Debate Transcripts

LB 1134 (1998)

General File

February 24, 1998


CLERK:  Not now, Senator.


SENATOR CROSBY:  Senator Raikes and Senator Wehrbein announce that they have, as their guests today, 60 fourth graders from Eagle Elementary.  (Introduces teachers.) They are in the north balcony.  Would all of you please stand and be welcomed by your Legislature.  Senator Robak also wants to announce that her grandchild is in the group in the balcony.  Mr. Clerk, LB 1134.


CLERK:  Madam President, 1134, introduced by Senator Janssen and others.  (Read title.) Bill was introduced on January 13 of this year, at that time referred to the Education Committee, advanced to General File.  I do have committee amendments, Madam President.  (See AM3137 referred to on page 639 of the Legislative Journal.)


SENATOR CROSBY:  Senator Janssen, to open.


SENATOR JANSSEN:  Thank you, Madam President and members of the Legislature.  LB 1134 makes several changes to the reorganization incentives that we currently offer to reorganize school districts under Section 79-1010.  This section provides incentives to school districts whose reorganization is effective between May 31st in 1996 and August 2nd of the year 2001.  1 thought I would go ahead and explain to you quickly what the green copy of the bill contains, however, the committee amendment does make some changes to the original bill.  The main goal of this bill is simply move up the payments for reorganization incentives to the first year in which the reorganized district provides educational services.  Currently, there can be up to two years' time between when the school district reorganizes and when they receive the incentives.  I feel that it is important to make these incentives available to school districts the first year that they operate as a reorganized district, since this is when they really need them the most.  In order to move up the payments, the payment date in LB 1134 changes the time line for when the incentives are determined.  Currently, the reorganization incentives are determined at the same time that state aid is certified to the school districts.  Therefore, they are determined in December of the school year before they are set to receive them.  The problem in many school district reorganizations, which will be




effective for the next school year, might not have been ...  might not have occurred in December, since reorganizations don't have to be effective until the next June the 1st.  The other part of the problem is the amount of reorganization incentives are determined by comparing the number of students that the district had in each of the grade ranges prior to the reorganization, and how many students they would have...would have been in those grade ranges, if the reorganization had occurred the previous year.  The number of students that move into the different range sizes is determined by using the average daily membership numbers.  The problem is that these average daily membership numbers are not available until July 1st the following school year, essentially two months before the reorganized district should receive their first payment, and seven months after the state aid has been certified.  In order to handle these problems and allow payments to be received by the reorganized district the first year, LB 1134 separates the determination of the amount of reorganize incentives from the certification of state aid.  Under the bill, state aid continues to be certified in December of the school year prior to the reorganization and the determination of the incentives is moved to August 2nd, immediately preceding the first year they are operating as a reorganized district.  In addition, the definition of the base fiscal year is changed by 1134 for reorganized districts during the 1997-98 school year and after.  The base fiscal year is the first year of the three years that the installments of reorganization incentives are paid.  The bill changes the definition to make it clear that the first payment must be paid in the first year that the district would operate as a reorganized district.  Therefore, these changes will allow the school districts, which reorganized during the fall of 1997 or the spring of 1998, and offers educational services as a school district during the 1998-99 school year, to receive the first third of their incentive payments during the 1998 and '99 school year.  As a result of determining incentives separately from the state aid, we need to make sure that the 1 percent allocated from state aid incentives was separated out of the pot of money divided in December and was available in August when the incentives are determined.  Therefore, LB 1134, before being amended, created the Reorganized School Assistance Fund to hold this I percent and make incentive payments.  Since the I percent had already been certified to the schools for the upcoming




1998-99 school year, 1134 called for a one-time appropriation to this new fund to pay for the first year of reorganization incentives in 1998 and 199.  The change made by LB 1130 (sic--1134) will allow the incentives to be paid to school districts when they really need them--that first year that they provide educational services.  I believe that the improvement of timing in the incentives might make a big difference in encouraging a school district to reorganize.  There are immediate costs associated with reorganization that will decrease over time, such as the cost of picking up new staff, and making sure that everyone is placed into the same pay scale.  Having extra funding in the beginning might allow staff to leave over several years rather than being riffed immediately.  There are costs of such as merging books, joining the curriculum, changing signs, buying uniforms, and changing facilities.  All these changes make the moving up of payments of incentives that first year very important and good policy.  In addition to moving up payment incentives, 1134 originally .required that the amount of reorganization incentives shall be double for any reorganization involving a Class VI and a Class I school.  The idea was recognizing unique costs that are present in these types of reorganization incentives.  This change would hope to encourage districts since incentive payments for the moving of younger students is traditionally quite small.  State aid payments during that first year, the final change in LB 1134 would make ...  make is to put back into place a form of protection that was formerly available to reorganized school districts.  The statute used to guarantee that the reorganized district could not receive less in state aid during the first year of reorganization than it did in prior years to separate districts.  (LB) 1134 would have put the protection back into place for districts that were receiving reorganization incentives essentially in Fiscal Year 198-99 through the year 2002.  The goal behind this idea was to give the districts some .:ertainty in planning as they go through the reorganization process and to promise that they will not face any uncertain funding at the time that they are going through all of these changes.  The committee amendment, essentially, removes this provision regarding the double incentives to certain reorganization and the protection from the loss of state aid.  However, it leaves in place the moving up of the reorganize incentives to the first year, the fiscal year following the fiscal year in which the




reorganization occurred.  The committee amendment does change the funding for the first year incentive payment.  It leaves the newly created Reorganized School Assistance Fund in place for the 1998 and '99 fiscal year, and provides $2 million in cash funds to help make ...  make the first year incentive payments during the 1998 and '99 school year.  This money will, essentially, be paid back to the cash fund the next year by an appropriation from the state aid fund.  Then in the years to follow, million will be reserved each year from the state aid appropriation to pay for these first year incentives, since they will be determined later than state aid.  And all the 2 million, if all the $2 million is not used, it will go back into next year's appropriation.  In conclusion, I believe that LB 1134 makes several necessary changes to the current reorganization...


SENATOR CROSBY:  One minute.


SENATOR JANSSEN:  ...  incentives.  It is important to provide these incentives and protection during the first year that the school districts are reorganized, rather than two to five years down the road after the transfer is complete.  The school needs the assurance of assistance during funding those first years that changes are occurring and that transition to a new system is being completed.  I believe that we need to put our monies where our mouth is and make the changes necessary to help make these incentives really work for the school districts.  Thank you, Madam President.


SENATOR CROSBY:  Thank you, Senator Janssen.  Before we continue, Senator Hilgert announces that he has, as his guests in the north balcony, 29 students from Creighton University International Studies Program in Omaha with their sponsor.  Would you all stand and be welcomed by your Legislature.  Thank you.  To the committee amendment, Senator Bohlke.


SENATOR BOHLKE:  Yes, Madam President, members, Senator Janssen has explained in detail what the bill does.  Essentially, the committee agreed with the issue brought forward by Senator Janssen, that we recognize that there are costs that first year, and so.  what we did do was strike the original section, and we moved those funds forward to the first year.  In order to make that possible, we also had to create a fund for those first year




incentives.  And as he explained, the way that we went about it was to actually borrow 2 million from the Cash Reserve Fund and the money is paid back by a reduction in state aid funds the following year.  So the committee, as I'm sure we'll discuss on Select File, did strike out the two items that Senator Janssen discussed, and that was the double payments for incentives because it's a Class VI, Class I coming together, and, essentially, the hold harmless that was in the original green copy.  But the committee, through the amendments, support LB 1134 in its present form and ask for your adoption.


SENATOR CROSBY:  Thank you, Senator Bohlke.  Discussion on the committee amendments?  Senator Witek.


SENATOR WITEK:  Thank you, Madam Chairman, members of the Legislature.  Senator Janssen, can I ask you a few questions about the committee amendment, or would you rather I ask Senator Bohlke?


SENATOR CROSBY:  Senator Witek...  or Senator Janssen, will you yield for a question?




SENATOR WITEK:  On page 9 of the committee amendments, you take $2 million out of the Cash Reserve Fund, correct?


SENATOR JANSSEN:  That's correct.


SENATOR WITEK:  And on page 10, you take $2 million out of the General Fund, correct?


SENATOR JANSSEN:  That's right.


SENATOR WITEK:  So we're up to $4 million, and that's in the Reorganized School Assistance Fund.  Will you be taking money, any more money than those $4 million for this fund?


SENATOR JANSSEN:  Well, see, the I percent has always been set aside for...  for committee...  for reorganization of school districts, that cash assistance fund.  I can run through a little formula for you here, Senator Witek, if that will help






SENATOR WITEK:  Could you tell me where the 1 percent is coming from now, what fund that in?  Is that the lottery fund?




SENATOR WITEK:  What fund is that now?


SENATOR JANSSEN:  That is set aside, Senator Bohlke, help me if I'm wrong here, but that is set aside out of the state aid formula, set back for these types of situations.


SENATOR WITEK:  So right now the state sets aside a million dollars a year for school reorganization.


SENATOR JANSSEN:  That's right, that's correct.  No...


SENATOR WITEK:  And what you are proposing to...


SENATOR JANSSEN:  No, they will.


SENATOR WITEK:  Oh, they will.  They don't do that right now?




SENATOR WITEK:  According to the first fiscal note, it says that that's the current policy.


SENATOR JANSSEN:  We don't set it aside.  It is available.


SENATOR WITEK:  Oh, it's available.




SENATOR WITEK:  Okay , so they can have it if they want it.




SENATOR WITEK:  A million, up to a million dollars...






SENATOR WITEK:  ...  a year right now.  And what you are proposing to do is take an additional $4 million, 2 from the Cash Reserve, 2 from the General Fund, we'll ...  and set that into a new fund.


SENATOR JANSSEN:  Senator Witek, I think Senator Bohlke can explain that a little.  I have a formula here but I believe that she could probably explain that to you a little better.


SENATOR WITEK:  Okay, okay, that would be fine.


SENATOR BOHLKE:  Yes, Senator Witek, currently we set aside 1 percent for the incentive payments.  That really comes in the range from 5 to 6 million dollars.  What Senator Janssen was asking to do was to have that $1 million available.  We could not because that has already been certified as of December 1st.  We had to find a way to make that $1 million available.  How we do it is we borrow from the Cash Reserve.  We then come back the next year and pay it back from that amount of money from the incentive payments.


SENATOR WITEK:  Okay, so you have available 5 to 6 million, but you don't have it available this year because it was legislation in the second year of the reorganization, not the first year of the reorganization.


SENATOR BOHLKE:  We have it available but it has been certified on how it would be distributed, so we couldn't use it for another purpose.


SENATOR WITEK:  okay, and what you're proposing to do at this time is take $2 million out of the Cash Reserve Fund, $2 million General Fund appropriation, is that correct?


SENATOR BOHLKE:  That's what she's doing, we are going to pay it back the next year.


SENATOR WITEK:  The State Treasurer shall transfer 2 million from the General Fund, oh, back to ...


SENATOR BOHLKE:  But to pay that back.




SENATOR WITEK:  Okay, back to the following year.


SENATOR BOHLKE:  Right, and the state aid comes from the General Fund anyway.


SENATOR WITEK:  And then at that point in time, you will take $2 million from state aid fund ...  you will be paying back the Cash Reserve from the state aid fund, and the General Fund money will come from ...  will go to the state aid fund, according to line 7 through 16 on page 10 of the committee amendment.


SENATOR BOHLKE:  Yes, Senator Witek,...


SENATOR CROSBY:  One minute.


SENATOR BOHLKE:  ...the General Fund money is what we call the TEEOSA Fund money.  That's the money we use for the incentives.  They're...  they're, essentially, the same.  So we are ...  we are paying it back to the Cash Reserve.  This just allows us to recognize that and do what Senator Janssen hopes that we would do, but we pay it back from that very fund.


SENATOR WITEK:  So the only increase in appropriations for this piece of legislation to the...




SENATOR WITEK:  ...  schools is $2 million for this year.


SENATOR BOHLKE:  No, there is no increase.  We are borrowing it from the reserve; we are paying it back out of the money that is already available from the incentives.


SENATOR WITEK:  Okay, you are borrowing it out of the reserve this year, you're paying it back next year...


SENATOR BOHLKE:  Out of money that would be available for the incentives.


SENATOR WITEK:  Could you tell me where the 5 to 6 million, is that...  are we having...




SENATOR BOHLKE:  One percent of the TEEOSA.


SENATOR WITEK:  ...  that many schools reorganizing in the state of Nebraska then?


SENATOR CROSBY:  Time.  Thank you, Senator Witek.  Senator, on the committee amendment, Senator Schrock, followed by Stuhr, Wehrbein, Bohlke, and Witek.  Senator Schrock.


SENATOR SCHROCK:  Madam President, members of the Legislature, if Senator Janssen would engage in a little chat...


SENATOR CROSBY:  Senator Janssen, will you yield again?


SENATOR SCHROCK:  ...  with me, I would appreciate that.




SENATOR SCHROCK:  Can you tell me the rationale for doubling the incentive payment for...


SENATOR JANSSEN:  That is not in the committee amendments.


SENATOR SCHROCK:  On the Class VI that was struck?


SENATOR JANSSEN:  The committee amendments struck that, yes.


SENATOR SCHROCK:  Okay, then I was not aware of that and I will ...  that will complete my comments or questions then.


SENATOR CROSBY:  Thank you.  Thank you, Senator Schrock.  Senator Stuhr.


SENATOR STUHR:  Thank you, Madam President and members of the Legislature.  I just rise in support of the bill and also the committee amendments.  I, personally, have an example of two schools within my district that are reorganizing this year.  In fact, that reorganization will take place next Tuesday evening, March 3rd, and you will all be receiving a copy of some of the costs that are involved in reorganization.  And I think that this is very interesting and points out the fact of the necessity of having these incentives, particularly the first




year.  In the information that you will be receiving, cost...  I mean, we are looking at minimum of over $150,000 of providing some incentives for the teachers that will not be able to have a position, since the schools have reorganized, for a staff development option and early retirement.  Not even in this $150,000 cost are attorney fees that are going to have to be looked at for hearings on reduction in staff, cost of changing names on signs and buildings, which we often don't even think about.  I know that they were discussing changing the masc ...  the mascot on the auditorium floor and it was going to cost $10,000, just to have the mascot name changed on the floor.  So all of these costs do play an important part, and in the information you will be receiving, that actually they would only be receiving about $114,000 in incentive payments.  So I ...  I am very supportive of this bill and hope that you will all give it great consideration.  Thank you.


SENATOR CROSBY:  Thank you, Senator Stuhr.  Senator Wehrbein, on the committee amendments.


SENATOR WEHRBEIN:  Madam President, members, I just want to ask Senator Bohlke a question, I think is the one, on the committee amendments.


SENATOR CROSBY:  Senator Bohlke, will you yield for a question?


SENATOR WEHRBEIN:  And all I want to do is clarify at this point.  As I understand, you are borrowing from the Cash Reserve this year, or is it starting in July?




SENATOR WEHRBEIN:  And then pay it back next year.


SENATOR BOHLKE:  Oh, wait, what did you say, starting in July.




SENATOR BOHLKE:  Starting in July.


SENATOR WEHRBEIN:  Or, I said or.  Oh, so you borrow from the Cash Reserve....






SENATOR WEHRBEIN:  ...  in July, pay it back in...


SENATOR BOHLKE:  Uh, 1999-2000.


SENATOR WEHRBEIN:  Okay, the next fiscal year.




SENATOR WEHRBEIN:  That is all ...


SENATOR BOHLKE:  It follows one ...  we borrow one year and pay it back the next year.


SENATOR WEHRBEIN:  I just wanted to clarify.  I have the flow chart, I understand it.  I just wasn't clear on the timing.  So it's this coming fiscal year you borrow; the next year after that is you...  it's paid back to Cash Reserve.






SENATOR CROSBY:  Thank you, Senator Wehrbein.  Senator Bohlke.


SENATOR BOHLKE:  Yes, Madam President, members.  It seems like we've caused some confusion, so I will just go over it one more time in that in order to accomplish getting the funds for this reorganized district moved to the first year, we had to find the funds to do that.  Generally, we have used the incentive money from state aid.  The state aid formula has funded the incentive payments.  And so what we do is we borrow from the Cash Reserve, and then we pay it back basically right out of state aid, money that will go out in state aid to schools, we pay it back.  That's the very money that we use now, I percent of that, for the incentive payments for schools that wish to reorganize, and so I hope that may clear up any of the confusion that people may have on how the funding works.  With that, thank you, Madam President.




SENATOR CROSBY:  Thank you, Senator Bohlke.  Senator Witek, on the committee amendments.


SENATOR WITEK:  Thank you, Madam Chairman, members of the Legislature.  Senator Bohlke, can I ask you a question on this?


SENATOR CROSBY:  Senator Bohlke, will you yield for a question?




SENATOR WITEK:  Why didn't we just, since this is all, essentially, General Fund monies, except for the Cash Reserve, you get the money for school aid or we get ...  we all get the money for school aid out of a General Fund appropriation to school aid every year, correct?


SENATOR BOHLKE:  Say that again.


SENATOR WITEK:  The money that is kept...  that is set aside each year for school aid is General Fund dollars that go over to school aid, appropriated for school aid.




SENATOR WITEK:  So, and the money that is in the Cash Fund is money that is set aside from money that comes into the state of Nebraska into a Cash Reserve, correct?




SENATOR WITEK:  Why didn't we just, if you needed the money for reorganization this year, and the money that you already have in school aid is already appropriated or set aside, why didn't we just take 2 million from the General Fund, ask for a $2 million increase in appropriations from the General Fund this year, and then $2 million less into the school aid fund next year?


SENATOR BOHLKE:  Senator Witek, we thought it was important that we are very clear on how we fund this, because we have this school district now, we will have other school districts in the future who, if we make this change, that we'll have to have a system for allowing it.  It establishes that it is a loan and




makes it very clear as to what's happening.  If we just do it out of the General Fund, I think that we would lose the identifying it as a loan.  We thought it was important to identify it as a loan that will be paid back.


SENATOR WITEK:  But we could have just said this year we will ask for $2 million additional money out of the General Fund to go into the school aid fund, and next year, excuse me, we will decrease our request by $2 million so that you don't even have to touch the Cash Reserve Fund.  Because I am not sure I'm comfortable, and maybe this is something that happens more often than I think, tapping Cash Reserve Fund when really what you need is $2 million increase in appropriations for schools this year and you won't need it next year because you will put it into the fund for the schools.  So I guess I'm not clear on...  even if you wanted to make it look like a loan, if you had the language in the amendment that said we are going to take 2 additional million dollars this year, and we will take two less, $2 million less next year, why that wouldn't have been adequate instead of switching funds.


SENATOR BOHLKE:  Senator Witek, I'll Just respond to that saying because then it would like an expenditure for the state.  We have people that are taking issue with us spending money, and it is not ...  we aren't spending that.  It's a loan.


SENATOR WITEK:  Well, we actually are spending it...


SENATOR BOHLKE:  And it would show it in the appropriation.


SENATOR WITEK:  ...  this year.


SENATOR BOHLKE:  No, I mean there is a difference when there is a loan.  If you spend something with no intention of paying it back, I think it's clearly different than when you make a loan and say it's a loan and show how you're going to pay it back.  I think there is a distinct difference and I think we have to be clear on that to the people who watch how we spend their money, that this is, indeed, a loan and we're going to pay it back, that it doesn't just show up as an increase in the appropriation.




SENATOR WITEK:  Are you going to pay interest on that loan because we would be losing the interest of the $2 million set aside in the Cash Fund?  So is there interest involved in that 2 million dollar payback?


SENATOR BOHLKE:  You're welcome to amend it.


SENATOR WITEK:  Thank you, Senator Bohlke.


SENATOR CROSBY:  Thank you, Senator Witek.  Senator Cudaback.


SENATOR CUDABACK:  Madam President and members, I'd like to ask Senator Janssen a question, please?


SENATOR CROSBY:  Senator Janssen, will you yield for a question?




SENATOR CUDABACK:  Senator Janssen, is it safe to say that 1134 really doesn't do anything other than move payment up one year?


SENATOR JANSSEN:  The committee amendments, that's exactly what they do.  It moves it up...


SENATOR CUDABACK:  That's all it does, doesn't do anything?  it won't cost one penny more, not one penny less?




SENATOR CUDABACK:  It just simply moves it up one year.


SENATOR JANSSEN:  That's right.


SENATOR CUDABACK:  And the money will be back in the fund the next year, dollars.  We won't know the difference in one year and Senator Wehrbein's chest of dollars will be the same?


SENATOR JANSSEN:  That's ...  that's correct.


SENATOR CUDABACK:  Simply moves it up one year.






SENATOR CUDABACK:  And that's all 1134 does in the amendments.


SENATOR JANSSEN:  Correct, in the present form,...


SENATOR CUDABACK:  In the present form.


SENATOR JANSSEN:  ...  with the committee amendments that is what it does.


SENATOR CUDABACK:  Okay, thank you.


SENATOR CROSBY:  Thank you, Senator Cudaback.  Senator Wehrbein.  Senator Wehrbein waives off.  Senator Witek.


SENATOR WITEK:  Madam Chairman, I guess I'm just curious as to why we would need a piece of legislation, and I am not opposed to helping schools consolidate and giving them money.  I want to make that clear right up front, but if we need the $2 million this year, we should go ahead and put the $2 million in this year, and if you don't need it next year, then you should just lower your appropriation request next year for the school aid fund, instead of some kind of program that really isn't a loan.  I mean it is not a loan, it is just moves money around from one fund to the next, and it's all the same source.  I mean, it's taxpayer dollars.  It's not ...  there is no interest on the loan, it is really not a loan.  It just seems kind of silly to me that we're going about, now we are going about appropriating money in the state of Nebraska through this kind of mechanism for the sake of making it look like we're not spending money this year, that it is only a loan, and then I guess ...  I guess then I would need to know now if it is only a loan, how much money is going to be appropriated next year for the school aid fund so that I can really tell if it's $2 million, if you don't just add the $2 million to the request, and then transfer it back over into the Cash Fund.  You know, I mean I'm not trying to be difficult.  I'm just trying to say that this seems rather silly to me to...  to be wanting $2 million increase for school consolidations this year, not having the money in the school aid fund, and then going about it in this way; not letting us know how much is going to be needed next year in the school aid fund so that any of us really know if the $2 million is an additional request




that they then put into the Cash Reserve Fund, or that they actually request $2 million less than they would need in the school aid fund, and then put it into the Cash Reserve Fund.  So that it is actually not spending more money in that case, but how would any of us know?  What type of accounting measure is in there to even allow us to recognize that this is actually the case?  So even though I do support school consolidation, I guess, and support individuals who want to consolidate and have this money available to consolidate, I think that this shell game that is being played with this money is not a good stae policy.  Thank you.


SENATOR CROSBY:  Thank you, Senator Witek.  There are no further lights.  Senator Bohlke, I will recognize you to close on the committee amendments.  She waives closing.  The question is the adoption of the committee amendments to LB 1134.  All in favor vote aye, opposed no.  We are voting on the committee amendments.  Have you all voted?  Record, please.


CLERK:  29 ayes, 0 nays, Madam President, on adoption of committee amendments.


SENATOR CROSBY:  The committee amendments are adopted.  We are now on the bill itself, 1134.  There are no lights.  Senator Janssen, recognize you to close on LB 1134.


SENATOR JANSSEN:  Thank you, Madam President, members of the Legislature.  This is something that we, as a body, have stood and said, schools, you have to reorganize, become more efficient, and in order for that, for these schools to do that, we have placed in the statutes incentive payments for those schools to reorganize.  All that LB 1134 is doing in its present form is moving that incentive year up to the first year.  The Department of Education determined that it would be the second year, and that it would...  you would get no funds till the third year.  This, specifically, puts in the statute that those incentive payments will begin the first year of the organized districts, when they first start through the organized plan.  So that...  that is simply all it does, and I ask for your advancement on to Select File.  Thank you.


SENATOR CROSBY:  Thank you, Senator Janssen.  You've heard the




closing.  The question is the advancement to E & R Initial of LB 1134.  All in favor vote aye, opposed no.  We are voting on the advancement of 1134.  Have you all voted?  Record, please.


CLERK:  30 ayes, 1 nay, Madam President, on the advancement of 1134.


SENATOR CROSBY:  The bill advances.  Mr. Clerk, do you have items for the record?


CLERK:  Madam President, I do.  Amendments from Senator Maurstad to be printed to (LB) 1053.  A new A bill, (LB) 1063A.  (Read by title for the first time.) Senator Tyson has a motion with respect to LB 1075.  That will be laid over.  That is all that I had, Madam President.  (See pages 751-54 of the Legislative Journal.)


SENATOR CROSBY:  Thank you.  Senator Coordsen, would you like to...


SENATOR COORDSEN:  Thank you, Madam President.  I move that we adjourn until February 25th at 9:00 a.m.


SENATOR CROSBY:  You've heard the motion to adjourn till tomorrow morning at nine o'clock.  All in favor say aye.  All in favor say aye.  Oppose no.  We are adjourned.