Board approves policy removals and consent agenda, hears financial updates

The Ralston Public Schools Board approved motions to remove or revise several district policies and approved the consent agenda, which included minutes from Jan. 26, the January financial report and bills.

Policy actions: The board considered removal of policy 3033 (lending schools to children enrolled in private schools, changed June 2024) and policy 3017 (closing the school site). Board discussion referenced alignment with the district’s policy service and indicated a plan to adopt replacement language and then remove older, overlapping policies (including policy 5047). The motion to remove policy 3033 carried on a roll-call-style record of 'Aye' votes.

Consent agenda and votes: The consent agenda listed Jan. bills totaling $666,572.45 for the general fund and $335,514.71 for the special building fund; Caroline and Robin Richard had reviewed the bills prior to the meeting. After a motion to reconsider a prior approval, the board called and recorded votes on the consent agenda; the roll-call included multiple 'Aye' votes and two recorded abstentions on the consent agenda.

Financial and bond updates: The business office reported that state apportionment arrived earlier than last year, lifting January receipts (the district had budgeted about $805,000 and received $876,000 on that revenue line). The bond phase-2 tracker shows roughly $3,000,000 committed with $831,000 remaining; the special building fund balance was reported at about $14,800,000 with roughly $3,900,000 in written and approved contracts. A potential public power tax payment of just over $900,000 was discussed with hearings scheduled Feb. 27 and Mar. 27 and a target resolution by May.

Why it matters: The policy removals and consent-vote outcomes affect district governance documents and routine financial approvals; bond and apportionment timing influence capital-planning cashflow and near-term payments, including a $1.7 million bond payment due in June.

Next steps: Board asked for reporting preferences on phase-2 budget presentation (per-school disaggregation versus aggregated phase-2 package) and for follow-up on proposed replacement policy language at the next meeting.