of item 3, matching test records to measure academic growth. We do this bi-ennually due to cost restrictions, using the Iowa Test of Basic Skills (ITBS) and CoGat. This bears our attention because there is a statewide movement among different constituencies to create a value-added model requiring one testing instrument.

We do track college-readiness based on historical data to craft the needed coursework and program alignment to ensure student success, if they participate in the coursework (the class of 2003 has the second best public school performance in Ohio).

Of these 10 “essentials”, L-B is “cutting-edge” on items 2, 3, 6, and 7. Item 4 is irrelevant because we test all children. Item 8 is “interesting” because even though we have “graduation rates” of 96%, we hit the 99-100% range within two years because we work with our “drop-outs” to complete their high school graduation requirements.

All the other items, 1, 5, 9, and 10, are state and/or federal tracking modalities.

I met with Batelle Institute and Gates Foundation representatives on February 1^st and shared our L-B data to date. Their response was that they wanted to “work with us”, but that we scrap all our work to date and use what they want to use to determine “value-added”. Frankly, our data is stronger, more understandable, and meets all the criteria being proposed. We do not have the “man-power” or financial resources to “departmentalize” this as one of our functions. It is something I do week-ends, and nights to give us a map of our academic progress to date. This is why I’m seeking grant funding to help in putting a person in this role. (Item L)

17. Demographics play a part in student performance. Standard of living is a factor in student

learning, in that there is a realization that the higher the level of education, the greater the chance

for economic opportunity. There is a “shift” occurring. L-B used to have (1994), less than 4% of our children termed economically disadvantaged. We are now at 8.6% (2005) in this category. What makes me proud of our children and community is that even though this percentage increases, our academic performance improves, which is contrary to conventional thought. Per Standard and Poors research, the local schools “break-out” this way in terms of economically disadvantaged:

Arcadia 9.0%

Arlington 9.5%

Cory-Rawson 5.0%

L-B 8.6%

McComb 20.4%

Van Buren 5%

Vanlue 13.7%

Findlay City 27.2%

Looking at other high performing districts, we get the following economically disadvantaged rates:

Jennings 5.6%

Ottoville 4.6%

Ottawa Hills 0%

Miller City 0%

This helps provide us a “frame of reference”, and should provide us a sense of pride in our academic achievement. (Item M)

If you received your “OSBA Briefcase”, you’ll notice a request for presenters at next years OSBA Capital Conference. If you don’t mind, I’d like to have us conduct a presentation this fall on Instruction and Student Achievement. Trust me, we have plenty to share. Who’s willing to participate?

Also, I’d like each principal to nominate one of their programs for the Student Achievement Fair. We’ll be “running up” a mileage bill and feeding the kids, but this might be a great opportunity to showcase what we are about as a school.

In one week, the accompanying articles appeared in the Toledo Blade regarding Patrick Henry, Archbold, Woodmore, and Edgerton Schools, all seeking additional revenues. All, except Edgerton, are equivalent to us in size, with similar demographics. Every one of these schools needs between 9 and 13 mils to remain solvent.

My “theory” for Liberty-Benton, if put into practice, would protect us for the next six years (at least), for half the cost. If we wait two years, we face an identical situation as these other schools face, with a much higher cost to the taxpayer. But wait, if we have a new constitutional amendment that doesn’t allow us to increase costs, we “live within our means”, which simply means cut costs (programs and staff). The truth is our costs are already significantly below the state and county average, and our academic performance the best.

We are “under the gun” because for my theory to work, all parts of the plan must be in place before the end of this calendar year. Again, what I’m looking at is not school year 2006-07 (next year), but school year 2012-13, or further. If we fail to act, the results, in my estimation, will be tragic. The week of February 13^th saw Liberty-Center having to seek an increase of school sales tax in the amount of ¾%. On February 15, North Baltimore voted to seek a 1.5% income tax and a millage replacement, equaling an additional 4.1 mils. (Item N)

We’ve provided quite an advantage to the L-B community in terms of early childhood learning. One of my children was considering sending their child to kindergarten next year, seeking an all day, every day program. Since L-B is the only public school around that provides this, the alternative was a parochial setting. Tuition costs for their all day kindergarten is $1800, versus the $1300 for regular tuition in other grades. Again, this opportunity being provided our children at local expense is a rarity. What is even more interesting is that the state determines our tuition rate.

Now for the clincher. A tuition paying kindergarten student at L-B this year (all day, everyday) would have been $1922. When you build in state subsidies to parochial education, we find that our collected revenues are nearly identical. I just found this to be an interesting fiscal point. Also, if we experience a decline in kindergarten population, our tuition rate would be highly competitive. The only obvious advantage to the parochial setting for some parents is the church-based setting, in my opinion.

Enclosed are the 2005 1^st half policy adjustments advised by NEOLA. (Item O)
This is an “extra” update for the month because we need the time to review upcoming policies for consideration at our next board meeting.

Enclosed is “The Board”. (Item P)
We have an urgent issue to deal with. We received a billing for a special needs child from another county. I protested the charge and asked for court relief but was informed that for special needs children, the district of residence for the parent is required to pay these costs. Technically, since the ROC is in L-B, we are responsible for paying the costs of the resident’s special needs children’s education. I tried to get our own court to intervene, but they chose not to. As counties and schools “feel the financial pinch” that is worsening, folks will push costs of an educational nature on to each other through the courts, if possible. At this point, I have the prosecuting attorney, two courts, two superintendents and the state legislature involved to help correct this issue. We might prevail and we might not. I was hoping that when our prosecutor spoke with the other county judge, reason would prevail. The problem was I was thinking my reasoning was correct. The other county disagrees. I spoke at length with the Hancock County prosecutor’s office and we may institute a “motion to intervene”. To the other county’s credit, they may have found a way to shift “big ticket” costs from the schools they serve. However, these now become our costs. Once the word “gets out” on this, schools with jails are going to get “nailed” with costs of educating special education students, no matter where they attend school, because their parent(s) is incarcerated in a facility located in our jurisdiction. Our prosecutor has been updating me, and this does have some serious implications, if not resolved.
Enclosed is a copy of next school year’s calendar for 2006-07, upon a final review with our teacher’s organization leadership. I don’t know if any upcoming legislation will impact our “make-up day” schedule. We’ll have to see if any such legislation does occur that would automatically call for days to be made up. (Item Q)
Mr. Wagner asked that this information letter be forwarded. (Item R)
I’ve been researching how other states address colleges rewarding students for high academic performance. Oklahoma provides concurrent enrollment (ala our Oberlin experiment), if juniors score a 25 and Seniors a 24 on their ACT for 4 year state colleges. Concurrent enrollment is allowed for community colleges (ala Owens), if students score a 19 on ACT or 3.0 GPA as Seniors, or a 21 ACT as a junior.

On ACT the highest performing state in the nation is Minnesota with a 22.3, compared to L-B’s average of 23.3. Since 1996, the Minnesota average has been 22.1.

When I benchmarked LB’s performance, by drilling down on the nation, Minnesota, Ohio, our county/city, and then us, a compelling trend begins to develop. The Hancock County/Findlay City composite score is 22.1. Findlay alone is 22.6, the county (including L-B) is 21.8, the county alone is 21.4, L-B alone is 23.3.

Percentage of students deemed “ready” for college coursework (75% class of C or better, 50% B or better):

USA Minnesota Ohio Hancock Co/Findlay City L-B

College English 68% 76% 70% 73% 90%

College Algebra 41% 53% 44% 50% 67%

College Social Stud 51% 61% 56% 60% 73%

College Biology 26% 37% 30% 36% 49%

All 4 areas 21% 29% 24% 28% 43%

With the factor of college remediation, Minnesota is at 31%, versus L-B’s 19%, and with the other gauge of “success”, Minnesota’s persistence rate is 83%, versus L-B’s 93%.

Will need to approve the graduation date for Liberty-Benton as June 11, 2006.
Lisa Dager has served as our LAMP coordinator in the past as well as this year. Brian Burkett has recommended her as our Lamp, Too! Coordinator, as well.

HIGH SCHOOL PRINCIPAL’S REPORT

Liberty-Benton Board of Education Meeting

February 20, 2006

7:00 p.m.

1.) Talent Show Rehearsing - I am not at the board meeting tonight because at this time I am assisting Mrs. Brenda Hoyt-Brackman with our first talent show rehearsal. Mrs. Hoyt-Brackman is now directing the show, but I am assisting her through it all this year. Auditions were held last week, and we have the largest show ever with 40 acts and 53 student performers. The surprise act is the best act ever, too, and there are several new faces involved! (Just had to build up some suspense for the upcoming show!!) We will hope to see everyone there on March 12^th at 2:00 p.m. and March 13^th at 7:00 p.m.

2.) Second Quarter Attendance - Our overall attendance rate for the second quarter was 96%.

3.) Honor Roll Students - Congratulations to the 211 students who were named to the second quarter honor roll. The Academic Boosters treated them to an ice cream social on Friday, February 3^rd.

4.) Third Quarter Midterms - Our third quarter midterms will be mailed home on Friday, February 24^th.

5.) DASL Going “Live” On February 28^th And Postponing Student Scheduling- With our district going “live” on DASL February 28^th, our student scheduling for next year is being postponed. As we head into the month of March, all of our district offices will be busily working to switch over all of our records, reporting, and software to a new program through our district A-site. Due to the timing of all of these requirements, we have had to push back our usual dates for scheduling students for next year’s classes until all of the new software is ready to be used. We are planning to work with students in the scheduling process for planning next school year’s classes in mid-to-late March at this point, but it will all depend on how smoothly the new computer programs roll over all of our existing information. The biggest challenge for all of us is learning to do everything we are used to doing in a new and improved format and structure. You will see a whole new look for our school grade cards starting with the grade card coming home at the end of third quarter. None of our policies or procedures are changing; simply the format, type of paper used, etc… will have a whole new appearance. We just wanted to let all of you know in advance.

6.) Cheerleading Survey And Study - Athletic Director, Dean Butler, and I recently conducted a study and evaluation of our high school cheerleading program. We reviewed the results and comments gathered in a survey of all of our current cheerleading families along with several recent articles and pieces of research about cheerleading injuries and gymnastics moves. After reviewing this for the past few months, both Dean and I agree that our current high school cheerleading program is right on track with our expectations, and we feel that the program is very appropriate for our high school students involved. Throughout the football and basketball seasons, we have also been comparing our program to the programs of the other schools we compete against, and we are very proud of our cheerleading program, cheerleaders, and coach. We have no recommendations for changes. If the coach wishes to somehow change the process or availability of the scrapbooks, that will be the coach’s decision. As far as the other expectations of this sport, we are pleased with what we currently offer.

7.) OGT Testing Coming Up - During the month of March, all sophomores will take the five areas of the state-required Ohio Graduation Tests for the first time in their high school years, and juniors will repeat any tests they still need to pass. The tests cover the areas of writing, reading, science, mathematics, and social studies, and the tests will be taken the week of March 13-17. We encourage all students who will be testing to get a good night’s sleep, to eat a good breakfast, to take the test very seriously, and to use all of their testing time wisely.

8.) 3.5 Banquet Planned - All high school students with a 3.5 accumulative grade point average or higher will be invited to our annual 3.5 Academic Banquet, sponsored by the Liberty-Benton Academic Boosters. The event will be held on Monday, March 20^th, at 6:30 p.m. A catered meal and an awards ceremony will be the highlights of the evening along with a guest speaker. Invitations will be mailed to all 141 students being honored, and the featured speaker this year is Jennifer (DeGraaf) Pecora, from the Class of 1995. Jennifer is the Director of Undergraduate Programs and the Pharmacy Scholars Coordinator at The Ohio State University.

9.) Musical, “Annie” - I congratulate the full cast of Annie and their directors for such a wonderful musical production. This was our first musical in four years, and it was extremely well done and well received. I believe it is safe to say that our musical productions are back on track, and I especially congratulate our first year teacher and director, Miss Sarah Santilli, on all of her leadership and direction. Congratulations!

10.) Choir Performance, Pep Band, And Impact - If you have been to any of our basketball games this season, then you already know how wonderful our pep band has sounded all season! Congratulations to Mr. Thomas, Miss Santilli, and all of the pep band members for all of their strong performances! For the homecoming game, the indoor drumline performed a nice show at half-time and the choir sang the “Star Spangled Banner.” I am still receiving compliments on how beautiful the national anthem was by the choir!!! I know we hear it at all the games, but I cannot fully express to you how beautiful it was! It was simply incredible. My compliments to the choir members and Miss Santilli on a wonderful performance. They are planning to do more performances and some solos for next year’s basketball season.

11.) Future Cross Country Trip - I wanted to let you know that the cross country program is planning for their future trips, and next school year, they would like to travel to a large meet in Philadelphia the weekend of September 15-17^th. This future trip will require board of education approval so you will see this on the agenda in the months ahead as planning progresses. The OHSAA does not allow teams to miss a day of school for an event, unless the event is in an adjacent state. With this meet in an adjacent state, the cross country teams will be able to leave on Thursday evening, miss school on Friday, and travel by bus, instead of plane, and this will save them a great deal in their expenses. They plan to only take a trip like this where they miss a day of school once every fourth year. The other annual trips will remain as weekend trips only. Mr. Butler and I both approve of this plan, and the cross country teams cover all of their own expenses for these trips. There is no cost to the board, and OHSAA standards are followed.

12.) Upcoming Events:

March 12 & 13 Talent Shows (Sunday at 2:00, Monday at 7:00)

March 15 Stevi B’s Pizza Night, anytime

March 20 3.5 Banquet, 6:30 p.m.

March 24 End of 3^rd Nine Weeks

April 8-17 Spring BreakJ

April 21 & 22 Art Festival (K-12), April 21 (6:00-10:00), April 22 (10:00-5:00)

April 28 Family BINGO Night, 7:00

May 6 Prom and Post-Prom

May 9 Spring Concert, 7:30

May 19-20 Relay For Life, Noon-8:00 a.m.