Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the District Finance And Operations topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Deerfield SD 109 discusses $1.5M budget amendment, fee changes and transportation bids; no vote recorded
Summary
Superintendent reported a recommended FY25 budget amendment to move $1.5 million into the capital projects fund for summer 2025 HVAC work; the board reviewed a modest fee increase for the district’s early learners program and heard that Olsen Transportation was the low bidder in a joint bus bid and is recommended for a five‑year contract.
Superintendent Mike told the Deerfield School District 109 Board on March 18 that administrators will ask the board next month to amend the 2024–25 budget to increase one capital projects expenditure line by $1.5 million to cover early delivery and installation of HVAC equipment for summer 2025 work.
“This is related to summer 2025 work that the board has already approved,” the superintendent said, adding that the district had “already taken delivery of some HVAC units” and the amendment is an accounting step to match timing of orders and receipts.
Administrators also presented recommended fee adjustments for fiscal year 2025–26. The board packet shows a proposed modest increase in the district’s early learners (preschool) fee — roughly 2.75% — the first increase for that program since 2023–24; the policy committee discussed benchmarking fees to comparable public and private providers next year.
On transportation, district staff reported that a joint bid with nearby districts produced four respondents and that Olsen Transportation was the lowest bidder. Staff recommended a five‑year contract with Olsen to provide predictability after a state law change removed the district’s prior ability to extend one‑year renewals indefinitely.
Officials said the recommended contract includes fuel pass‑through language so the district “rides the wave” with fuel prices — if fuel costs rise, the district pays more; if they fall, the district will realize savings. Staff also said the vendor’s bid came in roughly 0.9% below the current rate and included more favorable year‑over‑year increases than competitors.
Board members asked about the possibility of electric buses in a five‑year contract window. Staff said bid conditions “push some of the onus onto the vendor to look at sustainable options” but cautioned that securing electric buses has been easier for larger districts that operate their own fleets.
The board received the reports and asked questions; the transcript contains no motion or formal vote approving the five‑year transportation contract, the budget amendment, or the fee changes at the March 18 meeting.
A related committee report noted that specialized transportation vendor Septran was recommended for continued service at no increase for the next year after review of an objective rubric.
