[0:03] call the meeting to order at 6:31 p.m.

[0:07] Welcome to all who are here in person as

[0:09] well as those on screen. Um the first

[0:14] order is uh do we have any amendments to

[0:16] the agenda and our board members?

[0:20] Hearing

[0:24] none, we will move towards public

[0:28] comment. I'm doing readable

[0:32] expectation

[0:34] for persons wishing to give comment.

[0:37] Persons persons wishing to speak must

[0:39] place their name and town of residence

[0:41] on the signing sheet which I believe is

[0:42] over there on one of the chairs or um

[0:47] they may raise their Zoom hand and be

[0:49] acknowledged.

[0:52] When you are acknowledged, please say

[0:53] the your name in the town that you

[0:56] belong to. And in our meetings, we have

[0:59] two minutes per person. This is strictly

[1:02] monitored.

[1:05] And once you are acknowledged

[1:11] uh you may start to speak and what we

[1:14] prefer to do is that if there's a

[1:16] specific topic that people are

[1:18] interested in making comment about we

[1:22] will do those comments first and nobody

[1:24] has a second opportunity until all those

[1:27] who wish we recognize uh will have the

[1:29] opportunity to make that kind of public

[1:32] comment.

[1:33] Order into quorum shall be observed by

[1:35] all persons present at the meeting.

[1:38] Neither members of the body nor the

[1:40] members of the public shall delay or

[1:41] interrupt the proceedings of or the

[1:43] peace of the meeting or interrupt or

[1:46] disturb any member while speaking.

[1:48] Members of the body and members of the

[1:50] public um prohibited from making

[1:53] personal and pertinent threatening or

[1:56] protating remarks.

[2:01] Members of the body and members of the

[2:02] public shall obey the book the orders of

[2:04] the chair or other presiding member and

[2:07] all comments should be directed to the

[2:09] body or the chair not anyone other

[2:12] individual persons. So I will open it up

[2:15] first to the floor. If there's anyone

[2:18] here who would like to make public

[2:20] comment you can raise your hand.

[2:26] » Yes. Oh but we have three names.

[2:30] Who's the first name on the list?

[2:31] >> Claire Gard.

[2:33] >> Oh, she's she's just We asked you to say

[2:36] your penny, but also if you want to

[2:37] speak and so who's second?

[2:40] I am I

[2:43] um I'm Adam.

[2:46] I'll sit this way so I can back you. Um

[2:49] should I stop start talking? Okay,

[2:52] great. All right. Good evening. I'm Adam

[2:54] Bourson here from Woodstock and um just

[2:56] want to start by thanking uh the

[2:58] teachers and the staff and the and the

[3:00] um members of the board. Um we have

[3:02] fantastic school system and a lot of

[3:05] energy and that goes into that and I

[3:06] just want to acknowledge that and also

[3:08] on behalf of my kids I promised them

[3:10] that I would thank this cafeteria staff.

[3:12] We do a really good job making some

[3:14] yummy food. So hopefully that

[3:17] okay so I prepared a quick written

[3:18] statement only because I know there's

[3:20] two minutes and I want to try to adhere

[3:22] to that. Um, so even in a strong system,

[3:25] there are always places where small

[3:27] changes can improve transparency,

[3:29] strengthen outcomes, and prevent

[3:31] problems later. I think prek is one of

[3:34] those areas. The district has written u

[3:37] enrollment policies and Vermont gives

[3:40] the district some discretion how they

[3:43] can um be applied. So state rules 2610,

[3:47] 2611, 2612, they give a lot of useful

[3:50] framework around cost, transparency,

[3:52] outcomes and access. So preK is also a

[3:56] very big part of Wes. Last year 59 preK

[4:00] students attended compared to 30

[4:02] kindergarten students. So I think the

[4:04] board and the public should have some

[4:06] simple picture as to what that looks

[4:08] like and how it's planning out. How many

[4:10] seats do we have? Who's applying by age

[4:12] in town? How does the weight list move?

[4:15] What does prek cost per student? And

[4:18] what do we know about the readiness and

[4:20] where children go after prek? We can

[4:22] report this in aggregate while

[4:24] protecting the kids and the students

[4:26] identities. In addition, when there is a

[4:29] substantial weight list, uh it may also

[4:32] make sense to preserve some flexibility

[4:35] at the end of the school year when we

[4:37] have a clearer picture of demand across

[4:39] age group. So in conclusion, I'm just

[4:42] going to ask the board to consider three

[4:44] steps. Number one, publish the aggregate

[4:46] data. Number two, review how the

[4:49] existing policies are being applied. And

[4:51] three, consider some sort of independ

[4:53] independent review of the prek program.

[4:56] So I see this as an opportunity to make

[4:57] a strong program even better. Thank you

[4:59] very much.

[5:00] >> Thank you. [clears throat] Thank you.

[5:06] Um, I'll take a person from the Zoom a

[5:09] Zoom member that would like to give a

[5:12] public comment. You're welcome to raise

[5:15] your hand.

[5:21] » Yes. Hi. Um, I was curious why uh there

[5:25] was a meeting that had occurred. I know

[5:28] it didn't have a quorum. Um, but there

[5:31] were minutes that were posted and then

[5:33] taken down and replaced by a notice of

[5:36] no quorum as if a meeting therefore did

[5:39] not occur. And I understand that when

[5:41] there's not a quorum, uh, obviously

[5:43] there can't be any voting that occurs,

[5:45] but the meeting appears to have

[5:47] occurred. I I just I don't understand

[5:49] what that disappearance of minutes was

[5:50] all about. Is there some information

[5:52] that you could please uh provide to us?

[5:55] Oh, by the way, I'm from Woodstock.

[5:58] I'll just briefly say that when we don't

[6:00] have a quorum, we don't record minutes

[6:03] and the admin uh the HR person who was

[6:06] doing the minutes that night um realized

[6:09] after the fact that that there were no

[6:11] minutes to be made and so she removed

[6:13] them.

[6:17] >> Thank you.

[6:20] >> Is there anyone else in the room? Yes.

[6:25] >> Uh hello, I'm Robin. I'm a uh Alex. I'm

[6:30] a Woodstock uh high school senior. Uh,

[6:34] and I would like to talk about the new

[6:37] policy as of this year that says that

[6:41] high school students cannot enter the

[6:43] building until

[6:45] uh 7:40,

[6:47] which is

[6:50] I I need to find a better wording than

[6:52] not good, but uh not good. [laughter]

[6:56] Um, it a lot of students do arrive like

[7:01] significantly before 7:40. I uh at the

[7:05] weeks when I'm at my mom's house, I

[7:07] arrive at 7:20 because she works 40

[7:09] minutes [snorts] away and has to be

[7:10] there by 8:00. Um and I I'm not the only

[7:14] one. There's several other groups of

[7:16] kids who arrive that early or in that 20

[7:21] minute span between 7:20 and 7:40. And

[7:26] there's nowhere for us to go in this new

[7:29] with this new policy. And um I

[7:34] understand that it's a like union

[7:38] something,

[7:41] but I I've talked to several different

[7:44] teachers about this and they said that

[7:46] they'd be willing to have students in

[7:50] their room before that time um

[7:53] personally.

[7:55] Uh, so I was wondering I was hoping for

[7:59] that policy to be relooked at and

[8:02] re-reviewed to um allow for students who

[8:07] arrive before that time to have a place

[8:10] inside because when it's snowing or

[8:13] raining or just cold like we cannot be

[8:16] outside that this is this is not

[8:19] something we we can be doing all year

[8:22] especially in Vermont. So I I would I

[8:25] would like the board to reconsider that

[8:27] if possible.

[8:29] Thank you at line. We will look into

[8:31] that. Thank you.

[8:35] All right. Uh is there somebody on who

[8:37] would like to make a comment?

[8:46] All right. Seeing no other hands raised.

[8:48] Um are there anyone is there anyone here

[8:51] who still would like to make a comment?

[8:54] All right, I'm going to close the public

[8:56] comment. We do have it again at the end

[8:58] of the meeting.

[9:00] So, we're going to start with um the

[9:02] superintendent report.

[9:04] >> Great. And you'll find in the workbook

[9:06] um just introduction about the start of

[9:08] the school year, how the process

[9:10] happened and a project that I'm working

[9:12] on called the Mountain Views Way, which

[9:14] is an opportunity for me to coordinate

[9:17] all the different programs and resources

[9:19] we have in the district prior to me

[9:21] leaving. So really trying to work with

[9:24] the team to do that. Um, what I'd really

[9:26] like to use my time though is to share a

[9:28] letter that um, I received on Friday

[9:32] from the um, Acts 170 lead facilitator

[9:35] Dave Gonz. Um, as you know, Act 170 is

[9:40] requiring um, districts, SU's

[9:44] supervisory unions, supervisory

[9:45] districts to get together and have

[9:47] conversations about voluntary mergers.

[9:49] It's a very aggressive schedule to

[9:52] accomplish all this in Act 170. So I

[9:54] just wanted to update you with the the

[9:56] work that's been done and what are the

[9:57] next steps. So regional facilitators are

[10:00] currently undergoing a September

[10:02] training series um covering AFL70

[10:05] governance history good faith

[10:07] participation meeting logistics and news

[10:10] facilitation including a review of the

[10:13] AOE uh quality framework with Secretary

[10:16] Saunders. Um, a finalized definition for

[10:19] good faith, which is a main term in act

[10:22] 170, is targeted for release by

[10:24] September 25th after vet uh vetting with

[10:27] stakeholders, board design, and

[10:30] superintendents can expect to be

[10:32] contacted by regional facilitators

[10:34] starting September 18th. And so we have

[10:37] someone who's identified from Boston

[10:39] area who will be working with us um to

[10:41] set up the initial merger committee

[10:44] meetings. Districts and SUS are likely

[10:47] to consider adding an act 17 uh resource

[10:51] section or subsection to their website

[10:53] which has the agendas, minutes,

[10:55] warnings, and video links. We will do

[10:56] that. Emergency committee meetings

[10:58] [clears throat] will initially begin

[11:00] with one appointed board designate per

[11:03] board for organizational purposes at

[11:06] which facilitators will present two

[11:08] approaches to establish proportional

[11:10] representation. So currently no matter

[11:13] the size of the district there will be

[11:16] one representative. So for our group

[11:19] Bartford has one,

[11:21] Southeast which has three districts will

[11:23] have three. We will have one. So looking

[11:26] at that very different sizes Hartford

[11:29] versus H Heartland. So proportional

[11:31] representation will be one of the topics

[11:33] that will be discussed and currently

[11:35] they have two different approaches that

[11:36] they're going to bring to their groups.

[11:39] Already there have been 11 requests for

[11:41] changes in group assignments and have

[11:44] been received by Dave. Uh and a

[11:46] preliminary set of groupings will be

[11:48] released on September 18th subject to a

[11:51] local board consultation feedback

[11:53] window. So that's in process. So not

[11:56] everybody wants to be in the group they

[11:57] were originally assigned on. There is a

[11:59] process to move between groups. And then

[12:02] grouping requests are evaluated against

[12:04] statutory requirements of containing a

[12:06] minimum of 2,000 students. Meaning those

[12:09] individuals, those districts or SUs that

[12:11] are in a group must have minimum 2,000

[12:14] students and being geographically

[12:17] contiguous.

[12:19] So that's the update thus far. I will

[12:21] share those at board meetings as they

[12:23] are given to me and Carrie as she

[12:26] becomes involved. It's a very aggressive

[12:28] timeline. We have a lot of work to do.

[12:30] Those of us who go out to 46 remember

[12:32] how much work it is. Um so hopeful, but

[12:35] we have some really good representation

[12:37] on those facilitators. And just to

[12:39] continue, I sent a board um memo around

[12:43] 5:30 today

[12:45] printed that um email that Sher just

[12:47] read. You should have all received it as

[12:50] members of the Vermont School Board

[12:52] Association. Um so you would have

[12:54] received it maybe 10 days ago I think

[12:57] and um I had volunteered as the chair to be on the initial committee and I

[13:03] will stay with that committee but

[13:04] definitely if there are opportunities

[13:06] for more board members it's in our best

[13:08] interest to have um as many as they

[13:11] allow us. So please be thinking about

[13:13] that. It is going to be probably once a

[13:17] month meeting with homework in between.

[13:19] Um it's not going to be easy. I have

[13:23] reached out to a couple of side um

[13:26] districts

[13:28] uh near us or sus near us who have

[13:30] indicated interest in possibly coming

[13:33] along the board with us. They're not

[13:35] sure.

[13:37] They feel like they should go to the

[13:38] initial one and see if they feel that's

[13:41] the right place for them to be. um and

[13:43] then consider it. And I don't know, it's

[13:45] not very clear what the rules are around

[13:47] that. I've seen a couple of different

[13:50] approaches to it, saying you have to get

[13:51] it done in like the next 15 days. You

[13:54] have to designate the person. And then

[13:56] I've seen though, you will be able to to

[13:58] jump out. [clears throat]

[14:00] They clearly said you can't be in two

[14:03] different um merger groups or three

[14:06] different learning groups, but I don't

[14:08] think they can also bar you from

[14:09] attending. It's a public meeting. So, um

[14:12] I've encouraged the people that have

[14:14] spoken with me about this that they

[14:16] should consider going um to do the

[14:19] meetings they want to because it's very

[14:22] clear in the statute that these are

[14:23] public meetings and they're open to the

[14:25] public. So, um think about those things.

[14:29] We do want to have you know the most

[14:32] people we can have and um once we know

[14:35] what the mechanism is going to be um

[14:38] getting that back out to you all.

[14:40] >> Yes.

[14:41] I just this is probably going to be a

[14:43] pretty stupid question, but um um what

[14:47] is the almost likelihood of the whole

[14:49] geographically

[14:51] continuous staying? Because at least

[14:53] from my experience with talking with

[14:54] other students across the state is just

[14:56] take for example a school like Windsor

[14:58] who's very geographically close. You

[15:00] would think they would be very similar

[15:02] to us, but at least my experience with

[15:03] student body their school serves has an

[15:06] entirely different set of needs with

[15:08] ours compared to other students I've

[15:10] talked to across the state where they

[15:12] seem to have a more similar situation

[15:14] with us. What is the likelihood of that

[15:17] changing? Cuz I don't know how well we

[15:19] would mesh with some schools that do not

[15:22] have our same interests, if that makes

[15:25] any sense. Like I would almost be

[15:28] curious about us bucking horns with

[15:30] other districts that do not think the

[15:33] way and do not have the same goal sets

[15:34] compared to as we will with some

[15:36] districts that are not so geographically

[15:38] connected.

[15:38] >> So remember it's voluntary. So it's

[15:40] having opening conversations and the

[15:43] reason why it's it's geographically

[15:45] contigious contiguous

[15:48] um is so that you will have one

[15:51] superintendent will be responsible for

[15:53] those students and so there will be

[15:55] services there will be so in order for

[15:58] that continuity of service right now we

[16:00] already are geographically pretty large

[16:02] it's 30 minutes to Killington it's you

[16:04] know 25 minutes if you're not going down

[16:07] 106 not during fall foliage Um, and so

[16:10] even then that's challenging. So that

[16:13] for one reason to govern that large of

[16:15] an area it it can be challenging. So I

[16:17] think that's why they're trying to keep

[16:19] it uh close to each other. Um, and

[16:22] remember the statute as written now is

[16:25] voluntary merger

[16:28] >> and the goal is um at least is stated as

[16:31] that it's to improve the quality of

[16:33] education for all students. It's really

[16:35] not about whether um you like the people

[16:38] you're partnered with. It's it's about

[16:41] everyone improving and you know it's

[16:44] just it's going to be very difficult. I

[16:46] don't think the timeline is really sad.

[16:50] So Bren just briefly thanks for um

[16:54] talking to other potentially interested

[16:58] merger partners who aren't currently in

[17:00] our um group. And I think if if if it's

[17:06] possible to bring it up as a discussion

[17:08] point at the first meeting, it does feel

[17:11] like you said, it's not clear how much

[17:14] flexibility there is going to be or what

[17:16] the timeline is for people being able to

[17:18] switch. But um maybe advocating for, you

[17:22] know, a little bit of a longer window

[17:24] that folks can sort of even get their

[17:26] feet wet in the process and realize, you

[17:28] know, what are the stakes and what what

[17:30] do we really want to be looking for? Um

[17:32] and secondly, I just wanted to know I

[17:34] don't think

[17:36] unless I just missed it. I don't think

[17:37] that that um note came out to all of us

[17:40] as board members. I think maybe just

[17:42] came to the chair, but curious.

[17:44] >> Well, you all have we have not and thank

[17:46] you for sharing that.

[17:48] >> It's not always clear to me who who gets

[17:50] what, right? Because it just says dear

[17:53] >> and and the best place to advocate is

[17:55] your representatives and super senators.

[17:57] They are the only ones who can change

[17:59] that definition through act 170 in terms

[18:03] of extending the timeline. Yes. You know

[18:05] that I've given that messaging to uh the

[18:09] speaker of the house and others that it

[18:11] is a

[18:12] >> unrealistic. But I think again the more

[18:14] that the community is involved in saying

[18:16] the same thing,

[18:18] >> the more opportunities there are in the

[18:20] spring to make those changes.

[18:23] left. How many more towns would we have

[18:26] to add to our seven in order to get our

[18:28] student body of of 2,000? [snorts]

[18:31] >> Well, we have close to a thousand now,

[18:33] >> right? So, that's seven towns. So, we

[18:35] might not have to add seven,000 would be

[18:38] Hartford,

[18:39] Mountain Views, and Windsor Southeast.

[18:42] That's more than 2,000.

[18:44] >> So, we would qualify if we agreed to

[18:46] merge. What the level of merging is what

[18:49] we have to discuss. Nobody wants to

[18:51] close their schools. Nobody. So you're

[18:54] not going to get that done overnight. Um

[18:57] so there's just, you know, that's the

[18:59] biggest barrier in the room and that's

[19:01] the most costefficient is to close

[19:04] buildings and break. And what they're

[19:07] basic they're saying the ideal is 2,000

[19:09] and the absolute minimum is 200. So

[19:12] that's

[19:13] >> Oh, okay. Yeah.

[19:14] >> I thought it was the minimum was 2,000.

[19:16] I was like

[19:16] >> that's the ideal in my reading of 170

[19:20] and that the baseline minimum is 200.

[19:24] >> So that you know and for some school

[19:25] districts that's a challenge to have

[19:27] 200. We are right around a thousand.

[19:30] We'll see. And he promised me the real

[19:32] numbers. I haven't asked him officially

[19:34] quite yet because it's not fair. But um

[19:36] so somewhere in there and again as long

[19:39] as we are addressing reason students and

[19:42] we can offer a quality program those are

[19:44] all the other factors involved and the

[19:46] good faith effort is not that we're

[19:48] getting my understanding is not that we

[19:50] get to the magic number 200 is that we

[19:53] are again trying to create a composition

[19:56] of students and serve students better.

[20:01] Any board members online have a

[20:03] question?

[20:07] » One in the room.

[20:07] >> Okay, go ahead.

[20:08] >> Um, I think you may have just answered

[20:10] my question. So, is our initial grouping

[20:13] that we still have a chance to change

[20:16] going to be harder southeast or is our

[20:20] initial grouping based on the the map

[20:23] that made it out of the boss like

[20:26] voluntary merger map?

[20:28] >> No, it's not. It's the the R3 um

[20:31] districts and then Pittsfield because

[20:34] they're mostly aligned with less.

[20:36] >> So they have little as well. So

[20:40] >> how those initial groupings

[20:42] who who set who set those because I

[20:44] thought the Bose map had us aligned with

[20:47] towns much uh well beyond just those

[20:50] three

[20:51] >> that those that's specifically for the

[20:53] Boseies.

[20:54] >> Okay. So 170 had two very major efforts.

[20:58] One was creating a Boseies or CISA.

[21:01] We've already done that. So, we're we're

[21:03] lucky. We've got that work done. The

[21:05] other part of 170 is the voluntary

[21:07] merger with groupings and that came out

[21:09] of House Education and House about who

[21:11] are the the towns they grouped. Again,

[21:14] close made sense, you know, and again,

[21:17] that's why there's the opportunity to

[21:19] resort at this time. Um, so there are

[21:22] all different kinds of that's why Dave

[21:24] said he's already received what 11

[21:26] different choices to move. So that came

[21:29] out of House Education and was you know

[21:31] the House Act development 170. So two

[21:36] very separate pieces of

[21:39] >> Yep. I think it mainly came from

[21:44] he was the one who put that geographic

[21:47] together looking at the districts that

[21:49] were already working together. Okay. If

[21:51] we I concur with Kin. If we can't get

[21:54] the time extended to to sort of uh

[21:57] modify the groups at all, then then I

[22:00] guess the next few days are critical if

[22:02] we're trying to attract some other

[22:04] channels to join our group. And it

[22:07] sounds like maybe you've got some in

[22:08] mind.

[22:09] >> I I have spoken with three separate

[22:12] entities who were interested but were

[22:15] kind of nervous about how do we even

[22:17] know it's the right fit for us. So, I

[22:19] think that you'll see some people at

[22:21] meetings that are just watching to see

[22:23] what's what's happening

[22:26] because it is a big change. If you're

[22:28] going to jump out of a district you've

[22:30] been in for 50 years or something like

[22:33] that.

[22:36] Okay. Anybody else from the board?

[22:39] All right. Thank you. One more question.

[22:42] Would we try to incorporate Pittsfield

[22:46] into our school district but beyond

[22:48] being at our SU as as part of this?

[22:51] >> We would love to. I've had that direct

[22:53] conversation. They prefer to retain

[22:56] choice. However, they 98% of their kids

[22:59] come through our system.

[23:01] >> But there are people who move there from

[23:03] specific schools they want their

[23:05] children to go to, including Kington

[23:07] Mountain School. And that's that was

[23:09] what they said.

[23:11] I think only three of their however many

[23:14] come from kids go somewhere other than

[23:16] here.

[23:18] So they want to be remain flexible as

[23:20] Heartland as does weather. They want to

[23:22] retain their choice ability.

[23:29] » Well, I understand why they want it.

[23:31] Yeah, because they're not giving it out

[23:32] anymore. Um any other directors who are

[23:37] here tonight in person or on the Zoom?

[23:40] Would you like to make any comments

[23:42] about your reports in our board book?

[23:46] I just say one other thing. I just um

[23:48] wanted to voice that it has been an

[23:50] incredible start to the school year.

[23:51] Thanks to all of our students and all of

[23:53] our teachers and everyone um has done

[23:56] such great work and I just wanted to say

[23:57] thank you to everybody for great start.

[24:00] I've had multiple reports from multiple

[24:02] teachers. It's been a great start.

[24:05] >> All right. And students, do you just add

[24:07] a quick call out to if you'll see that

[24:10] um from Andy the fishing mitigation um

[24:14] him and members of his group presented

[24:16] to the full faculty and staff. This is a

[24:19] significant

[24:20] uh challenge that we're all facing

[24:22] daily. Um and I really appreciate the

[24:25] efforts of his team to really make sure

[24:27] that it's not happening in our buildings

[24:28] and that teachers and staff have the

[24:31] training they need to make the decisions

[24:33] about the kinds of emails coming

[24:34] through.

[24:35] Not that everybody, but it's been a

[24:37] challenge more so than ever.

[24:39] >> I have on that. Um, is there any risk

[24:43] about fishing student accounts? Because

[24:45] I know the report said that we're

[24:47] specifically only testing adults.

[24:52] >> Um, the uh

[24:56] student accounts don't seem to have been

[24:58] an issue.

[24:59] >> Okay. And um the access that students

[25:02] have to um like login and other sort of

[25:08] sensitive information um is so much

[25:10] more.

[25:11] >> Right. Right. I didn't know if there's

[25:12] any way of somebody like getting in that

[25:14] back door and getting over Yeah,

[25:16] >> I did I think only because of the board

[25:19] get a very weird email from evil twin

[25:21] Sherry who

[25:24] >> twin Sherry this morning. So I do have a

[25:29] sister who lives in

[25:32] but I'm not on there tonight.

[25:35] >> Well, my my corlary to that is maybe at

[25:39] some point in the future we should think

[25:40] about doing one of these simulated

[25:43] fishing attacks for students as

[25:45] educational and draining because they're

[25:48] going to get it when they get jobs. self

[25:50] here.

[25:52] >> Yeah,

[25:54] >> I'd like to say I do have a twin sister

[25:56] named Sher. [laughter]

[26:04] So when it's carried Sherry, that's like

[26:07] this is not new to me

[26:10] all my life. [laughter]

[26:13] >> May I make one more comment just on the

[26:16] fishing piece? So, um, right, just to

[26:18] make sure we're clear on the terms, the

[26:20] fishing fishing emails are emails that

[26:22] you get where there it's some bad actor

[26:24] trying to get you to click on a link or um or click on a button that goes to

[26:30] a that'll take you to a website, they'll

[26:31] ask you for your login credentials for

[26:33] some site and it's not actually like

[26:35] it'll look like a Google site, it will

[26:37] look like a Microsoft site and it's not

[26:39] actually one of those sites, right? And

[26:41] so somebody steals your credentials and

[26:43] then uses those to log into your account

[26:45] and then send out emails from you or do

[26:48] other nefarious things um with your with

[26:51] your accounting information. The um I I

[26:54] wanted to mention that because thank you

[26:56] for bringing it up um up Sherry and the

[26:58] folks on my team have done um a lot of

[27:01] hard hard work um on that in the last

[27:04] month or two because Vermont has been

[27:05] targeted. Uh all all of the board

[27:09] [clears throat] members have

[27:09] Mountainviews.org

[27:12] um email accounts and so you are part of

[27:16] the fishing um both at you're at risk

[27:19] right for fishing attacks and you're

[27:22] included in our fishing simulation

[27:24] emails. And so some of you have

[27:26] contacted me already about that to ask

[27:28] about them. Um and uh those are uh um

[27:33] [clears throat] yes you are

[27:34] intentionally included in in our fishing

[27:37] uh simulation entry.

[27:41] » Um can you just remind me how the

[27:44] students who the youngest students who

[27:45] have email addresses who are accessing

[27:47] their email addresses who can be exposed

[27:50] to these fishing attempts? How old are

[27:52] they?

[27:54] >> I don't know how

[27:55] >> what grade are they in? I don't know how

[27:57] students are who are getting

[27:59] >> six prosper.

[28:02] >> Is my question just like at what at what

[28:04] grade do they get email addresses

[28:05] >> that they're checking?

[28:07] >> I don't know.

[28:08] >> We don't know.

[28:09] >> Well, I don't know.

[28:10] >> I definitely have one by fifth grade.

[28:13] >> You have one in fifth grade?

[28:14] >> So I I mean I moved to the school

[28:16] district in fifth grade.

[28:20] >> It was before that slightly. Yeah.

[28:22] >> Yeah.

[28:24] >> Fifth grade.

[28:24] >> You're right. We don't engage during

[28:26] public unless it's public comment.

[28:29] >> No.

[28:29] >> Okay. Sorry. No, I mean it's okay to ask

[28:32] Andy. Um,

[28:35] >> so did Andy follow up with Ser and when

[28:38] student email accounts is she?

[28:41] >> Yeah.

[28:41] >> I think as soon as they create a Google

[28:43] account, they probably have have one,

[28:44] but

[28:45] >> Oh, yes.

[28:45] >> Why don't just get her a good answer?

[28:48] >> Yeah.

[28:50] And Yeah. Right. We we've talked

[28:52] about they get Google accounts as soon

[28:54] as

[28:54] >> we've spoken about it, but I still like

[28:56] don't really understand.

[28:57] >> Yeah.

[28:58] I can find out when they start

[29:01] accessing.

[29:02] >> I'd love that. Thank you.

[29:05] >> All right. Thank you. Um Laya and Logan,

[29:07] would you like to say a few words?

[29:09] >> Oh, I do.

[29:13] » All right. Um this is short. So, it's

[29:16] the start of the new school year. Um

[29:18] I've been really enjoying the high

[29:19] morale. Um, there are new plans and

[29:22] people to implement it into our routine,

[29:24] but I think the transition is going

[29:25] really well. Uh, the field hockey team

[29:27] has pulled off a couple of really great

[29:28] wins. Theater is off to a great start.

[29:30] Casting is finished. Rehearsals are

[29:32] underway. Um, some seniors are preparing

[29:34] for early decision applications. The

[29:36] detail I'm including in case you see me

[29:38] start sobbing hysterically at our next

[29:39] meeting or in the middle of this one.

[29:43] >> Thank good.

[29:46] » Um, just kind of a welcome back. Um,

[29:49] just wanted to say we had the I'm not

[29:51] sure if any of you guys saw it the other

[29:52] day in the parking lot. We had senior

[29:53] sunrise. It was an amazing experience.

[29:55] All of us got to get together, say hi to

[29:57] old friends. It's been great catching up

[29:59] with our peers. It's been great catching

[30:01] up with members of the staff. I really

[30:03] wanted to give a shout out because I

[30:05] know there's some stuff with the new

[30:06] roll out of this year. Big one was we

[30:08] were all worried about the new lunch

[30:09] line is going to take forever. But the

[30:11] staff did an amazing job. They got that

[30:14] lunch line down in I don't know, four

[30:16] days. It was insane.

[30:17] >> Yeah, it was something. Um, fall sports

[30:19] season's underway. I believe our boys

[30:20] soccer still undefeated. It's They're

[30:23] doing really well this year.

[30:24] >> That was a crazy goal posted on

[30:25] Instagram. I don't know if you guys

[30:27] follow boys soccer on Instagram, but it

[30:28] was pretty impressive.

[30:30] >> Um, and it was just it was been an

[30:32] amazing start to the year. Could not be

[30:34] better.

[30:35] >> Great. Thank you. So,

[30:40] » great. From such a better privilege to

[30:44] >> Yes, we got him today.

[30:46] >> That's why you're so happy.

[30:48] I'm filled with joy.

[30:51] [laughter]

[30:51] >> I thought so. All right. Uh we're going

[30:54] to move into the appointments. Uh the

[30:56] first up is nominations for vice chair.

[30:59] Um and two people have indicated their

[31:02] interest. Gina Mallister and Josh Lenton

[31:05] each said they were interested in that.

[31:07] So I'm going to open for nominations for

[31:10] vice chair.

[31:12] Elliot,

[31:12] >> I'd like to nominate Gene McAllister for

[31:14] vice chair. Okay.

[31:17] Is there a second? Second. Thank you. Um

[31:22] All right. Is are there any other

[31:23] nominations?

[31:27] » Okay. She is she was

[31:28] >> I was going to Yeah. stepping down for

[31:30] nominations for Danish since she already

[31:32] has them. Thanks.

[31:34] >> Are there any other nominations for

[31:37] anyone else?

[31:44] » All right.

[31:44] >> Wait, is Josh on? He's on.

[31:46] >> Can he nominate himself?

[31:48] >> He can. I guess that'll go.

[31:50] >> Yeah. I mean, procedurally, he should

[31:52] know that. Maybe we should make that

[31:54] possible if it's technically allowed any

[31:56] expressed interest.

[31:58] >> I I didn't think it would be appropriate

[32:00] to nominate yourself. That's why I

[32:02] didn't.

[32:07] » I have no idea on that question. Cannot

[32:10] answer that. I think you could.

[32:11] >> I think Well, go ahead. If Josh, if

[32:13] you'd like to nominate yourself, go

[32:14] ahead.

[32:18] » I'll nominate myself since I showed

[32:20] interest.

[32:22] >> We don't know the rule. I'm happy to to

[32:24] nominate Joshua just so we can get a

[32:26] vote.

[32:27] >> Is there a second?

[32:28] >> Oh, second. Thank you, Lara. All right.

[32:31] Um, I think it would be very helpful if

[32:35] uh everyone is putting their voice on

[32:38] because I have to do a roll call to view

[32:41] this. So, first I'm going to um so

[32:44] unmute yourselves, please. Um if you're

[32:47] a board member, is there

[32:49] >> is it we have discuss is it possible for

[32:52] the two nomination nominees to say a few

[32:55] words if they'd like.

[32:56] >> Sure.

[32:58] Uh Gina, why don't you go first? Well,

[33:01] first of all, you know, I'm honored to

[33:03] be considered for this. Um, I have a

[33:07] couple of of of reasons for wanting to

[33:11] do this because it doves so well

[33:16] alongside the work that I'm doing as

[33:18] communications chair. Gives me a little

[33:20] bit more visibility as to what's going

[33:22] on across the board and allows me to

[33:26] pull things together.

[33:28] Also, I'm already chairing the

[33:30] superintendent search committee in

[33:33] addition to being a representative for

[33:35] reading with a great small elementary

[33:38] school. So, the scope of what I'm

[33:40] already doing now seem to fit

[33:43] uh the role. Uh and so I I love to play

[33:48] that a little.

[33:51] Josh,

[33:54] » I feel like I would fit this position

[33:57] well because I'm involved in community

[33:59] and multi levels. I have involved in the

[34:01] school as far as being a coach for

[34:03] middle school football and I've been on

[34:06] this board for now seven years between

[34:10] the two terms.

[34:18] Okay,

[34:19] >> great.

[34:19] >> You can put your mics on. Um,

[34:23] all those in favor of electing Gina

[34:25] Mallister as the vice chair, would you

[34:27] please uh say your name and yes or no?

[34:31] Uh, you only have to say your name if

[34:33] you're voting yes.

[34:36] I'll just go right around the room here

[34:37] and then I'll go to the Zoom. All those

[34:40] in favor of electing Gina, please say

[34:43] yes.

[34:43] >> Yes.

[34:45] So, one, two, three,

[34:48] four, five, six. Karina, I can't see.

[34:52] Okay. [clears throat]

[34:54] All right. All those in favor of

[34:56] electing uh Josh.

[34:59] Uh oh, sorry, Gina from the screen.

[35:02] Anna,

[35:04] yes. Heather, yes. Bob, yes.

[35:07] >> Hi.

[35:08] >> All right. It appears that Gina has been

[35:10] elected as the vice chair. and thank you

[35:13] both for being willing to to do this

[35:15] job. Um, I appreciate that women's

[35:17] interest. Um, and so I'm going to call

[35:20] it for Gina. Thank you, uh, board.

[35:25] Um, all right. Our next order of

[35:28] business is to select a newly stocked

[35:31] school board rep. Uh, the select board

[35:34] received two letters of interest. Claire

[35:37] Bernard who is here tonight over here um

[35:40] was selected by this board to be um that was their recommendation. Um

[35:47] unfortunately the other candidate was

[35:49] not able to give a statement at the

[35:50] board meeting although I sent out both

[35:53] letters to the board. Um and so um I'd

[35:57] like to uh again ask for um a vote to u

[36:02] have claim

[36:05] the group and after the election cla

[36:07] I'll ask you to say a few words.

[36:10] All those in favor of electing claire

[36:13] please say yes and we'll put out your

[36:15] zoom hand.

[36:18] >> Yes.

[36:23] Uh let's see that I think we have enough

[36:25] to call it for Claire. Thank you very

[36:28] much everybody for this and thank you

[36:30] Claire before we will into our circle of

[36:34] friends.

[36:36] So would you say a few things about your

[36:38] interests?

[36:39] >> Sure. Um I'm Claire Bernard. I've lived

[36:41] in Woodstock for three years. Um I've

[36:43] got a six, seven, and eight-year-old.

[36:45] So, aside from the questionable

[36:47] parenting lineup choices there, uh, we

[36:50] have a vested interest in the success of

[36:52] this district and I'm really excited to

[36:55] try to help. So, nice to look forward to

[36:57] meeting you all working together.

[36:59] >> Welcome.

[37:00] >> So, Claire can sit on the sidelines, but

[37:02] she has to be sworn in by the town clerk

[37:04] to officially participate, but Claire,

[37:06] feel free to raise your hand if you have

[37:09] something you want to ask her um sent.

[37:12] And if if and maybe somebody over there

[37:15] can tell me they're perfectly perfect

[37:17] against us because they can't see them

[37:18] very well.

[37:19] >> All right. Well, thank you both. Um

[37:23] uh at this time we're going to have a um

[37:27] a request for quotes for an energy

[37:29] performance contrast on the new bill. I

[37:32] believe both Matt and Mary are to

[37:35] present that or Mary is presenting that.

[37:39] I think I was presenting this and then

[37:40] we were presenting together. Great. Uh

[37:43] together we're presenting the um budget

[37:46] items during the finance update. So

[37:50] >> um

[37:52] >> one of the things that the new bill uh

[37:54] committee has been working on uh as you

[37:57] all know is to bring private money

[38:01] uh to match what the bond voters have

[38:05] approved. that was a contingency on our bond and some of that has been

[38:11] filthropic. Um but one of the other ways

[38:16] that we can meet that uh that

[38:18] requirement is to raise uh federal

[38:21] grants uh or state grants. Any really

[38:24] any money that we can bring uh it's not

[38:26] just coming from the voters. And an

[38:29] interesting uh opportunity has come to

[38:31] us and and that is to apply for uh the

[38:35] federal energy tax credit for geothermal

[38:39] heating and cooling systems. And and for

[38:42] those of you who've been involved in the

[38:43] new school build or on the board long

[38:45] enough to have seen some of the designs,

[38:47] uh we looked at a number of different

[38:49] options with our architect and with our builders.

[38:53] And we ended up going with something

[38:54] kind of in the the middle that would

[38:57] have some some geotechnical wells uh

[39:01] that would contribute to a geothermal

[39:02] system, but we didn't go for like an

[39:04] entire uh electric building that would

[39:07] have even more wells. And one of the

[39:09] things we did in our due diligence and

[39:11] working with our engineers and

[39:12] architects was put a test well uh here

[39:17] on the property um that showed you know

[39:20] adequate um results to to have a

[39:22] geothermal system. So long long story

[39:25] short, um one of the concepts is to

[39:29] potentially find other ways to save cost

[39:33] in our new building design so that we

[39:36] could go back potentially to the larger

[39:38] geothermal system. And if like for

[39:42] example

[39:44] um if the the tax credit is up to 40%

[39:48] uh of the upfront capital cost of your

[39:51] geothermal system and that geothermal

[39:53] system extends to a lot of the HVAC as

[39:56] well. It's not just the geothermal

[39:59] system. Uh so it could actually end up

[40:01] being a pretty big number like of our

[40:03] say if our school is $115 million total

[40:07] uh that energy system in total could end

[40:10] up being as much as 20 $30 million and

[40:13] you can get a 40% credit. So now you're

[40:16] looking at 8 to uh did I say 30 to 40

[40:20] million? So yeah, you're looking at um

[40:23] 12 to$16 million in a federal grant. and

[40:26] that that if that counts toward the

[40:29] well, it would count toward the private

[40:31] fundraising requirement uh to to meet um

[40:36] the needs of our bond vote. So, it seems

[40:39] like a very good idea to re-evaluate

[40:41] that. But there is a state law that

[40:44] before we can have any contractor

[40:47] uh put a bid together on any any type of

[40:51] proposal that would come up with say new

[40:53] designs or new cost. uh we have to do an

[40:56] RFQ which is a request for uh for

[40:59] quotes. It might actually be technically

[41:01] a request for qualifications. It is and

[41:04] um so we would like the board to vote

[41:07] tonight. Uh this just kicks off the

[41:09] process and then we'll have to identify

[41:11] qualified biders. They'll have to make

[41:13] proposals. We would uh bring back to the

[41:16] board uh potential selection of of a of

[41:20] a qualified bidder. So with that um I

[41:25] think I can make the motion

[41:29] and we have it in the

[41:32] >> Yeah. So I hereby move that the

[41:34] superintendent's office prepare and

[41:36] publish requests for proposals for the

[41:38] purpose of seeking vendors to quote for

[41:40] an energy performance contract on the

[41:42] new bill.

[41:43] >> Second.

[41:46] >> Any discussion?

[41:48] >> Uh good question about it. Um just to

[41:52] clarify, um would the

[41:57] uh

[41:59] moving forward with a

[42:03] does this assume moving forward with a

[42:05] more robust um

[42:09] uh geothermal system than is

[42:13] incorporated in the current plan that

[42:17] was the 115 or

[42:19] >> it doesn't matter. have to, but it

[42:21] could. Um,

[42:23] >> so it would be a balance of like finding

[42:26] other cost savings in the building

[42:28] design,

[42:29] >> right?

[42:29] >> Um maybe choices of

[42:32] uh windows or surfaces or like because

[42:36] if you just increase the cost of the

[42:38] energy system, you're you're going to

[42:40] increase the cost of the total building.

[42:42] So we have to balance like keeping the

[42:43] cost of a building at at a level we

[42:46] could still achieve. Um but potentially

[42:49] uh having uh a more I think

[42:53] environmentally sustainable and e

[42:55] economically uh cost-effective system

[42:58] that also has the bonus of bringing in

[43:00] this federal line.

[43:01] >> Okay. So this action doesn't doesn't

[43:04] come at us to one particular design or scale of system. It's sort of

[43:10] exploring

[43:11] >> right. No, we could I mean we could say

[43:13] no to all the proposals and we could

[43:15] stick with the existing architect

[43:17] design, the existing engineering and the

[43:19] existing bolts we got from PC

[43:22] construction. Or we could say we like

[43:25] what this these firms are proposing

[43:28] and we could break up contract in such a

[43:31] way where we'd have PC construction in

[43:33] our initial architect like say do the

[43:35] building but this group would have a

[43:37] separate contract for the geothermal and

[43:39] HVAC and if they have their that

[43:42] individual contract then holds all the

[43:45] cost and assets that can qualify as

[43:47] eligible investment for the tax credit.

[43:50] So, it's it's a good it's a it's a good

[43:53] idea. Um,

[43:55] it kind of gets us looking at the new

[43:58] school build designs again, which we

[43:59] haven't done in a little while.

[44:02] >> So, any other questions?

[44:04] >> Is there a time when this grant's going

[44:05] to go away or threaten to go away?

[44:08] >> So, just so happens the uh federal

[44:10] government, I won't name names, really

[44:13] likes drilling technology.

[44:16] Uh and so geothermal got um got was kept

[44:21] in the one big beautiful bill.

[44:24] >> Solar tax credits were were sunset my

[44:27] business um if we didn't start and start

[44:30] 226 of July 4th. But geothermal battery

[44:33] storage uh did very very well and I

[44:36] believe that tax credit for them is is

[44:39] guaranteed 2034 I think is the the date.

[44:42] But

[44:45] >> and then Anna

[44:46] >> I just have a terminology question. I'm

[44:48] confused by the term tax credit. Do we

[44:51] pay federal taxes?

[44:54] >> No. So yeah. So what ends up happening

[44:57] is um this the biders in this particular

[45:03] RFQ

[45:04] will essentially um take that credit and

[45:08] then sell it to a tax equity investor to

[45:11] bring in actual cash. That that's my

[45:13] understanding of the structure. So we

[45:15] can't offset our tax liability because

[45:17] we're a nonprofit,

[45:18] >> right? But with the energy performance

[45:20] contract, uh, they can monetize it.

[45:24] >> Okay.

[45:24] >> And use it to offset the upfront cost of

[45:27] the building.

[45:28] >> Okay.

[45:28] >> Um, so

[45:31] >> so we don't pay them in dollars, we pay

[45:32] them in tax credits and then they build

[45:35] this thing for us.

[45:38] So we still have to come up with the the

[45:43] money to build the building. But if they

[45:47] can find a financing partner who you

[45:49] know is going to guarantee buy the

[45:51] credit

[45:52] >> um then a bank would essentially lend us

[45:54] the money knowing that we're going to

[45:56] get tax credit.

[45:59] >> So in the end it offsets upfront cost.

[46:03] >> Okay.

[46:05] I'm glad you know this.

[46:11] » I [clears throat] have I have two

[46:12] questions. The rebuild plan as it stands

[46:14] currently, does that qualify for any

[46:16] federal tax dollars under the geothermal

[46:18] bill?

[46:19] >> Actually, yes, it it would. Yeah, we

[46:22] just would have to structure it the

[46:24] right way to go after the tax credit.

[46:26] But yes, because we have some geothermal

[46:28] in the existing bill, uh it it should be

[46:32] eligible for the tax credit. But then,

[46:34] you know, you might need um one of these

[46:38] companies. They're in the business of

[46:40] structuring it to to get the cash

[46:43] instead of the credit to work with us.

[46:46] >> Received. And uh it sounds like maybe

[46:48] we're going to explore uh building out

[46:49] how much geothermal we rely on for the

[46:51] new build just to see where where that

[46:54] gets us with the the federal grant.

[46:57] >> Yes, that would that's what their

[46:58] proposals will include is like how would

[47:00] they design a geothermal system?

[47:03] received. And uh my last question is

[47:05] previously when we've applied for grants

[47:08] um and uh I think previously it's been

[47:10] RFPs, but do we are we required to

[47:13] accept the lowest bidder as we have

[47:15] before?

[47:18] >> I believe so on RFQS. I don't have that

[47:21] statute in front of me.

[47:23] >> Okay, that was more procedural. Awesome.

[47:25] Thanks y'all.

[47:27] >> Did you have a question?

[47:28] >> Yeah, I'm just curious. Um, I mean this

[47:31] sounds this sounds really very

[47:33] promising. So I'm just like I'm just

[47:35] wondering if there's

[47:37] any if there's a flip side at all like

[47:40] is there is are we thinking like how how

[47:42] likely are we thinking that this is to

[47:44] be successful and in order to be

[47:46] successful like roughly what would would

[47:48] be the timing of us in understanding

[47:50] knowing that

[47:52] >> so is there like is there downside? So,

[47:55] one thing I'll mention is that the

[47:57] technology is is proven. Um, it's been

[48:01] around for for a long time. It's used

[48:04] very often. Um, in commercial buildings,

[48:08] like like schools, that's often one of

[48:12] the places you'll see it. U, it's I

[48:15] believe that Burlington High School put

[48:17] it in and one of the companies that

[48:19] we're talking to uh designed and built

[48:22] that system. So from a technology risk

[48:24] perspective, no I we're not like signing

[48:26] up for something that's like super uh

[48:29] experimental. Um I think the thing that

[48:33] people should understand is that the

[48:36] bigger and more costly this system gets,

[48:38] yes, you get a proportionate tax credit,

[48:41] but you have to be careful because you

[48:43] could just be adding a price tag to the

[48:46] cost of your total building.

[48:47] >> Yeah. So there was like I said there's

[48:50] going to be a balance when you know we

[48:53] don't want something that just makes it

[48:54] un unpenable for the current bond right

[48:58] the current bond we had passed is is was

[49:01] based on an earlier design

[49:03] >> and just eyes wide open making sure

[49:05] we've had the attorney involved since

[49:07] the beginning having met with his deep

[49:09] experience so there have been six or

[49:12] seven of us who have been meeting with

[49:13] this one potential candidate and so we

[49:16] just want to be very it's exciting

[49:17] Especially for those of us who've been

[49:19] doing this for 15 years to think this

[49:21] might be the path forward but we have to

[49:23] be so careful and not get too excited

[49:26] but it could be an the timeline is

[49:28] interesting. We are Mary's put getting

[49:31] putting together a folder which has all

[49:33] the reports and design and all the

[49:36] everything that we've done. So as people

[49:38] create uh complete the RFQ they're

[49:40] already beginning to formulate their

[49:42] thoughts about what are the

[49:43] opportunities. there are very few

[49:45] companies in this area that does do this

[49:47] kind of work. Um and so the hope is that

[49:50] it can be augmented because they will

[49:52] have access to the resources and begin

[49:54] thinking about it. Um but the timeline

[49:56] itself and I don't have the days yet. Um

[49:58] again this has been happening pretty

[49:59] quickly but we have to go through the

[50:01] stats of RF before we can even begin to

[50:04] have serious conversations with anyone.

[50:09] It's great.

[50:10] >> Um [clears throat]

[50:11] I think it's interesting that the big

[50:13] beautiful bill could be helpful. The

[50:15] last I heard about geothermal um in

[50:18] terms of this campaign and this rebuild

[50:20] was that we were like fixing it because

[50:22] of the cost and that was one of the ways

[50:24] that Seth was like we were shaving cost.

[50:26] So now this is this new thing has come

[50:28] up where there's possible federal money

[50:30] if we put it back in.

[50:32] >> Yeah. I don't think we completely

[50:33] eliminated it

[50:34] >> cuz it was like an extra $10 million

[50:37] >> I think to go full geothermal and be

[50:39] 100% electric building and not need

[50:41] backup propane. I think that was um not

[50:45] chosen in our final design. But I think

[50:47] we still have a design that included

[50:49] some just didn't cover our entire energy

[50:51] load.

[50:52] >> And so now we're hearing that there

[50:53] could be federal money if we include

[50:55] that.

[50:55] >> Well, the federal you can get the

[50:56] federal money regardless. But now that

[50:59] we're more aware of the because that tax

[51:02] credit was extended and is and has

[51:04] actually been increased as part of the

[51:06] big beautiful building. Now you you

[51:08] you're incentivized to potentially do a

[51:11] bigger system like this the system we

[51:13] initially had in mind that would cover

[51:15] our entire energy load

[51:18] >> with the midterms coming up and I think

[51:21] most people are predicting that it's

[51:22] going to lean blue. Is that like is that

[51:25] going to change this?

[51:27] >> Um so the big beautiful bill that could

[51:31] be changed politically amended or

[51:33] whatever a new law could come out but

[51:35] since both parties support this the

[51:37] geothermal tax credit it's awesome

[51:39] >> pretty safe. Cool.

[51:41] >> Great question and yes

[51:43] >> actually one other question. So you said

[51:45] that we you need to identify some cost

[51:48] savings in the current build to kind of

[51:49] offset this. um you've listed kind of

[51:52] windows, things like that. And I'm um I

[51:56] guess I was under the impression that

[51:59] the current build I mean they was you

[52:02] know really paired down from you know

[52:04] the first vote to get to where we are

[52:06] now. Um I'm just curious

[52:10] like how are there still things we can

[52:12] make cheaper? I'm I'm I'm I'm just

[52:14] surprised to hear that there there's

[52:16] other switches we could make because I I

[52:18] would have thought we would have

[52:19] previously made them.

[52:21] >> Yeah. Their their jobs won't be easy. We

[52:24] already hired our firms earlier PC

[52:27] construction group and

[52:29] >> um our architect to do the val what we

[52:32] call the value engineering. Yeah. So

[52:34] they went through and they scrubbed

[52:36] their initial post proposal and they

[52:37] came back with all the line items where

[52:39] they could take cost out. They called it

[52:40] value engineering. So yes, I agree.

[52:44] These companies that want to do

[52:45] potentially bigger geothermal for us are

[52:47] going to have a very difficult time

[52:49] trying to do value engineering when

[52:51] we've already done it twice.

[52:53] >> Like

[52:54] >> it's going to be hard.

[52:56] >> Oh, why not?

[52:59] If we can again make it, you know, be

[53:01] responsive to our taxpayers and like

[53:03] there's something we had new set of

[53:05] eyes, new set of ideas. I know there

[53:07] were members of the new bill group that

[53:09] one person who's an architect had really

[53:12] scrutinized but again having someone

[53:14] else look at it and that's the work they

[53:17] typically do is to take someone else's

[53:19] design and say here's another

[53:20] opportunity but every million we take

[53:23] off you know it's a savings so we're

[53:26] really trying everything

[53:27] >> yeah and we might just be getting their

[53:29] view of the cost which is like a second

[53:32] opinion

[53:32] >> so they might think the geothermal that

[53:35] we designed and it doesn't cost as much

[53:37] or maybe they think it costs more. So,

[53:39] we're going to be getting a second set

[53:41] of opinions on costs.

[53:45] >> Are we ready to vote?

[53:49] >> All right. All those in favor of moving

[53:51] forward on the RFQ, please say I or

[53:55] raise your Zoom hand.

[53:57] >> I

[53:59] >> Are there any opposed?

[54:05] any abstaining

[54:06] >> I because I came in late

[54:11] I think it was yes so um okay then it

[54:16] has passed and thank you all thanks to

[54:18] the work that's being done by Abby Lers

[54:21] Mary

[54:23] and Seth Sherry um I mostly listen

[54:31] um the next thing is Sher's going to

[54:33] talk a little bit about the VSBA BA VSA

[54:36] annual conference.

[54:38] >> So there's a conference coming up that's

[54:40] sponsored by the superintendent

[54:42] association and the school board

[54:43] association on October 29th and 30th. Um

[54:47] Carrie and I and I think some others

[54:50] will be attending. It's a great

[54:51] opportunity to meet with other school

[54:53] boards. Carrie and I have gone a number

[54:55] of times. Um yes today I was asked to be

[54:58] on our panel around innovation on the

[55:00] 29th around change. So, it's an

[55:03] opportunity again to develop some of

[55:05] those skill sets. Uh, we're a highly

[55:07] functioning school board. I'm proud to

[55:09] work with. There's always place to grow

[55:11] and I think opportunities to learn new

[55:13] perspectives. So, um, Carrie has that

[55:16] information. Is it linked here?

[55:18] >> Um, I think it is linked there. Yes, I

[55:20] asked asked that be linked. So, you can

[55:23] take a look at that.

[55:27] The second day probably would be um more

[55:31] interesting than the first day. Um for

[55:34] me as the chair, I get my training hours

[55:36] that I'm expected to do every year and

[55:38] mostly I get can get it through this.

[55:41] It's it's never boring. It's always

[55:43] interesting and but it is up in

[55:45] Burlington. So it's sometimes it's at

[55:47] late morning. So if you're interested,

[55:49] you can sign up. Um

[55:52] uh I don't know what the cost is. there

[55:54] is a cost but it's not terrible.

[55:57] >> So um please uh please do that because

[56:00] it's a timely um topic. Last year was

[56:05] not something we went to was about the

[56:07] govern a governance thing they wanted

[56:10] everyone to do but we elected not to do

[56:13] that. So and with all that's happening

[56:15] with merging CISAs act 70 it's an

[56:19] important part to school board

[56:21] association.

[56:23] All right. Thank you. Um strategic plan

[56:26] um goals update, Sher.

[56:27] >> Yes. So you have a link to the goals

[56:29] that were identified with uh the

[56:31] principles and directors. Um we are

[56:35] three years into our strategic plan. We

[56:38] every um of the goals that were

[56:41] identified in the last strategic plan,

[56:42] we have made initial attempts on the

[56:45] work and all about three or four. Um

[56:48] what we really came to realize is that

[56:50] we've over extended ourselves in terms

[56:53] of strategic plan globe strategic plan

[56:56] goals. So each director principal has a

[56:59] responsibility in those goals. Um and

[57:02] it's work that we will accomplish over

[57:04] the course of this year. The board has

[57:06] responsibilities. My goal is really

[57:08] around facility um and working on

[57:12] continue to advocate for that work. Um,

[57:14] so just so that you know and then I will

[57:16] report out in April on progress made on

[57:20] those goals. So you'll see if you

[57:21] compare this year's to last year's, we

[57:23] tried to be a little tighter in the work

[57:25] that we're doing um whether it's um

[57:28] around having um a consistent response

[57:32] to student behavior across all our

[57:34] buildings. um some of the other work

[57:36] around curriculum but you'll see the

[57:37] work that the principles and directors

[57:39] have identified for them to ensure that

[57:42] we are moving forward on the uh plan of

[57:44] the strategic uh with what's listed in

[57:47] our strategic plan.

[57:50] >> Any questions for Sher?

[57:54] » All right. Thank you. Um now we'll start

[57:56] into the committee updates. Finance

[57:58] committee is up first.

[58:02] >> All right. So, we met uh Karina Anna and

[58:05] I um two weeks ago and uh Mary has put

[58:11] together a few slides that I thought we

[58:14] could share with the entire board.

[58:17] >> I need to make you co

[58:19] can't find you.

[58:21] >> Oh, no. You can pull it up on yours.

[58:23] >> No, that would I don't It's too hard.

[58:26] So, um Randy, can you help me and make

[58:29] Mary a co-host?

[58:33] Do I need to be logged in or I can see?

[58:35] >> No, you just need to uh log into the

[58:37] meeting.

[58:39] >> Oh, that's why I can't see you because

[58:41] you're not logged into the meeting.

[58:42] >> No, I'm not.

[58:44] >> Sorry.

[58:46] >> So, you don't want to share?

[58:48] >> It's hard on screen. Yeah.

[58:51] >> Yeah.

[58:54] just finally.

[58:55] >> Well, I'll while you're pulling that up,

[58:57] um what we

[59:01] presented a month ago is is going to be

[59:04] very similar to what we presented now,

[59:05] but last time I kind of just verbally

[59:07] went through it and I sent some of the

[59:09] letters that Jim Fen had prepared back

[59:12] in June. So, this is a little bit

[59:15] repetitive. Uh it's somewhat refined,

[59:17] but now it's going to be visual with the

[59:19] slides. We just thought that would be

[59:20] better for the board.

[59:28] more filler.

[59:29] >> More filler.

[59:33] » You know, if you understand what Act 70

[59:35] is trying to do, it's trying to move us

[59:37] to a foundation formula of big merged

[59:40] districts with regional schools of 2,000

[59:42] plus kids. And um when we get there, the per pupil spending will be based on

[59:48] a block grant, which is a lot less than

[59:52] the current per pupil spending. And one

[59:55] of the ways that the legislature thought

[59:57] would be helpful to get us there, and

[1:00:00] that's debatable whether it's going to

[1:00:02] be helpful, is to continue to lower the

[1:00:04] excess spending threshold from one

[1:00:06] fiscal year to the next

[1:00:08] >> as we approach the implementation of the

[1:00:10] grant with the block formula. The

[1:00:13] problem with that approach is that you

[1:00:16] don't really have the big drivers of the

[1:00:18] cost savings. So, the big drivers of the

[1:00:21] cost savings on per cable spending are

[1:00:23] going to be a lot more students.

[1:00:26] That will get your per pupil spending

[1:00:28] down. Um, and so to achieve the kind of

[1:00:32] cuts to get down to the block grants

[1:00:34] without more students is is very hard.

[1:00:37] And so unfortunately these uh act 170

[1:00:42] starts to ratchet down our per pupal

[1:00:45] spending before we really have those big

[1:00:48] changes to our um school population.

[1:00:54] That's I'm not going to say anymore

[1:00:56] Mary's beautiful.

[1:00:59] So now I'm gonna um go to

[1:01:05] >> Yeah.

[1:01:11] » Do we have numbers about um like school

[1:01:13] choice communities of people who could

[1:01:15] come here who don't?

[1:01:20] >> It's a lot more than Okay.

[1:01:24] >> Those who don't.

[1:01:25] >> Yeah.

[1:01:28] I can't answer that right now.

[1:01:30] >> You can't?

[1:01:31] >> I cannot.

[1:01:32] >> That's why this years past when we had

[1:01:35] those questions like, well, how many

[1:01:36] kids from Hartland would go to our

[1:01:38] school versus others? Uh, Raph actually

[1:01:40] was really into doing that analysis for

[1:01:43] us. I don't know who would do it. It

[1:01:45] would be Andrew now or Andy.

[1:01:49] >> Okay, I missed that. I missed the

[1:01:50] question. Sorry.

[1:01:52] Just wondering about like what what kind

[1:01:54] of tuition we're missing out on like

[1:01:55] who's going where and how many people

[1:01:57] are going elsewhere that could be coming

[1:01:59] here

[1:01:59] >> from choice from choice.

[1:02:03] >> I'm looking at

[1:02:04] >> the the what we've when that's been

[1:02:07] investigated by the middle school who

[1:02:08] typically students come in either

[1:02:10] seventh but more most likely ninth grade

[1:02:13] decisions around and Logan can speak to

[1:02:16] this is typically um legacy. So, our

[1:02:19] family goes to Windsor, our family goes

[1:02:21] to Hartford. Um, one factor that we've

[1:02:25] noticed is that because uh Hartland has

[1:02:28] a very um experienced wreck program that

[1:02:32] is associated with Hartford, many

[1:02:34] Hartland residents or athletes go to

[1:02:37] Hartford High School.

[1:02:38] more often what we've noticed in

[1:02:41] conversations because we do have teams

[1:02:43] of teachers who go to those st those

[1:02:45] schools and do presentations

[1:02:48] um often decision to around choices

[1:02:51] around where does that family tend to go

[1:02:53] so it's more legacy what do you look

[1:02:56] >> yeah and it fluctuates a lot I know this

[1:02:58] year we got a lot more weather kids than

[1:03:00] in previous years and the year before we

[1:03:02] didn't get any it's anyone's guess where

[1:03:05] we go I think the best way to look that

[1:03:08] students like me is talented with the

[1:03:09] experience I got when I came here, when

[1:03:11] I shadowed here, I thought it would be

[1:03:12] welcomed. I know something other schools

[1:03:14] started to be doing was taking larger

[1:03:16] groups and giving that big tour. So, I

[1:03:20] think it would benefit us to really

[1:03:21] reach out to these schools like H

[1:03:23] Heartland and Weatherfield because they

[1:03:25] do bring in significant amount of money

[1:03:27] and but you also do have other districts

[1:03:29] like I believe we talked about

[1:03:30] Pittsfield earlier where 98% of their

[1:03:32] kids come to us and it's it's just such

[1:03:35] a like you were saying it's a lot of

[1:03:37] family choice and there's not a huge way

[1:03:39] to predict it.

[1:03:41] >> What town do you live in?

[1:03:41] >> Well, it's

[1:03:46] I'll turn it over to Mary.

[1:03:48] >> Okay. So I was able to put together a

[1:03:50] few slides. Um we were tasked with um

[1:03:53] taking the budget from fiscal year 27

[1:03:56] and doing some estimated assumptions. I

[1:03:58] want everybody to know these are

[1:04:00] estimates. Don't take these numbers to

[1:04:02] say they're the numbers because I know

[1:04:04] how that can be too. So okay, first I

[1:04:07] want to talk a little bit about the

[1:04:09] Vermont education transformation. Um act

[1:04:12] 170 is transitioning um toward a new

[1:04:15] education funding structure. Um the

[1:04:19] legislation is basically um tightening

[1:04:22] spending through excess spending

[1:04:24] threshold. In fiscal year 27 it was 118%

[1:04:28] and for 28 it drops down to 115.5%.

[1:04:34] And again beginning in fiscal 28 that is

[1:04:36] going to continue to decline which is

[1:04:38] going to put um increasing restrictions

[1:04:41] on us and we're going to have to look at

[1:04:44] lowering our cost per pupil costs.

[1:04:47] So for example um the legislation or

[1:04:50] legislative analysis estimated fiscal

[1:04:52] year 28 at 115.5%

[1:04:56] that the cost per pupil would be 16,121

[1:05:00] whereas in fiscal year 27 at 118% who's

[1:05:04] 16,470.

[1:05:07] So with costs going up, which they are,

[1:05:11] um we need find a way to go down to meet

[1:05:15] their threshold. If we don't meet the

[1:05:16] threshold, we then pay penalties on

[1:05:20] those conditions. But again, everything

[1:05:23] comes into play on that. Your heating,

[1:05:25] you know, all those things. That's why

[1:05:26] the new build, hopefully if we get that, should help us on our costs as far

[1:05:31] as utilities and things like that. But

[1:05:33] even so, that's an expense being added.

[1:05:35] Um, so anyways, again, I'm going to put

[1:05:38] that out there. These are only

[1:05:40] estimates. Um, first of all, we looked

[1:05:43] at employee benefits. We said, well,

[1:05:46] they've gone up every year. We're going

[1:05:47] to look at about 12%.

[1:05:50] That may be high, but, you know, I think

[1:05:52] we're within range of 12% right now

[1:05:54] because we don't have those numbers, and

[1:05:56] we won't have those numbers for a while

[1:05:57] to tell us where that's going to be yet.

[1:05:59] >> Yeah. And I'll just throw in there. I

[1:06:01] think two years ago it was something

[1:06:02] outrageous like 14%. And then last year

[1:06:06] it was something like kind of surprises

[1:06:08] still outrageous but it was like I think

[1:06:11] seven or eight%

[1:06:13] >> 7%. So 12 is I think a good placeholder

[1:06:16] but we don't know what the state's going

[1:06:18] to assign to us.

[1:06:19] >> We never know until like November late

[1:06:23] what that number is. But of of the all

[1:06:25] the things that this just eats up our

[1:06:29] budget and you take away other things if

[1:06:32] everything else stays the same but with

[1:06:34] healthcare is going up 1%. We it just

[1:06:36] start to eat up our budget. We like take

[1:06:39] away from other things. It is it is

[1:06:41] difficult.

[1:06:42] >> Well very we don't have control over.

[1:06:44] That's really what it comes down to in

[1:06:45] our budget. You know we don't have

[1:06:48] control over the cost of insurance that

[1:06:50] is set by somebody else. So, you know,

[1:06:53] it's those are the things that when

[1:06:55] you're looking at those those decreases

[1:06:58] that eat into trying to find a way, like

[1:07:00] Matt said, to cut down to get there. And

[1:07:03] you have to wages and benefits are our

[1:07:06] biggest costs. You know, we are not

[1:07:10] that's what we have. You know, we we're

[1:07:12] service industry. So, you know, we're

[1:07:15] here to support the students and the

[1:07:16] staff and that's how we spend our money.

[1:07:19] Um the next thing is we did look at

[1:07:21] salary increases and things like that

[1:07:23] and and put an amount in there. But the

[1:07:26] other thing is we went with a moderate

[1:07:27] amount 3% increase on everything else

[1:07:30] for utilities and things like that. But

[1:07:32] again, I don't know what's going to

[1:07:34] happen tomorrow. So, you know, things

[1:07:36] could change come November and prices

[1:07:38] could start going back down. But again,

[1:07:41] it's it's a variable that don't have

[1:07:43] control over. The next thing we did is

[1:07:46] we looked at student counts and kept

[1:07:48] enrollment level where it is right now

[1:07:51] um to figure out where we'd be at. So

[1:07:56] starting with the current budget for

[1:07:57] fiscal year 27 we applied all those

[1:07:59] increases and um for comparison purposes

[1:08:04] enrollment like I said we kept that

[1:08:05] level but based on these assumptions the

[1:08:08] finance committee is recommending an

[1:08:09] estimated 1.5 million budget reduction

[1:08:12] which is approximately 15 positions to

[1:08:16] keep our excess spending equal to or

[1:08:18] less than the amount in 27. So that

[1:08:20] would give us a level budget as of right

[1:08:22] now based on those assumptions. But

[1:08:24] again their assumptions um for planning

[1:08:27] purposes again the 15 positions were

[1:08:30] estimated and what we did is took 75%

[1:08:33] teaching and 25% other staff. So that

[1:08:37] could be related to anywhere within the

[1:08:38] district. Um again teacher salaries were

[1:08:42] estimated with a master step one. So we

[1:08:45] tried to be moderate with that. Um and

[1:08:49] other staffs were based on um you know

[1:08:51] hour and hourly rate and benefits.

[1:08:55] Um the last part is I can't stress

[1:08:57] enough these numbers are preliminary

[1:08:59] budget only. No final budget decisions

[1:09:02] have been made. Estimates will continue

[1:09:04] to change updated information as updated

[1:09:07] information becomes available and the

[1:09:09] fiscal 28 budget is developed. Again,

[1:09:13] these are just estimates to give you an

[1:09:15] idea to show you the potential financial

[1:09:17] impact. And this isn't a one-year deal.

[1:09:20] This is going to continue if Act 170

[1:09:23] stays in place and schools are going to

[1:09:26] be forced to keep looking at their

[1:09:29] programs and their personnel and and

[1:09:31] stuff. So,

[1:09:33] >> yeah. And I'll I'll add a few things

[1:09:35] then if Karina and Anna want to jump in.

[1:09:37] Um, so when we met with our finance

[1:09:40] committee two months ago,

[1:09:42] and we're looking at these numbers.

[1:09:45] Um, we knew that we we couldn't wait

[1:09:49] until we get the final healthcare number

[1:09:51] until we get the final uh per number of

[1:09:54] people, the long-term weighted average

[1:09:56] daily

[1:09:57] >> membership.

[1:09:58] Why would they use that

[1:09:59] word?

[1:10:00] students students um

[1:10:02] >> Vermont

[1:10:03] >> and uh and and we won't know like the

[1:10:07] property yield and all those things are

[1:10:08] going to actually tax calculating tax

[1:10:10] rates and CLA's we just can't wait for

[1:10:13] the final final numbers if we can

[1:10:16] already see that the excess spending

[1:10:18] threshold percentage is coming down and

[1:10:20] we have to reduce then we need to as a

[1:10:23] board and I'm talking about board

[1:10:25] members here we need as a board to tell

[1:10:27] our administration what to do like go

[1:10:30] look for some, you know, budget

[1:10:32] reductions. And so what we came up with

[1:10:34] was um when we crunched these numbers

[1:10:37] based on just those assumptions, if we

[1:10:40] want to be level at where we were last

[1:10:42] year in in the amount that was in in in

[1:10:45] threshold, it would be 1.5 million. So

[1:10:49] that's the starting point. And Cherry

[1:10:51] put together a letter that went to all

[1:10:53] of the staff and leadership across all

[1:10:56] our campuses. And I think you've had at

[1:10:58] least one meeting so far with

[1:10:59] administration principles and leaders to start working on potential proposals.

[1:11:05] Um but those proposals haven't even come

[1:11:08] back to us yet as a finance committee.

[1:11:09] So I I can't share with the board like

[1:11:11] what will be the suggested reductions.

[1:11:14] But that those will start coming in to

[1:11:16] us the finance committee within two

[1:11:18] weeks and then we can come we can share

[1:11:20] those with the full board. Um, but it it

[1:11:24] will be challenging and and maybe some

[1:11:26] numbers will go in our favor like that

[1:11:28] health insurance cost. Maybe it won't be

[1:11:30] 12%. But other things could go against

[1:11:32] us like the final number of students.

[1:11:36] So, we'll we'll be very transparent and

[1:11:39] we want the public to to know that this

[1:11:41] is the the work that we're doing and we

[1:11:43] want people to come to our meetings and give input.

[1:11:47] >> Bren, and

[1:11:48] >> you covered it.

[1:11:49] >> Okay.

[1:11:50] >> Yeah.

[1:11:51] And I think Matt, you know, at the end

[1:11:53] of our last meeting, the whole

[1:11:55] committee, no one wants to cut. This is

[1:11:57] not a task that any of us wants to

[1:12:00] enter. It is not administration's goal.

[1:12:04] We have a highly successful district.

[1:12:06] Our students are thriving. Um, we have

[1:12:09] tightened our belts for many years now,

[1:12:11] but 15 positions is a lot of positions

[1:12:14] no matter where they land. And I just

[1:12:17] and I really appreciate the finance

[1:12:19] committee has been works finance

[1:12:21] committee very clear on the charge

[1:12:24] really walking with us in this really

[1:12:26] hard decision. I appreciate Matt allowed

[1:12:28] me to put his name on that memo that

[1:12:30] went out to the faculty and staff. I

[1:12:32] know they're organizing. I see lots of

[1:12:34] faculty here tonight. I am so

[1:12:36] appreciative of them giving us their

[1:12:39] evening so they are involved. they're

[1:12:40] listening and that they know that um

[1:12:44] speaking with their their senators,

[1:12:46] speaking with their representatives,

[1:12:47] holding their governor accountable,

[1:12:49] that's where the work really has to be.

[1:12:51] No one wants to cut. Everyone's proud of

[1:12:54] the work that's happening. We are forced

[1:12:56] into this position because of act 170

[1:12:59] and only we know these communities have

[1:13:02] shown up in amazing ways in Montpillar

[1:13:05] and um hopefully people will feel that

[1:13:07] same energy to make those choices again.

[1:13:09] So, I want to thank the finance

[1:13:10] committee. It's been a very transparent

[1:13:13] process so far and I really appreciate

[1:13:15] it and so is the principles. Anna, would

[1:13:18] you like to speak as a member of the

[1:13:20] committee?

[1:13:21] >> Yeah, I wanted to kind of reiterate two

[1:13:23] things. Um, one is just that I wanted to

[1:13:26] share um, a piece that Matt had shared,

[1:13:29] but maybe in a little different words to

[1:13:30] make sure everybody's clear that um,

[1:13:32] this 1.5 million cut would keep us at a

[1:13:34] similar level of excess spending as the

[1:13:37] taxpayers approved last year. So, we're

[1:13:39] trying to keep it in uh, you know,

[1:13:41] similar depth of excess in that of that

[1:13:43] threshold per people spend as we had

[1:13:46] approval for last year. So, meeting our

[1:13:48] expectations for um, our taxpayers as

[1:13:51] well. Um, and then something that Mary

[1:13:53] said that I think is is worthwhile

[1:13:55] saying again is that this is likely not

[1:13:57] going to be just this year. Um, if Act

[1:14:00] 170 continues to go and we continue to

[1:14:02] head down the trail towards this um,

[1:14:04] foundation formula, we are going to need

[1:14:06] to do this repeatedly every year. And

[1:14:09] one more thing, as Sher said, this is

[1:14:11] not what we want to do as the finance

[1:14:13] committee. We we have such a successful

[1:14:15] district right now and this is, you

[1:14:17] know, the opposite of what we want to

[1:14:19] do. We want to continue to to foster the

[1:14:21] great education that we're offering

[1:14:22] students. Um, and this is uh this is

[1:14:25] going to be heartbreaking for us should

[1:14:26] we need to go down this pathway. Thank

[1:14:28] you.

[1:14:32] » Yes, Lara.

[1:14:34] >> In um previous years budget migraine

[1:14:38] discussions, we've had like three

[1:14:42] different options presented to us and we

[1:14:44] sort of voted on which one. Are you

[1:14:46] planning on giving us multiple options

[1:14:49] or are you

[1:14:50] >> Yes, we've asked the administration to kind of rank uh each possible cut

[1:14:58] that they could make in terms of

[1:15:01] um what would be, you know, least

[1:15:03] impactful on educational experience, but

[1:15:06] maybe the most bang for the buck. So,

[1:15:08] we're we're trying to uh and then we'll

[1:15:11] group together the ones that we think we

[1:15:14] can kind of live with and put together

[1:15:16] uh yes scenarios and sensitivities and

[1:15:20] show various options

[1:15:22] like here's what it looks like if you go

[1:15:24] all the way to 1.5 mil here. Here's what

[1:15:26] it looks like if you only maybe get

[1:15:28] partway there. But we don't have that

[1:15:31] yet. And so time timelinewise,

[1:15:34] this board votes to move the budget

[1:15:37] forward uh at our December meeting. So

[1:15:41] we have our October meeting or November

[1:15:42] meeting or December meeting. And then if

[1:15:45] we don't come to agreement in December,

[1:15:48] we can call a special meeting, try

[1:15:50] again. Um, and I think the worst case

[1:15:53] scenario, we can pass like January,

[1:15:56] early January, we can get it passed as a

[1:15:58] board and then that's in time for to be

[1:16:01] warned for the March town votes.

[1:16:05] But last year we able to we we did get

[1:16:07] it through the December 6 meeting from

[1:16:09] last year. So that's ideal. We want to

[1:16:12] approve it as a board by December.

[1:16:17] sprint. So an estimated 1.5 million is

[1:16:21] going to be cut in the next year and an

[1:16:23] estimated 15 positions are going to be

[1:16:25] removed through the next year.

[1:16:27] >> That's the target. Yeah, that's the goal. That's the sort of like

[1:16:32] starting point. It's not definite. You

[1:16:36] can't phrase it like that because

[1:16:39] >> estimated estimated.

[1:16:40] >> Yep.

[1:16:41] >> And it doesn't have to all be positions.

[1:16:43] It could be other other spending. It

[1:16:45] could it can but the equivalent FTEES

[1:16:48] based on teacher salaries and staff

[1:16:50] salaries was 15 but it can it could also

[1:16:54] come from cutting you name it oil

[1:16:58] consumption of the schools

[1:17:02] >> Chromebooks patches

[1:17:05] can I ask a question please

[1:17:06] >> yes

[1:17:07] >> earlier we said act 170 is about

[1:17:10] improving the quality of education for

[1:17:12] all is that defined what that means like

[1:17:14] is Is there a minimum?

[1:17:15] >> That's just called pre that's like

[1:17:16] preamble garbage that goes into all

[1:17:19] legislation.

[1:17:20] >> So cuz I mean I know that we don't have

[1:17:21] a ton of excess

[1:17:23] FTEES around like at some point are we

[1:17:26] actually like decreasing the quality of

[1:17:28] the education in a way that is objective

[1:17:30] that we can show to the state or to

[1:17:33] anyone or is this just all subjective?

[1:17:39] Are there minimum standards that we have

[1:17:41] to be able to show like teacher student

[1:17:44] ratios,

[1:17:46] right?

[1:17:46] >> There's lots of things that are set that

[1:17:49] we and certain programs or classes that

[1:17:53] we cannot touch or touch because they

[1:17:55] are part of safe stand.

[1:17:57] >> So I'm assuming that will be baked into

[1:17:59] whatever is presented like these are

[1:18:01] costs we can't touch. These are fixed.

[1:18:03] So of those these are the things that

[1:18:05] are on the table.

[1:18:06] And when the state says improving

[1:18:09] quality, they're looking from a

[1:18:11] statewide

[1:18:14] perspective with their their you know

[1:18:16] legislation.

[1:18:18] Um we are in excess spending because we

[1:18:26] spend

[1:18:28] according to the way they calculate it

[1:18:30] more per student than some other

[1:18:32] districts in the in the state.

[1:18:35] Um so but and we serve our students very

[1:18:40] well.

[1:18:41] >> Um and there are there are other things

[1:18:42] about the ways that we serve our

[1:18:44] students um that actually may translate

[1:18:49] to savings at the state level and that's

[1:18:51] a whole another conversation

[1:18:54] u or piece of it. Um, but

[1:18:58] when they say when they use that the

[1:19:01] phrasing we're we're doing this we're

[1:19:03] putting this latitude before because we

[1:19:05] want

[1:19:06] >> education. Um,

[1:19:09] they're essentially talking about

[1:19:11] improving things across the board. But

[1:19:13] one of the one of the critiques has

[1:19:15] been, you know, you're saving money and

[1:19:18] improving education by leveling

[1:19:20] everything down.

[1:19:22] >> Yeah.

[1:19:24] Uh

[1:19:28] » yeah, thanks. Another couple of pieces

[1:19:30] of information. Um it seems very

[1:19:32] personal that we go straight to talking

[1:19:34] about um staff personnel. Um and there's

[1:19:38] reason behind this. This is not again

[1:19:40] this would not be our our choice of what

[1:19:41] to cut. However, at this point with the

[1:19:44] way that insurance rates that are set by

[1:19:46] the state are going up. um our total

[1:19:48] budget about somewhere between 80 up to

[1:19:51] 85% of our costs is personnel and

[1:19:53] benefits and insurance. Um and so when

[1:19:56] we look at costs um this is the biggest

[1:19:59] driver of of costs. Um the biggest

[1:20:01] portion of our cost maybe is a better

[1:20:03] way to say that. Um so this is you know

[1:20:06] this feels very personal. Um you know we

[1:20:08] all have family and friends that are on

[1:20:10] staff. This is this is pretty dramatic

[1:20:12] for many of us. Um, I'll also say that,

[1:20:15] um, as Mary had alluded to, a lot of

[1:20:16] these numbers are going to change, and

[1:20:18] some of them don't even don't even get

[1:20:20] settled until after the taxpayers have

[1:20:22] passed the budget, too. Um, so we're

[1:20:25] really throwing these numbers out as

[1:20:26] estimates. Um, and they are going to

[1:20:28] change between now and December, and

[1:20:30] they will change also after, some of

[1:20:32] them will change after the taxpayers

[1:20:34] have already voted on the budget as

[1:20:35] well. Um, so it's really kind of a

[1:20:37] tricky situation as for us to navigate

[1:20:39] these and give you estimates knowing

[1:20:41] full well that they're not set and won't

[1:20:43] be set again until the taxpayers have

[1:20:46] already p passed a budget. Um, so we

[1:20:49] appreciate your patience as we do our

[1:20:51] best to estimate these numbers knowing

[1:20:52] that they're not going to be settled for

[1:20:54] a while.

[1:20:56] And I think it's important to know that

[1:20:58] last year there were certain numbers

[1:20:59] that the state was projecting that we

[1:21:02] put baked into the budget and the

[1:21:04] numbers came out quite a bit lower in

[1:21:06] some areas. So therefore um we we were

[1:21:11] okay and that it was the buy down of the

[1:21:13] taxes. So it did help the taxpayers. Um

[1:21:18] but the whole upper valley has the same

[1:21:20] problem. When you look at the map, there

[1:21:22] is a map. I I don't know where I saw it,

[1:21:24] but there was a map that showed, you

[1:21:27] know, who's paying the most in taxes

[1:21:29] regarding the the double tax. We the

[1:21:32] upper valley is completely hard hit

[1:21:34] every single town. And then you can look

[1:21:37] at other towns and they have a neutral

[1:21:39] and then there were others that had

[1:21:41] different classification. It's kind of

[1:21:44] mindboggling how they set these things.

[1:21:46] We nobody I've never heard a good

[1:21:48] explanation of this but um I'm trying to

[1:21:52] get that one now.

[1:21:54] So yeah, this region hasn't been getting

[1:21:57] quite hit. There are districts who will

[1:21:59] be doubling the number of positions cut

[1:22:01] than what we're talking about now around

[1:22:03] us. It is

[1:22:06] unimaginable.

[1:22:09] » All right. Anything else with finance?

[1:22:13] All right. Thank you. Um, next we have a

[1:22:16] policy committee update from Elliot.

[1:22:19] >> Yep.

[1:22:19] >> Thanks. Uh, so we have three policies to

[1:22:22] review. Two of them are for second

[1:22:24] reading. Uh, first one is school

[1:22:26] district building access policy.

[1:22:28] Remember this is about after your hours

[1:22:31] access with emphasis on vacations,

[1:22:33] holidays, certain times. And this was

[1:22:36] brought to us by as a request from the

[1:22:38] building and grounds and facilities. Um,

[1:22:41] so I'm asking for a motion to bring it

[1:22:44] to the next meeting and not go over as a

[1:22:46] as an adoption reading next.

[1:22:51] » Is this I would assume like is this

[1:22:53] related to in any way to public comment

[1:22:56] we received earlier about

[1:23:01] No, that policy does not cover them.

[1:23:04] Um, so

[1:23:07] >> perfect.

[1:23:11] Thank you, June. All in favor of uh

[1:23:14] passing uh to a final reading slash

[1:23:18] adoption of the school district building

[1:23:20] access policy, please say I or raise

[1:23:22] your hand discussion.

[1:23:24] >> Oh, sure.

[1:23:25] >> Just a question about it. Um

[1:23:34] has have various groups weighed in on

[1:23:38] the on the on the policy. I'm just

[1:23:41] curious um

[1:23:44] >> I think curious

[1:23:45] >> who impacted the most and the

[1:23:48] >> well who's impacted the most our

[1:23:50] buildings and grounds team who because

[1:23:54] faculty um were done the Friday after

[1:23:57] were no longer in the building the

[1:23:59] Friday after students left and then two

[1:24:01] weeks before then people who were

[1:24:04] working the buildings were able the

[1:24:05] toughest building was Prosper Valley

[1:24:07] Summer so was at Prosper Valley this

[1:24:09] year So, not only were teachers not, you

[1:24:11] know, able to get in there because

[1:24:13] teachers were running the program. That

[1:24:15] was a little challenging, um, what the

[1:24:18] report back we had with principles is

[1:24:20] that if a teacher wanted to get into the

[1:24:22] building, they would ask the principal

[1:24:24] and then have access. And usually it

[1:24:26] was, "We're changing classrooms. I'm

[1:24:28] moving my materials or those kinds of

[1:24:30] things." So, for the most part, worked

[1:24:31] really well. Me and Got to get in there,

[1:24:34] clean the classrooms. As we know, a ton

[1:24:35] of work happened at the middle school

[1:24:37] high school. When teachers needed to get

[1:24:39] into a space, they connected with the

[1:24:41] principal, permission was given, but it

[1:24:42] gave real clarity that the goal and

[1:24:44] intent is during those summer months, we

[1:24:46] really need to get the biggie team in

[1:24:48] there so they can do the work. Yeah,

[1:24:50] that's when we do our big projects. Same

[1:24:52] is true winter break um and our, you

[1:24:55] know, spring break and April break is

[1:24:57] the um February break. Those are the

[1:24:59] times where they can contract groups to

[1:25:01] come in actually work. you can't do it

[1:25:03] when students are there. So if staff are

[1:25:06] faculty and staff aren't there during

[1:25:07] those times the work can get done. Okay.

[1:25:09] So

[1:25:10] >> and this covers weekends as well.

[1:25:12] >> No it does not. It's just vacations.

[1:25:14] Weekends absolutely teachers can get in.

[1:25:17] That's not how just the vacations.

[1:25:21] >> Um I was going to add some discussion.

[1:25:24] So, I just hope that the policy has been

[1:25:27] reviewed in relation to the um existing

[1:25:33] policy for community use

[1:25:36] um which allows uh organizations to use

[1:25:41] our public facilities upon approval from

[1:25:45] I think it's director of operations I

[1:25:47] think is the way that policy is written.

[1:25:49] uh and having actually taken advantage

[1:25:51] of that and run um programs in our

[1:25:55] public buildings like coaching various

[1:25:58] sports that might not be a school sport.

[1:26:00] It could be like a travel team. Um it

[1:26:04] would be devastating to those programs

[1:26:06] if all of a sudden every one of these

[1:26:09] holidays were carved out and no one can

[1:26:12] get in the building. So can we just

[1:26:15] uh double check the

[1:26:18] >> school? Yeah. Policy specific to

[1:26:20] teachers.

[1:26:22] >> Okay.

[1:26:22] >> It's and so we have the building use

[1:26:24] form which goes through administration

[1:26:27] but this policy correct is specifically

[1:26:30] to faculty and and staff using the

[1:26:33] building.

[1:26:34] It's my understanding. Is that right?

[1:26:37] >> Yeah.

[1:26:37] >> It's just got to answer.

[1:26:41] So those other groups if they have

[1:26:42] permission to use them they'll be able to use it during those

[1:26:46] times correctly

[1:26:47] >> unless I mean I just I don't want to you

[1:26:49] know if Prosper Valley needs a new gym

[1:26:52] floor knows you know I mean there will

[1:26:55] there may be events that happen which

[1:26:58] prevents groups to come in during those

[1:27:01] priority first has got to be maintain

[1:27:03] the building for students strings

[1:27:05] >> and that that already exists today

[1:27:06] because when you fill out a request for

[1:27:07] it and they look at their schedule and

[1:27:09] tell you you can get your dates that

[1:27:10] your question. So if you get your dates,

[1:27:13] >> you'll be able to use the building even

[1:27:15] though no other faculty or staff will be

[1:27:16] allowed in. So who will let you in? I I

[1:27:19] don't know. So just I'm just saying make

[1:27:21] sure that

[1:27:21] >> rec center has a key

[1:27:23] >> so they have access to Lake Prosper

[1:27:24] Valley and the different buildings

[1:27:25] depending upon. So they have access to

[1:27:27] that and and really if they're using the

[1:27:30] gymnasium or common use area, it's the

[1:27:33] classrooms getting into the classrooms,

[1:27:35] cleaning them. So you know, especially

[1:27:36] during winter break, there's a deep

[1:27:38] clean. germs in, germs out. It's those

[1:27:41] classroom spaces and that's what we're

[1:27:43] really speaking to in that polic, you

[1:27:44] know, what Joe recommended in that

[1:27:46] policy

[1:27:47] more so than a gymnasium that's easy to

[1:27:50] clean is classrooms where the touch

[1:27:52] spaces where students are can be

[1:27:55] challenging. Yeah, it just seems like

[1:27:58] the the piece the stress is just in and

[1:28:01] developing the the procedures that that

[1:28:04] sort of align with this policy to make

[1:28:06] sure that that works as well um with the

[1:28:10] that other existing policy

[1:28:15] elementary for three weeks during the

[1:28:18] summer. Um that went on and custodian

[1:28:21] there knew what was coming. There's

[1:28:22] that's been a consistent plan. um and

[1:28:25] the number of classrooms they use was

[1:28:27] really delineated. So, we still want to

[1:28:29] be good community partners and we want

[1:28:31] to make sure me and Gene can do the work

[1:28:33] we have to do so school can open and

[1:28:36] stay clean.

[1:28:41] Well, if you're open to a friendly

[1:28:43] amendment, I would just suggest adding

[1:28:44] something like this wasn't that wouldn't

[1:28:47] prevent use under the other policy that

[1:28:50] we have as because when I read this just

[1:28:54] at its face value, it it doesn't look

[1:28:56] like anyone can really get into the

[1:28:59] building without written.

[1:29:01] >> Well, it's going to be written. I mean,

[1:29:03] >> okay.

[1:29:05] >> Right. I mean if you're have a form

[1:29:09] >> well it says the employee. So in this

[1:29:10] case like it's not an employee it's it's the community that is requested

[1:29:16] community use under our other policy and

[1:29:19] this says you can only get it if you

[1:29:20] have an employee has received written

[1:29:23] communication.

[1:29:26] I don't know. I'm just asking please

[1:29:27] read please read the other policy read

[1:29:29] this one and just make sure they can

[1:29:30] coexist

[1:29:32] because it's really

[1:29:34] for the public be able to use our

[1:29:36] buildings for these like rec center

[1:29:38] volleyball rec center you know travel

[1:29:40] basketball all these other things would

[1:29:42] just hate to see that go away because

[1:29:44] someone passed a policy inadvertently to

[1:29:47] prevent it or to deny it. Well, we can

[1:29:50] certainly take it back to policy

[1:29:51] committee next month and just just tweak

[1:29:55] it a little bit. All right. Thank you.

[1:29:59] >> Are we ready to vote?

[1:30:02] All in favor of moving it to a second a

[1:30:04] final reading. Sorry. Uh please say I or

[1:30:07] raise your consume hand.

[1:30:09] >> I

[1:30:12] posted.

[1:30:15] >> All right.

[1:30:16] >> Okay. Second one for uh second reading

[1:30:20] is

[1:30:21] complicated post issues tax compliance

[1:30:24] policy and procedures which is a

[1:30:26] detailed policy over 10 pages long to

[1:30:28] basically how we handle um compliance

[1:30:31] with tax exempt bonds. It was

[1:30:33] recommended or referred to us by Jim and

[1:30:36] then reviewed by by Jim Fen and reviewed

[1:30:38] by Mary Henry as well. Um, again, we're

[1:30:41] asking for uh for um an adoption reading

[1:30:45] next month on October.

[1:30:49] >> So,

[1:30:51] is there a second?

[1:30:54] >> Tina, thank you. Is there any

[1:30:55] discussion?

[1:30:59] All right. All those in favor of of

[1:31:01] moving this to a final vote in the next

[1:31:04] meeting, please say I. I. I.

[1:31:08] >> Any opposed? Any abstaining?

[1:31:12] All right. Thank you. And uh now we're

[1:31:16] looking at adoption.

[1:31:17] >> Right. And the third one that we're

[1:31:19] doing is for adoption is the pets on

[1:31:21] campus policy. We've discussed this two

[1:31:23] other times. We've had um several have

[1:31:27] several opportunities for public

[1:31:29] comment. And basically the idea is that

[1:31:32] um

[1:31:34] since we've had uh rules for uh leash

[1:31:37] laws and collect waste, but we wanted to

[1:31:41] uh further this to have a note that's on

[1:31:42] campus policy and that's where we are.

[1:31:45] And at this point we are recommending

[1:31:47] that beer asking for a motion to have it

[1:31:50] approved at this meeting for adoption.

[1:31:53] >> And I and I was asked to speak with um

[1:31:55] Kevin Nunan who is our lead grounds

[1:31:58] person. He said the impact has been

[1:32:01] significant and we don't have way of

[1:32:04] measuring statistically but his

[1:32:06] experience compared to previous summers

[1:32:08] it's been significantly it's not perfect

[1:32:10] but it's much better than it ever was in

[1:32:12] terms of control and one recommendation

[1:32:14] I have for Kevin is that we have larger

[1:32:16] signs the signs are pretty small but he

[1:32:19] even with what we have in place there's

[1:32:21] been a significant reduction in the

[1:32:24] amount of pet waste on campus

[1:32:27] >> with what we have

[1:32:28] with this analysis.

[1:32:30] >> Well, the policy was announced, so

[1:32:33] >> Well,

[1:32:35] sorry to be picky, but the signs went up

[1:32:38] before the policy was passed.

[1:32:41] And that just rubs me the wrong way.

[1:32:43] >> Yeah.

[1:32:44] >> Why did all the signs go up on campus

[1:32:47] before the policy was passed?

[1:32:50] >> Because buildings and ground wanted to

[1:32:52] clear them up. They should have waited

[1:32:53] till the policy was passed. But they're

[1:32:56] all over campus now. I'm just

[1:32:58] procedurally that just

[1:33:03] why

[1:33:07] unfortunately I don't think we have any

[1:33:09] buildings and grounds here tonight to

[1:33:12] speak to that.

[1:33:15] But the policy was asked and requested

[1:33:17] by Joe and Browns.

[1:33:25] Yeah, I don't think any of them are here

[1:33:27] tonight.

[1:33:31] Any other comments?

[1:33:33] What what is um what is the consequence

[1:33:36] or what happens if you somebody violates

[1:33:39] this policy? What how are we handling

[1:33:41] this? Who's responsible for that?

[1:33:44] We approach people when we see them on

[1:33:47] campus whether they've had and we ask

[1:33:49] them to leave a pet. There is no fine.

[1:33:53] There's no recourse. Though we've had

[1:33:55] individuals who on multiple occasions

[1:33:57] have been asked and still return the

[1:33:59] pet. Um in the summertime that's a

[1:34:01] Woodstock violation having a pet in a

[1:34:04] car. Um and so we've had to inform

[1:34:08] individuals that if they continue to

[1:34:10] bring their pet and leave them in a

[1:34:11] vehicle, we would fall with stop police.

[1:34:14] Um primarily when we've approached

[1:34:16] people, and that's myself and Joe and

[1:34:18] others, um people have been, you know,

[1:34:20] said they were unaware and have not

[1:34:22] returned to their pets. So it it we

[1:34:25] haven't I've asked a number of people. I

[1:34:26] know Joe and Kevin and Keith and you

[1:34:29] know, we've really tried to start from

[1:34:30] an educational point of view and most

[1:34:32] people have been very respectful. We've

[1:34:34] only had one situation where we had an

[1:34:37] individual who continue with their pet

[1:34:39] and leave them in a car during the

[1:34:40] summer time.

[1:34:41] >> So even if we ask them to leave with

[1:34:43] their pet and they refuse, there's

[1:34:44] really nothing like we can't there's

[1:34:47] >> we're not in a position

[1:34:50] but people I mean I and again from what

[1:34:52] Kevin's reporting and his ground it's

[1:34:54] really made an impact. I knew while it

[1:34:58] the policy was not in place, their

[1:34:59] intention mostly was there was so many

[1:35:03] dog feces on the campus. It was having

[1:35:05] sports and having tea. It was really a

[1:35:08] health issue or um that they were

[1:35:11] concerned about.

[1:35:13] >> Um I'd like to share something. Um, do I

[1:35:18] would it be more appropriate to um make

[1:35:21] the motion, second the motion and have

[1:35:23] discussion or should I uh share my

[1:35:25] comments now?

[1:35:26] >> I think we already we did not. Oh, we

[1:35:28] did.

[1:35:29] >> Let's get through the motion second

[1:35:30] motion because I also have some more

[1:35:32] comments.

[1:35:33] >> All right. Would somebody like to make a

[1:35:35] motion to adopt?

[1:35:39] So move. Thank you, Lara. Any second?

[1:35:43] >> Yeah, I'll second.

[1:35:44] >> Thank you.

[1:35:46] Hela, you plan to say

[1:35:48] >> great. Um, thank you. Um, so I moved

[1:35:52] back to Vermont in 2017. I came from a

[1:35:56] I'd worked for 15 years in a school

[1:35:57] district where there was a fence. Oh,

[1:36:00] that campus also backed up to a river,

[1:36:02] but there was a fence around the field,

[1:36:04] so students couldn't access the river

[1:36:06] and animals couldn't come in.

[1:36:10] One time two deer jumped the fence and

[1:36:13] were on the fields and we went into

[1:36:15] lockdown because that's how worried

[1:36:18] people were about any animal poop on the

[1:36:20] grounds.

[1:36:24] Really happy to move back to Vermont in

[1:36:26] 2017, served four years as principal in

[1:36:29] uh what is now Mountain Views. And

[1:36:32] during my second week on the job, I

[1:36:35] called Peg Debella into my office and I

[1:36:38] said, "Peg, call security. There's a dog

[1:36:42] in the field." Peg came in, said,

[1:36:45] "Heather, there's no security and the

[1:36:48] dog's fine." And I knew I was back where

[1:36:52] I needed to be. You have people who come

[1:36:55] here from rural areas because they want

[1:36:58] to be near friendly dogs. And I can tell

[1:37:01] you if you get rid of the friendly dogs,

[1:37:03] the geese will come and geese also poop.

[1:37:09] My second matter is I believe this is

[1:37:13] management and not governance. This

[1:37:15] should be a safe and healthy schools

[1:37:18] policy with putting the management of

[1:37:20] how we keep our grounds clean enough for

[1:37:23] children to play on in the hands of

[1:37:25] management.

[1:37:28] Thank you for considering my comments.

[1:37:31] >> Thank you, Heather.

[1:37:34] Matt.

[1:37:34] >> Um, yeah. So, I I voted against last

[1:37:37] time and I plan to do so again. The uh I

[1:37:41] acknowledge that the issue is real and

[1:37:43] that certain buildings and ground

[1:37:45] members have told us that on certain

[1:37:49] athletic fields they've had complaints.

[1:37:51] Um, so I think that we could have

[1:37:55] handled it a little bit differently. We still can we could um we could make

[1:38:00] it very specific to say the football

[1:38:01] field or the varsity soccer field or the practice fields. This policy is

[1:38:06] written covering 100% of the property we

[1:38:08] own in our district like and any any any

[1:38:11] and every school whether it's west or

[1:38:13] proper rally or barnard uh or reading

[1:38:16] and I've you know I push on a lot of the

[1:38:18] fields including here and um uh and then

[1:38:22] prop the rally and I've ne never come

[1:38:25] across it. So this the the source is

[1:38:28] coming from the staff who have to deal

[1:38:30] with it. And I get it like that's not a

[1:38:32] fun job, but the source is biased. And

[1:38:36] so you got to kind of like get I think a

[1:38:38] little bit more input on like how big of

[1:38:40] a problem is this really and on what

[1:38:42] fields and could we have approached it

[1:38:44] in a way where it was like we put up the

[1:38:47] signs on those fields saying you know no

[1:38:49] pets on this football field where we

[1:38:51] have the signs, we put up the bags, we

[1:38:53] put up the take your own waste. Um, so

[1:38:56] that's that's my two cents. Um, I I

[1:39:00] think it'd be a shame if the public lost

[1:39:02] the ability to to come on our campuses

[1:39:04] with their pets.

[1:39:08] » Anybody from Josh?

[1:39:13] » Well, I'm just going to put this into

[1:39:15] perspective, and this is because I work

[1:39:17] for the state.

[1:39:19] We have dogs that are allowed to come on

[1:39:22] to any of our state facilities on the

[1:39:24] any of the state lawns and there's

[1:39:27] nothing that can be done about it. That

[1:39:28] is the freedom that comes with it being

[1:39:30] a public property. The same as what ours

[1:39:32] is.

[1:39:37] » Thank you, Josh. Anybody else?

[1:39:42] >> I'll just put my hat in the ring that I also feel that just going way

[1:39:47] overboard. I I hear the concern, but I

[1:39:50] think the response to it is not

[1:39:53] appropriate and and

[1:39:57] way too across the board. And I, you

[1:40:00] know, we weren't I'm not on the policy

[1:40:02] committee and I didn't view uh any

[1:40:06] videos or the minutes to see what was

[1:40:08] presented. I I'm hearing what was

[1:40:10] presented and that is an issue. Um but

[1:40:14] it it just it strikes me as um

[1:40:20] it would be really disappointing to the

[1:40:22] community that it's one of the public

[1:40:24] spaces right in your community that you

[1:40:26] can go with your family or maybe with

[1:40:28] your dog and and um I mean I like Mac's

[1:40:32] idea that it's like yeah there's you

[1:40:35] know sports field in particular

[1:40:38] um and and you know there's already

[1:40:39] signage up we could put the signage is

[1:40:42] doing the the work. Let's let's put the

[1:40:44] science where it needs to do the work.

[1:40:47] Um and you know take that approach. Um

[1:40:51] the policy seems a little bit

[1:40:54] too wide ranging.

[1:40:57] >> I have a question of no like intention

[1:41:00] one way or the other, but I'm just

[1:41:01] curious since the signs have been put

[1:41:03] up, has there been like a noticeable

[1:41:05] decrease?

[1:41:06] >> Okay.

[1:41:08] I'm going to comment on that

[1:41:09] because at the football game on Friday,

[1:41:12] there were multiple people who had dogs

[1:41:13] with them and came to the football game.

[1:41:16] And so I don't know this idea that we

[1:41:19] have evidence of a decrease. I'm hearing

[1:41:22] it said. I don't see actual evidence

[1:41:25] that there's been a decrease

[1:41:27] um just because of the signs. But I I

[1:41:31] did observe that there it is very very

[1:41:35] awkward for your staff to handle uh pe

[1:41:40] the public who come to the football game

[1:41:42] with with their pets and like so I'm

[1:41:44] just wondering how it will be enforced

[1:41:45] and like you said what are we calling

[1:41:49] the police every time someone comes on

[1:41:51] campus with a dog? Are we going to ask

[1:41:53] our staff to

[1:41:56] like how are we how are we enforcing

[1:41:58] this

[1:41:59] >> during conversation? I think in we can

[1:42:01] invite Keith I mean Kevin Nunan who's

[1:42:04] been on part of our grounds crew for a

[1:42:08] long time. I think it's really important

[1:42:09] to have that perspective as well as our

[1:42:12] building principles. They're the ones

[1:42:14] that are out there. I mean this is not

[1:42:16] just a Hillsville high school issue.

[1:42:18] There are campuses where we've had

[1:42:21] found dog feces on the middle of a

[1:42:24] playground multiple times week after

[1:42:26] week. And so if you want more to come in

[1:42:29] principles and and our buildings around

[1:42:32] people to speak to what that is, I think

[1:42:34] that's really important. It's a public

[1:42:35] health issue. This is while I know this

[1:42:38] is taxpayer this is not public property

[1:42:40] like a park or the cemetery. We have

[1:42:43] students here with responsibility for

[1:42:45] their health and safety. Um, I know

[1:42:47] this. My son worked to be the grounds

[1:42:49] crew one summer and the number of times

[1:42:52] we wacking he would come out covered in

[1:42:54] dog pieces because people pick up and

[1:42:57] then they throw it and the kids who are

[1:42:59] playing sports or chasing after lacrosse

[1:43:01] ball chasing after baseball

[1:43:05] helpful. If you want Kevin to speak, he

[1:43:06] can. You want building principles to

[1:43:08] speak, they can too because they're

[1:43:10] experiencing it in playground duty and

[1:43:13] seeing what happens on campuses. So, um,

[1:43:16] I'm a dog person. We we often had Carrie

[1:43:19] would bring her dog into this building.

[1:43:21] We'd love I mean, it's not an anti- dog

[1:43:24] conversation. It's around the And we

[1:43:26] have children who are really afraid of

[1:43:27] dogs and families that are afraid of

[1:43:30] dogs. And so, I think there's a

[1:43:31] sensitivity. That's not my experience,

[1:43:33] but I know we had an individual in this

[1:43:35] building who was really afraid of dogs.

[1:43:37] So, we start bringing our dogs into this

[1:43:39] building. So, I think there's there's

[1:43:42] that part of it that I think needs to be

[1:43:44] represented as well.

[1:43:46] >> All good points. So, I just think we got

[1:43:48] to vote and if it if it passes, it

[1:43:50] passes. If it fails, then maybe we bring

[1:43:52] in more

[1:43:53] >> more more voices.

[1:43:55] >> Wonder if someone from building because

[1:43:57] this was brought to us by building a

[1:43:58] grand committee. Um, we didn't and

[1:44:02] >> we could also table it.

[1:44:05] [snorts]

[1:44:06] >> Just one more question. Sorry. Is are

[1:44:08] the people that are like not cleaning up

[1:44:10] after their dogs also the people that

[1:44:12] are now seeing the don't bring your dog

[1:44:13] signs and leaving?

[1:44:15] >> We don't know.

[1:44:16] >> Okay, that's a good question. No.

[1:44:18] >> Well, one would imagine if the dog poop

[1:44:21] is in the middle of a playing field that

[1:44:23] it's not the people who are bringing

[1:44:25] their dogs to watch the game cuz they're

[1:44:27] not on the field at that time. So, I

[1:44:29] would imagine it's folks walking their

[1:44:31] dogs on weekends or whatever.

[1:44:37] Uh, would there be a motion to table it?

[1:44:41] I'm gonna make a motion to table it.

[1:44:45] >> Can you Can you do that with a

[1:44:48] >> uh question

[1:44:52] and chair?

[1:44:53] >> Um,

[1:44:57] I think they need to

[1:45:01] >> Yeah. Amend the motion.

[1:45:05] >> Yeah. No, they can imagine.

[1:45:09] >> I think it was you. I amend my motion

[1:45:13] and table it.

[1:45:17] » Is there a second?

[1:45:18] >> I second.

[1:45:19] >> I'll second it.

[1:45:21] >> Right. Ryan seconded. All in favor of

[1:45:25] tableling it for another meeting, please

[1:45:27] say I. I.

[1:45:32] » Any opposed?

[1:45:34] Any abstaining?

[1:45:36] All right, we have reached tablet until

[1:45:39] we have more information.

[1:45:41] Thank you.

[1:45:47] » Uh, buildings and grounds committee. Is

[1:45:50] anyone here to speak to buildings and

[1:45:52] grounds?

[1:45:57] Okay. Uh, negotiations, hiring and

[1:46:00] retention committee. Currently I'm a

[1:46:02] member of it as well as Brian. Um we

[1:46:06] really need at least one more person to

[1:46:08] join us. U often Ryan has coaching um

[1:46:12] obligations at the times that we meet.

[1:46:14] We usually meet in the the later

[1:46:16] afternoon. Um we're going to have a big

[1:46:19] job this year with both uh the ESP and

[1:46:23] the assist staff going forward with

[1:46:26] negotiations. um they are ready to start

[1:46:28] meeting um and so um we're gathering

[1:46:32] information from the board side uh

[1:46:35] thankfully through Mary and other things

[1:46:38] that we have from past negotiations but

[1:46:40] I really need to have one more person

[1:46:42] because I cannot foresee being the only

[1:46:46] person in the room on the days that Ryan

[1:46:48] rightfully can't be there

[1:46:50] >> what is the commitment like what do you

[1:46:52] meet monthly

[1:46:53] >> no we meet

[1:46:55] >> in the beginning um twice a month

[1:46:58] probably and then as we see where things

[1:47:00] are going we may have uh like a separate

[1:47:05] meeting with each group some we'll start

[1:47:08] together with both groups and then it it could go for it could [clears throat]

[1:47:13] go really slowly but I would anticipate

[1:47:17] two to three weeks apart just to keep

[1:47:19] the momentum up

[1:47:21] >> and if you can't be in person is it a

[1:47:24] situation do

[1:47:28] So I mean uh we can we can talk about

[1:47:32] the timing of things but they like to do

[1:47:34] it around 4 um just because some some of

[1:47:38] them are here some of them drive here

[1:47:40] say Killington and we try to be in

[1:47:42] person when we have me um but it doesn't

[1:47:45] always work for everyone. Ryan.

[1:47:49] >> Yeah, I was just chiming in to uh le

[1:47:53] Lisa. What I found in previous

[1:47:55] negotiations is the first several

[1:47:57] meetings are relatively mundane and

[1:48:00] straightforward, but as negotiations get

[1:48:03] further down the line, the meetings can

[1:48:05] go hours sometimes and like much longer.

[1:48:09] So, it's just something to plan ahead on

[1:48:11] if that's something you're looking to

[1:48:12] join or whatnot.

[1:48:16] sell it. [laughter]

[1:48:19] >> Well, no, that I'm just saying like that

[1:48:21] was my problem. I didn't mind the

[1:48:22] meetings, but then you know I some of

[1:48:25] them go a long time. So,

[1:48:28] >> yes. So, yeah. And I think it's going to

[1:48:31] be a challenging negotiations round

[1:48:33] quite honestly because of the situation

[1:48:36] that the finance committee has

[1:48:38] described. So, please somebody help me.

[1:48:43] I I we can't you know Brian and I cannot

[1:48:47] do it by ourselves. We need a third

[1:48:49] person.

[1:48:49] >> Yeah. And Carrie's doing the merger and

[1:48:52] attending policy and attending.

[1:48:54] >> Yeah. There's a lot

[1:48:58] student do that or is that a

[1:48:59] >> I don't think so. Yeah. Because it's

[1:49:02] money.

[1:49:03] >> Yeah.

[1:49:05] >> Be in charge of money

[1:49:10] but yourself.

[1:49:12] >> All right. Um, are there any other

[1:49:15] working groups that would like to speak

[1:49:16] tonight?

[1:49:18] >> Yes. Um, it's I'm honored to represent

[1:49:21] uh Seth Webb.

[1:49:24] Um, who uh as as most of us know is the

[1:49:29] chair of our MDSU schoolboard rebuild

[1:49:32] working group. He's he's not able to

[1:49:36] come, but he prepared a very complete

[1:49:38] report and I'd like to read that

[1:49:40] completely into the record.

[1:49:44] So Seth begins, "As I'm unable to attend

[1:49:47] Monday's meeting, I'm writing to update

[1:49:50] you on where we stand with the rebuild.

[1:49:54] This memo outlines number one, the

[1:49:58] status of the rebuild related to funding

[1:50:01] and final approval, and two, recent

[1:50:04] feedback from the agency of education

[1:50:07] and our legislative delegation.

[1:50:11] and three, possible federal funding and

[1:50:15] four other next steps.

[1:50:18] Number one, status of the rebuild. To

[1:50:22] date, we have secured nearly 80% funding

[1:50:26] needed for the rebuild parenthesis 90

[1:50:29] million of the 112 million in

[1:50:33] parenthesis via the vote bond in March

[1:50:36] and private fundraising.

[1:50:38] And the new state school construction

[1:50:42] program notes that we should be eligible

[1:50:45] for state assistance for 30% costs.

[1:50:49] That's 10% more than we need. The

[1:50:52] challenge is that the legislature has

[1:50:55] not funded the program and the agency of

[1:50:58] education has not created the rules to

[1:51:01] administer it. But we are aggressively

[1:51:05] seeking both administrative and

[1:51:07] legislative solutions to allow us to

[1:51:10] begin building in 2027 before costs rise

[1:51:14] and conditions worsen.

[1:51:17] Detailed follow.

[1:51:20] Number two, request to agency of

[1:51:23] education for final approval.

[1:51:26] On July 17th, we requested that the

[1:51:30] Agency of Education Secretary Zoe

[1:51:33] Saunders provide final approval for our

[1:51:36] project and grant in accordance with Act

[1:51:39] 170 contingent upon completion of agency

[1:51:43] rule making and future legislative

[1:51:46] appropriations.

[1:51:48] This request creates no immediate

[1:51:52] financial obligation for the state

[1:51:56] while allowing the district to continue

[1:51:59] responsible planning.

[1:52:02] Secretary Saunders rejected our request

[1:52:06] noting rule making should be done in

[1:52:09] 2028

[1:52:11] i.e. not necessarily,

[1:52:13] which would allow us to seek final

[1:52:15] approval. Then unfortunately, a 2 to

[1:52:19] threeyear delay in final approval could

[1:52:22] cost Vermont taxpayers

[1:52:24] approximately 35 million through

[1:52:27] construction, inflation, additional

[1:52:30] repairs to a building that will ultimat

[1:52:33] ultimately be demolished, and

[1:52:35] potentially emergency modular space. It

[1:52:40] would also delay regional consolidation

[1:52:42] efforts.

[1:52:44] Number three, request for legislative

[1:52:47] support.

[1:52:49] On August 9th, we asked our legislative

[1:52:53] delegation to appeal to the governor

[1:52:57] requesting that he support a solution

[1:53:00] that will allow the district to begin

[1:53:03] building in 2027.

[1:53:07] Senators Joe Major and Becca White and

[1:53:12] Representatives Michael Hoy and Valerie

[1:53:15] Taylor quickly signed on.

[1:53:20] After several weeks, Senator Allison

[1:53:23] Clarkson and Representative Charlie

[1:53:26] Kimble informed us that they would not

[1:53:30] sign on.

[1:53:35] Needless to say,

[1:53:37] Senator Clarkson and Representative

[1:53:40] Kimble failure to sign on to a letter

[1:53:43] that asks the governor

[1:53:46] quote to support a solution that will

[1:53:49] allow MVSu to build in 2027.

[1:53:53] end quote is very disheartening as a

[1:53:57] delay carries significant negative

[1:53:59] consequences for our taxpayers and

[1:54:03] students.

[1:54:04] Not building in 2027 means we face

[1:54:09] millions in increased costs and an

[1:54:12] already challenging budget movement and

[1:54:15] we unnecessarily subject students and

[1:54:18] teachers to unsafe and unhealthy

[1:54:21] conditions.

[1:54:22] The only s silver lining, and this is to

[1:54:27] his credit and our benefit, is

[1:54:29] representative

[1:54:30] Kimble stressing that stressing his

[1:54:33] willingness to work with us on

[1:54:35] legislation for the next session that

[1:54:38] could have a positive impact. We intend

[1:54:42] to work with him. Here are their

[1:54:45] responses.

[1:54:47] I have highlighted sections I found

[1:54:50] important and I'll try to notice those

[1:54:52] for you.

[1:54:55] Okay. Yep.

[1:54:57] We all know

[1:55:00] it's we start out Carrie and Seth.

[1:55:04] This is from Allison's email

[1:55:07] and Seth Webb on Friday, September 4th

[1:55:10] at 3:43 p.m.

[1:55:14] [cough and clears throat] Senator

[1:55:14] Allison Clarkson. Carrie and Seth, we

[1:55:18] all know our middle and high school

[1:55:20] physical plan is failing.

[1:55:23] And while I appreciate your advocacy and

[1:55:27] tenacity in pursuing a new build

[1:55:30] beginning in 2027,

[1:55:32] this time frame is out of sync with the

[1:55:36] state's work regionalizing school

[1:55:38] districts and creating comprehensive

[1:55:41] regional middle and high schools to

[1:55:44] serve our ever decreasing number of

[1:55:46] students.

[1:55:48] I am glad we met a month ago to discuss

[1:55:51] the stat status of state aid for school

[1:55:54] construction.

[1:55:56] But as you know, the state not only

[1:55:59] doesn't have a revenue source

[1:56:01] identified,

[1:56:03] it hasn't done the work of prioritizing

[1:56:05] which schools will get financial support

[1:56:08] first. Given the over six billion in

[1:56:12] need, this is a herculean task. And

[1:56:17] given these unknowns and knowing the

[1:56:20] governor and the AOE are prioritizing

[1:56:24] comprehensive regional schools, it is

[1:56:26] hard to ask us to ask for final approval

[1:56:30] of a project, no matter how worthy. The

[1:56:34] AOE isn't in a position to grant a final

[1:56:37] approval. So, it's hard for you to be

[1:56:40] pushing us to ask them for something

[1:56:43] they aren't going to give at this point.

[1:56:46] I am happy to help as I can next year to

[1:56:50] support and advocate from the sidelines

[1:56:54] for all pieces Charlie Kimble has

[1:56:57] proposed for next session. and the

[1:57:00] current legislator. I am willing to work

[1:57:03] with you and AOE to address all these

[1:57:06] issues in the next few months.

[1:57:10] Allison,

[1:57:13] here's the email from Charlie Kimble to

[1:57:16] Seth Webb Tuesday, August 25th at Finna.

[1:57:22] Good morning, Seth. Thanks for the time

[1:57:24] on the telephone yesterday. Rather than

[1:57:27] sign on the onto the letter that you

[1:57:30] presented, here is what I'm committed to

[1:57:32] doing in the coming weeks, months, years

[1:57:36] to advocate for the students of our

[1:57:38] region.

[1:57:41] Bullet one, introduce legislation that

[1:57:45] increases the amount of emergency aid

[1:57:47] available from 300,000 to 1 million.

[1:57:52] creates an expedited review for projects

[1:57:56] where the health and safety of the

[1:57:58] students is at risk.

[1:58:02] Three, creates an expedited review for

[1:58:05] projects that are substantially the same

[1:58:08] as ones that have previously received

[1:58:11] preliminary approval by secretary and

[1:58:14] state board of education.

[1:58:16] Number two, advocate for the

[1:58:19] appropriation of funds in the FY28

[1:58:22] budget to fund state aid for school

[1:58:25] construction projects sufficient to meet

[1:58:28] the needs of priority projects.

[1:58:31] Three, work with the agency of

[1:58:33] education, CESAs, and merger study

[1:58:36] committees to ensure that the Mountain

[1:58:40] Views District has their full

[1:58:42] consideration

[1:58:44] for work with the state aid for school

[1:58:47] construction advisory group to provide

[1:58:50] them with input regarding the

[1:58:51] prioritization of school construction

[1:58:55] projects. And last, engage the AOE and

[1:58:59] approach app appropriate legislative

[1:59:01] committees on the implementation of acts

[1:59:05] 73 and 170, including the establishment

[1:59:09] of new tax classifications for second

[1:59:12] homes, the construct of the foundation

[1:59:15] formula, funding for prek,

[1:59:18] transportation, and special educational

[1:59:21] services.

[1:59:22] I believe this is the best way that I

[1:59:24] can advocate for my views and its

[1:59:26] students within the legislative

[1:59:29] structure. I've already reached out to

[1:59:31] the secretary of education to schedule a

[1:59:34] meeting with legislators from the region

[1:59:37] and have contacted them as well.

[1:59:40] Charlie's

[1:59:44] item number for

[1:59:48] I'm going to just a little too

[1:59:49] >> we can submit it in the record. Yeah.

[1:59:51] Do you want to do you want to stop

[1:59:53] or do you want to skip the categories?

[1:59:55] Okay. Opportunity secure federal funds.

[1:59:58] We've been researching and meeting with

[2:00:00] companies like Energy Efficient

[2:00:02] Investments. And this is what Matt

[2:00:04] presented. Uh relevant presidents. Oh,

[2:00:08] this is important. The [clears throat]

[2:00:10] final section of this letter is on re

[2:00:12] relevant presidents.

[2:00:14] Burlington Integrated Arts Academy, a

[2:00:18] $14 million decarbonization

[2:00:20] project that secured 6 million in

[2:00:22] federal funding. Mount Mansville High

[2:00:24] School and in progress project where

[2:00:26] geothermal booking approximately 15

[2:00:29] million do high school and that's

[2:00:31] another geothermal.

[2:00:33] Uh next step issue an RFQ and we went

[2:00:36] over that. So that's that's the

[2:00:40] pretty much answer.

[2:00:43] >> Thank you.

[2:00:44] >> Any comments on that or questions about

[2:00:46] that?

[2:00:49] >> I they keep the legislature keeps saying

[2:00:52] things are going to happen in 2028. Is

[2:00:54] the tooth fairy coming or something?

[2:00:57] Like I don't I don't see where the plan

[2:00:59] is to make any of that happen.

[2:01:01] >> Right. Well,

[2:01:04] they're working on

[2:01:07] All right. Uh well, thank you. Any other

[2:01:09] working groups have an upgrade? The

[2:01:14] » I can give a brief summary of that. So,

[2:01:16] we've had um three meetings

[2:01:19] um and uh basically we're taking really

[2:01:22] comprehensive approach to understanding

[2:01:25] the use of that in for students. Just

[2:01:29] the um last one we reviewed the charge

[2:01:32] and I can just briefly the charge came

[2:01:34] back to the policy committee and and

[2:01:38] then was re uh sort of revised a bit and

[2:01:40] we gave it back to the uh edtech. So the um charge that we have now sort of

[2:01:47] modified bit is just um create policy

[2:01:51] recommendations and we want to um focus

[2:01:55] on certain categories. So device access

[2:01:58] and time use educational technology. So

[2:02:01] the apps themselves whether family how

[2:02:04] families can have a voice in this and

[2:02:05] the limitations of of what the work

[2:02:08] group is not doing. And also we're doing

[2:02:11] something else. We're stratifying um our

[2:02:14] recommendations based on grade bands. So

[2:02:17] and we hope to use as much you know make it as much evidence-based as

[2:02:22] possible. At the last meeting, uh, we

[2:02:25] did have a really extensive,

[2:02:27] um, review of the GoG Guardian, which is

[2:02:29] a program that, um, sort of basically

[2:02:34] keeps track of what students are are

[2:02:36] doing in the classroom and and it also

[2:02:38] is a protection for them. That was by

[2:02:40] Andy and Mark. And we started to look at

[2:02:43] um, New Line and Dream Box, which are

[2:02:45] some of the apps that are being used.

[2:02:47] So, work continues. is the group does um

[2:02:50] basically put together the agenda for

[2:02:53] the next time and what and so it's a

[2:02:55] really active group.

[2:02:58] >> Yes. All right. Any other working

[2:03:01] groups?

[2:03:04] We have two sets of minutes to approve

[2:03:06] from June 24 meeting. Uh it says 24 on

[2:03:10] me but it's 26

[2:03:12] and June 17, 2026.

[2:03:15] Um, is there a motion to approve both

[2:03:17] sets and minutes?

[2:03:20] >> I'll move to approve both sets and

[2:03:21] minutes.

[2:03:22] >> Is there a second?

[2:03:23] >> I'll second. Thank you, Lisa. Um, all in

[2:03:26] favor of approving the minutes, please

[2:03:28] say I.

[2:03:30] >> I.

[2:03:33] All right. Any opposed?

[2:03:35] Any abstaining?

[2:03:38] Okay.

[2:03:42] Um now the last section before we have

[2:03:46] to executive sessions uh we have an

[2:03:48] opportunity again for public comment. Um

[2:03:52] do a reminder that it's for two minutes

[2:03:54] and I'm going to ask Matt if you'd be

[2:03:56] timing that and uh we keep on the same

[2:04:00] topic. So if you have a comment on what

[2:04:03] somebody else is saying, we just try to

[2:04:05] get those done all as a group and then

[2:04:07] we can move on to another group and um

[2:04:10] we expect um civility in our comments.

[2:04:14] So is there anybody in the room who

[2:04:16] would like to make a public comment?

[2:04:18] >> Yes.

[2:04:19] >> Yeah, I'll be very quick. Um Adam Warren

[2:04:22] Woodstock. I just want to um say two

[2:04:25] things. First, I'm glad that the

[2:04:26] geothermal discussion is going through.

[2:04:28] Back in May, I had shared that idea with

[2:04:30] the with the um survivor union and um

[2:04:33] it's one of those abilities to get cash,

[2:04:35] but it only comes in after the bill

[2:04:37] typically and a discount. So, there

[2:04:39] still needs to be a way to actually

[2:04:41] funnel cash ahead of time to meet the

[2:04:43] requirement. And I had talked a little

[2:04:45] bit about this idea of a guarantee. When

[2:04:48] I worked for broad um for Vermont

[2:04:50] broadband board went ahead and bridged

[2:04:52] finance and for cable and saved about $2

[2:04:54] million. Essentially, what you're doing

[2:04:56] here at insurance policy that would be

[2:04:59] irrevocable and would pay the difference

[2:05:01] between say $20 million and and and what

[2:05:05] we owe uh for from or what the bond

[2:05:08] would produce. Say the bond produces 100

[2:05:10] million, we need 20 million. So we get a

[2:05:12] guarantee for 20 million and that 20

[2:05:14] million would be an insurance policy and

[2:05:16] we would pay 1 or 2% every year for that

[2:05:20] ability and it could be maybe 400,000,

[2:05:22] it could be 200,000. Anyways, I just

[2:05:24] want to put that in the record. Um, I

[2:05:26] can't address this to anybody, but I

[2:05:28] have spoken and I know that there'll be

[2:05:30] some followup afterwards. So, as Thank

[2:05:32] you very much.

[2:05:33] >> Thank you.

[2:05:35] >> Is there anybody um on Zoom

[2:05:37] [clears throat] who would like to speak?

[2:05:44] All right. Anybody else in the room?

[2:05:48] >> Yeah. I just want to say just on the

[2:05:49] topic of the school building that we're

[2:05:52] just everything I'm saying. I'm not sure

[2:05:54] how much of a consolation it is, but

[2:05:55] we're doing a great job. I think it's

[2:05:57] important for us to keep in mind that we

[2:05:59] have made, from what I've seen, we've

[2:06:00] made a lot of progress. We've gotten the

[2:06:03] over the big hurdles. We just need to

[2:06:04] get through this final little step. And

[2:06:07] that it's important to remember

[2:06:08] legislation has changed. The election

[2:06:10] cycle has come and gone. And whether

[2:06:13] they said it or not, that definitely

[2:06:15] played on their minds whether they voted

[2:06:17] for or against interests that helped us.

[2:06:20] So, it's important to keep in mind that

[2:06:22] we can try again and that our activity

[2:06:25] has had a huge impact in the state. I

[2:06:28] don't know if any other district is

[2:06:29] quite as impactful as ours and we're

[2:06:31] doing really really great work.

[2:06:37] » Anybody on on Zoom?

[2:06:42] All right. Then I'm going to close the

[2:06:44] cup of the the public comment and I need

[2:06:48] uh to have a motion that

[2:06:51] is to enter executive session for

[2:06:53] personnel matter one

[2:06:57] 313 A3

[2:06:59] motion for that.

[2:07:02] Anybody want a second?

[2:07:14] » Thank you very much.

[2:07:17] >> I I also only meet

[2:07:21] >> I was

[2:07:23] so on Zoom please.

[2:07:26] >> Only boards.

[2:07:28] >> Sorry. Um,

[2:07:29] >> see though I wanted

[2:07:33] or or Curry, I have a quick question.

[2:07:36] Um, will there be any decisions made or

[2:07:40] statements made in public following

[2:07:43] either executive session?

[2:07:46] >> Um, not that I'm aware of.

[2:07:48] >> Okay.

[2:07:50] So we uh took no action in the first um

[2:07:54] executive session and um we came out at

[2:07:58] 9:08

[2:07:59] and we have a second executive session

[2:08:02] for the same purpose of 1 BSA 313A

[2:08:08] item of reflection. Um, I would like us

[2:08:11] to have a more intentional time in our

[2:08:16] agenda to address anything that comes up

[2:08:18] in public comment that doesn't relate to

[2:08:22] something that's already on the agenda.

[2:08:23] This has happened multiple times. Um,

[2:08:25] and it could be that we address it in

[2:08:28] the same meeting where it came up if

[2:08:30] it's in the first public comment or we

[2:08:32] could say, "Okay, we're going to

[2:08:33] definitely put that on the agenda for

[2:08:35] next week." But I think some things have

[2:08:37] fallen through the cracks and I I would

[2:08:39] like I think the people who make the

[2:08:41] comment would like us to have some time

[2:08:43] to discuss it while they're still here

[2:08:46] personally

[2:08:47] >> or just in general. I mean, I I thought

[2:08:49] that both I think Adam and Aby's I I

[2:08:53] would be interested in hearing more

[2:08:55] about both of those things and thought

[2:08:56] that they came from really good places

[2:08:58] and right now there's just nothing on

[2:09:00] the table for us to continue

[2:09:03] that and I like to action some of those

[2:09:07] things. Yeah, we really aren't supposed

[2:09:09] to be answering the questions because

[2:09:11] other people interested in the same

[2:09:13] topic don't have the chance to know that

[2:09:15] it's going to be on the agenda. So, we

[2:09:16] would always have to push it to the next

[2:09:18] meeting. That's okay. But like how how

[2:09:21] can we do that? Like I mean I'm assuming

[2:09:24] we don't want to do that every single

[2:09:25] time. That's fine. But like how do we

[2:09:28] make is it is this the time in the

[2:09:30] meeting right now? We're deciding what we want to discuss next time.

[2:09:36] >> No, cuz we're we're we're in public

[2:09:38] session now to I mean nobody's here, but

[2:09:41] we're in public session. So we can but

[2:09:43] we can make that dis as a point of the

[2:09:47] reflection to say the chair really has

[2:09:49] the authority to set the agenda.

[2:09:51] >> Yeah. So there can be discussions with

[2:09:53] the chair outside of the public meeting

[2:09:55] about what ought to be on the agenda.

[2:09:58] >> Some of the agenda items we have

[2:10:01] practicedly if not everyone come from

[2:10:04] some of you guys and a public comment

[2:10:07] that we feel like we need to address

[2:10:08] this.

[2:10:10] >> So Karin's point is right. So if you

[2:10:12] have a topic that was in public comment,

[2:10:14] emailing Carrie and saying, "Could we

[2:10:16] have more information on this topic next

[2:10:18] to him?" Which gives us time to prepare,

[2:10:20] you know, and bring the right thing in

[2:10:22] the table.

[2:10:23] >> Right.

[2:10:24] >> Yeah. And I appreciate that. I I would

[2:10:26] like the opportunity to say that in the

[2:10:29] board meeting like yes, let's talk about

[2:10:32] this so that they feel heard

[2:10:34] >> because if they don't know if I email

[2:10:36] Carrie the next day. So you know just the one statement like hey Sherry

[2:10:41] who would be the best person for us to

[2:10:43] have at our next meeting to talk about

[2:10:47] you're allowed to say that by the way.

[2:10:49] So you're a board member and after

[2:10:52] public comments made you can say hey

[2:10:55] Carrie I would really like us to you

[2:10:58] know follow up with that and Carrie many

[2:11:01] times has actually said to the public

[2:11:03] what we do is after we listen to you um

[2:11:07] we will have like a script I don't maybe

[2:11:11] she didn't use it tonight but she'll

[2:11:13] tell the public like we can't further

[2:11:16] address it further tonight but we can

[2:11:17] put it on a future agenda and we is a

[2:11:19] board will address it. But even before

[2:11:22] she says her script, you can look Adam

[2:11:24] in the eye and you can you can say that.

[2:11:27] >> You can say that's a really important

[2:11:30] concern, Carrie. Can we talk about that?

[2:11:32] Like you can do that.

[2:11:34] >> So I think maybe we just need to know

[2:11:36] what that's for sure. That was

[2:11:39] >> that's what I was just going to suggest

[2:11:40] like I'm a new board member. I was just

[2:11:42] newly elected. So maybe the the meeting

[2:11:44] following election when everybody comes

[2:11:47] together quickly have a brief overview

[2:11:49] of what committees are here already

[2:11:53] established what a little bit of what

[2:11:54] they do and what we can do as a board

[2:11:57] member what we can and you know can't do

[2:12:00] so that everybody coming on and even a

[2:12:03] refresher for those who have been here

[2:12:04] for a while um it just kind of brings it

[2:12:07] to the forefront. Yeah.

[2:12:09] >> And the VSBA [clears throat] does have

[2:12:10] seminars and webinars too. Yeah, in that

[2:12:13] book that you get that's got a lot of

[2:12:16] stuff in there about that stuff too.

[2:12:18] I've been myself to review

[2:12:23] » and select board by the way a little bit

[2:12:27] differently. They have public comment

[2:12:30] or agenda item

[2:12:32] >> be changing that system.

[2:12:33] >> Okay. But [clears throat]

[2:12:35] there's a

[2:12:39] maybe longer but

[2:12:41] >> makes public feel like they're part of

[2:12:43] the actual discussion rather than all

[2:12:45] the beginning all the

[2:12:47] >> Yeah.

[2:12:50] » Okay.

[2:12:53] » Who would like to make the motion?

[2:12:55] >> I'll make a motion. I also want to say I

[2:12:57] love a good point of order.

[2:13:00] >> Yes.

[2:13:01] >> Thank you, Mom.

[2:13:02] >> All right. I'll keep

[2:13:06] » have a good evening.

[2:13:09] >> Have a good night.

[2:13:10] >> Good night. Anybody say no?

[2:13:14] Good night everyone.

Mountain Views Supervisory Union and School District Board of Directors 9/14/26

Transcript