It is 6 o'clock. I'd like to call this meeting of the Robbinsdale Area School Board to order. Today is Monday, July 21st, 2005, and we are in the Education Service Center boardroom. Would the clerk please call the role? >> With pleasure. Director Basset >> here. >> Director Bowman is here. Uh, Chair Evans Becker >> here. >> Director Hillbrand >> here. >> Director Holmes >> here. >> Director Long >> here. >> Director Wuto >> here. >> And Dr. Stalo >> here. >> We are all present. >> Thank you. All righty. Uh, first item up is approval of our agenda. Do I have a move to approve the agenda? >> I'll move it. >> Moved by Director Bowman. >> Second. >> Seconded by Director Wuto. All in favor, please say I. >> There's a hand. >> I director Evans Becker or Chair Evans Becker. I'd like to add something to the agenda. >> Oh, sure. Yeah. I'm just waiting for you to Yeah. I'd like to add um infraction of the bylaws the agenda and if we could probably add that >> that down >> or D oh well if we have >> more appropriate for it to come sooner. >> So do you have a do you have a >> that's that's what I'm asking for well just asking for to amend the agenda to add bylaw fractions. >> Bylon fractions. Okay. That's what I'm That's what my moving. Yes. >> Okay. >> Second. >> Moved by Director Basset, seconded by uh Director Long. Amend the agenda for bylaw infractions. All in favor say I. >> I. >> I. I. >> Post say nay. >> Nay. >> Okay. We need to We all need a roll call on that. >> All right. Let me um >> and I would like to pose a question like are we going to have a moment to discuss it or are we >> when we get to discussion but we're not there yet. >> So we have to approve it before we can get to the point of discussion. We don't this is a shot in the dark. We don't know what it is. >> We that's what the past practice is. >> No it's not. in in some cases >> best practices to discuss the reason why you want to have it >> well because there was an infraction to the bylaws and so that is really it and to talk about that as a subject. Don't we have uh don't we have procedure in I think policy 209 if there are infractions that are occurring within our bylaws or our policies. I do believe that there is a process beyond this and um I would look to I just want to make sure that we're thorough and I get to have my question answered. Thank you very much. >> I see a hand over there. >> Yeah, just a a point of order. the the vote is currently PBG. I think there was a >> I can't hear you. >> The vote is pending. There was a division. So, we we took a vote, but we don't have the results yet. >> I think it would be >> I think you're right. >> Okay. >> Okay. So, we need to finish off our vote. >> Okay. Director Basset, >> yes. >> Director Bowman votes no. Chair Evans Becker, >> no. >> Director Hillbrand, >> no. >> Director Holmes, >> yes. >> Director Long, >> yes. Director Wuto. >> Yes. >> Motion carries. >> We will add that. We will put it down under um under C. We'll make it D in bylaw infractions. Okay. >> Wait. Which section? >> Which section? >> New business. >> Okay. >> New business. D. Okay. Next thing up >> is approving the amended agenda. >> Yeah. Chair, I'm sorry. I didn't really quite catch where you were saying that you wanted to insert it. >> New business item number five D. >> Um I would ask that we have that be item C because I think it informs the next one that comes up after that. It's relevant and they are separate issues. So I would I would just recommend that we talk about infractions before we go into anything else. >> Just a simple change to from C to you. We often talk about where inserted. So C as opposed to D. >> I think I'm keep I'm keeping it at D. >> Appeal the decision. Okay. Um >> I have two people who want to appeal the decision. Do I have more than Do I have two more people who want to appeal that decision? >> Wait a minute. >> We can take a motion on that. >> Appeal chair's decision. >> So do we we take a vote? Um it requires twothirds to overturn the chair's decision. I need three more. She wants to leave it at >> Well, I heard all that, but I don't. >> So, I have I have Director Basset appealing the decision. Director Holmes appealing to the decision. Do I have two? >> And director Long, I need two more people to appeal the decision. >> Two more. >> It takes two/3s >> there for to rule the position of the chair. >> Okay, we'll keep it at D. >> Dr. Basset. um a point of privilege. Uh chair, I feel like that um a discussion of an infraction of our bylaws is a significant thing and to try to shut that down or change it. And I've expressed how important it is in the order because the issue that you would have follow it or precede it is inappropriate without some further discussion of the infraction. itself. And so I think that the issue supersedes you wanting to the placement of it. In fact, I would argue that it probably should be even higher on the agenda quite frankly because an infraction of our B bylaws is serious. It's one of the most that's what our governing documents are. That's like the constitution and infractions of the constitution when people are not willing to challenge it. The bylaws are the constitution of this school board and I think it's an important of issue. I I didn't press for it to go higher on the agenda although I considered it. All I'm saying is I think it should preede the issue that follows. It should go before it should be C and then we can talk about C to become D. I think it's kind of preemptive authoritarianism and inappropriate. what where's the harm? And I will further say I really resent including legal counsel in the discussions of this board because boards before you function without having a legal interjection in the midst of a meeting. That is the very thing that keeps this board from trying to work toward consensus as opposed to authoritarian rule. consensus is the order of school boards pretty much across this state. I think that the kind of actions that I see happening routinely or are troublesome to me and disparaged anyone. I never swear at a meeting. I've never sworn in 23 years. I'm simply stating my position. I think it's inappropriate. I think it's authoritarianism and I resent it. There's not a place for the legal counsel. Typically, the board determines and directs the chair or anybody else to impose or to request legal counsel. That is not a standard practice at board meetings to have legal counsel interject anytime conversation wants to be shut down. That's all I have to say about that. And so and my original issue is for you to withdraw that and and and the maker who said she was appealing it and to place it as I asked at C rather than D and we can just move along. Doesn't require all this legal wrangling if we're all willing to if the vote has passed to put it on the agenda and I'm asking you as the maker to place it in a certain place because I think it's relevant. I would like the courtesy of having that um respect. Thank you. However, it's not just authoritarianism. I had support of the board on what on the placement. Director Bowman. Oh. >> Um, are we going to move on the agenda item? I mean, we're going to vote on the amended agenda. >> Um, yes. So, um, I need a motion to approve the amended agenda. >> So, moved. >> Moved by Director Bowman. >> Second. >> Seconded by Director >> with the amendment. amended. Amended >> and it's going to be D, not C. >> Okay. All in favor, please say I. Of the agenda amended with our new item being item number D, please say I. >> I. >> I. >> Opposed, please say nay. >> Nay. >> I think that the eyes have it, but I can take a roll call on it. >> Great. I'm ready. Director Basset. No. >> Director Bowman votes yes. Chair Evans Becker. >> Yes. >> Chair I mean, excuse me, Director Hillenbrand. >> Yes. >> Director Holmes, >> no. >> Director Long, >> no. >> Director Wuto, >> yes. >> Okay, we have an agenda. Number four on the agenda is the consent agenda. Items for the consent agenda are routine in nature and are approved in a single motion. There is no separate discussion of these items unless a board member so requests in which case the item would be removed as a consent agenda item and addressed. Consent agenda items include administrative personal matters and financial matters. Do I have a move to approve the consent agenda? Director Holmes. >> Chair, can I pull the CISO contract, please? >> Yep. Anything else? Do I have a move to approve the agenda minus the CESO contract? >> So moved. >> Moved by Director Hillenbrand, seconded by someone, Director Huto. Okay, this is a roll call vote. We are going to have a roll call vote on the consent agenda minus the CISO contract. >> When you're ready, >> Director Basset. Yes. >> Director Bowman abstains. Uh, Chair Evans Becker. >> Yes. >> Director Hillbrand. >> Yes. >> Director Holmes, >> no. >> Director Long, >> no. >> Uh, Director Wuto, >> yes. >> Okay. So, we have >> It passes >> four yes, two no, and one abstension. So with the consent agenda passes uh with the ex with the CISO contract pulled. Do I have a motion to approve the CISO contract? >> First we have to have a it's been moved. Is there a second? >> It's been moved and seconded. Now we can have a conversation. >> Director Holmes, did you have something you wanted to say? >> I did. Um I just view transportation as a major component of a successfully run school district. So when we're changing direction um because it was a posted position and I recognize we have a memo explaining the difficulty of the hiring pool uh I just wanted to circle back on some points and talk through them. Um just based on pre previous information that had come from um rationration before um first point is why would it be starting in November two months into the school date? Good evening everyone. When the previous director of transportation um decided to resign from her position, she provided us with two weeks notice. Um school was in session. We were looking at I believe it was like the end of April, so we still had an a good couple five six weeks to to have operations going. At that time we entered into a shortterm agreement with CISO. And when that and when I say short-term it was a threemonth agreement that was a rolling agreement meaning if we didn't notify within a certain period of time it got extended. Given that where we are today with this contract that short-term agreement still is still in place. So therefore, this wouldn't start until November because then it's the expiration of that short-term agreement that was in place and this goes in then to a full the the remainder of the fiscal year. Continue. Um and then I wanted to discuss the rate of $10,000 a month with an auto 4% um fee increase beginning January 27. Uh we're just obviously up against some struggles here in you know nine bargaining units. So 4% seems above where we should be. Is there flexibility in that? Was there push back on that? Can we ask that? I would say with this kind I mean we have the opportunity. The intent is not to have this be an agreement in perpetuity. The intent is to have this agreement in place so we can continue with the function of and operations of transportation and go back out and search for um give it another run as far as a candidate get an employee in district one who is can represent um what we need them to represent. So in looking at what does a future dollar amount hold if that and uh director Holmes I'm sorry uh FY27 correct? >> Right. That's another it's the completion of this year. It would start again. I would say is there opportunity to go back and redo like I don't know what that's going to look like. We might not even need the contract. So I would say and I recognize that and I know it was expressed on the May 13th meeting by the superintendent. It's an important position and she thought that that person would be giving um expert advice. Um, so I guess that's why I don't want to get locked into a contract, especially my third point that has an inability to cancel clause unless we pay the remainder of the contract. So, how does that fall as you're looking for that position to fill it? Um, because that's going to put us on the hook if we find somebody in a couple of months. Um, then we've got to pay out the remainder of that contract is my understanding. I would I would presume we wouldn't be posting that position until we get it kind of into the heart of winter and because typically um people that are searching for other employee aren't doing it at especially in this position aren't doing it in September and October they start looking more in the January February timeline because they're looking at the at finishing up their existing position presumably they're in a in a uh another school district and looking to then maybe on board with us. So the intent would not be to post anytime probably until we hit the holidays to be honest with you. And so then that aligns more a le more or less with the intent to non-renew and the notification of that. Thank you for the explanation and additional information. I just this is there are too many unknowns with me on this contract. It's a vendorfriendly contract and just knowing the financial straits we're in, I will not be supporting this. Any other questions? If not, let's >> pardon me. >> There were good questions. >> Yes. Thank you. Um, let's let's do a vote. It'll be a roll call vote because it involves money. >> Cisco contract, director Basset >> and and we were voting. Can you restate it? >> Yes. We were voting on the CISO contract. >> Accepting the CISO contract. The one that was pulled from the consent agenda. M. Yeah, >> it's I'm going to abstain from that. >> Director Bowman votes yes. Chair Evans Becker, >> yes. >> Director Hillbrand, >> yes. >> Director Holmes, >> no. >> Director Long, >> no. >> Director Wuto, >> yes. >> 43 with one abstension. >> That means that means it carries. We have a CISO contract. Sorry about that. My computer is not working. All right. The next thing on our agenda is new business. And the the first item is the custodial grievance. Uh Dr. McDall. >> Thank you, Madam Chair, school board, Superintendent Stalo. We have a uh level three grievance hearing. Uh you were given a memo on that. um not different than the last board meeting, but the district has followed the process for progressive discipline as it's laid out in the contract in the bargaining agreement. And the recommendation uh for you to consider is uh to advance this to arbitration in accordance with the terms of that contract and working agreement. >> A deadline on this? >> Yes, we are. This is one of those again where it's a 15 day from the beginning. We're currently at day 12. Uh so it would be something where we need to come to some resolution uh with the bargaining group by Friday. >> Okay. So do I have um >> so how many grievances now do we currently have going with SEIU? >> I do not have that answer. I don't uh know that without uh director executive director Hearn here. >> Okay. >> Okay. Do I have a motion to um for the hearing and refer the matter to arbitration? >> Yep. I'll move approval of of creating that motion or moving that motion forward. >> Director Bowman has moved to forgo the hearing and refer the matter to arbitration. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Seconded by Director Wuto. All in favor please say I. >> I oppose say nay. Nay. >> No. >> Okay. So we have referred that one on to our Okay. Uh resolution on for the acceptance of donations. Um we're doing donations every meeting now so that we can get our thank yous out in a more timely manner. So, do I have someone um Mickey moving to accept the donations? >> Thank you. Director Basset has moved it. >> I'll second. >> Director Holmes has seconded it. Um roll call vote. >> Sounds great. I'm ready. >> Okay. So, >> Director Basset, >> yes. >> Director Bowman votes yes. Chair Evans Becker, >> I vote yes. >> Director Hillbrand, >> yes. >> Director Holmes, >> yes. Director Long, >> yes. >> Director Wuawa, >> yes. We It's unanimous. >> You accepted the donations and we are very grateful for h for getting them. Thank you. Next item on our agenda is a special um meeting pursuant to the district's bylaws. Directors Long, Bassid, and Holmes have called for a special meeting of the board. The district's bylaws give three board members the right to formally request that the board assemble for a special meeting. However, the board's legal council has determined that the bylaws do not give three board members the right to determine when the special meeting will be held or the agenda for the meeting. The board has the authority to decide those matter matters. Director Long, Bassid, and Holmes have requested a special meeting to consider the following items. One, review of budget items. A, family literacy program. B, cabinet market rate increases. C. Newly created positions as specified May 13, 2025, including status and salaries. D. Re-imagineed vision 2030 budget and year-to-ate spending. E, consent agenda policy draft proposal. F, other, two, board superintendent and community communications and expectations. Three, policy committee versus policy as a whole. The board has already voted on some of these items and another vote would require a motion to reconsider. Robert's rules of order state to provide usefulness and protection against abuse, the motion to reconsider can be made only by a member who voted on the prevailing side. Additionally, Robert's rules of order state that the motion to reconsider must be moved either on the same day or the of the original motion was taken or on the next succeeding day within the same session on which a business meeting is held. Finally, Robert's rules of order state that a motion to reconsider is out of order if there has been an affirmative vote on whose provision on whose provisions have already partly been carried out. In regard to budget items 1A, B, and C, the board has voted to approve the budget. The new budget is already being implemented under Robert's rules of order. Budget items Oh, sorry. Thank you. Um, budget items 1 A, 1 B, and 1 C cannot be reconsidered. Budget item D, the re-imagined vision 2030 budget, was shared with board members today. Budget item E, the consent agenda policy draft proposal. Um, it would be more appropriate if that would be forwarded to the policy committee for consideration. Item two is titled board superintendent community communication and expectations. This matter can be addressed as part of the study session agenda item A 7A and B this evening. Article 8, section two of the superintendent's contract requires the board and superintendent to annually determine goals and objectives of the for the superintendent. Article 4, section two of the superintendent's contract states that no later than August 1st, 2024, and at least annually thereafter, the school board and superintendent shall meet to discuss and process the process and procedures for how the school board and superintendent will communicate and work together. We are addressing these matters this evening under study session on the item agenda item 7A and B. Item three is titled the policy committee versus policy of the whole. We are discussing the policy committee already on the study agenda later tonight. This issue is on our agenda for tonight. The only item that is that I have not addressed in is budget item 1F which is titled other. By law, we cannot hold a special meeting without identifying specific purpose. As a result, we cannot hold a special meeting to consider unspecified purpose such as other. At this time, I would like to make two motions. First, I mo I move for the board to determine that budget items 1A, 1B, and 1 C cannot be reconsidered at a special meeting because one, the board has already voted on those items. Two, the budget items have been carried out in whole or in part. Three, a motion to reconsider was not made the same day as the original vote or the following day. And four, no be board member who voted in favor of the budget items has brought the motion to reconsider. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Second. >> Seconded by director. >> Okay. Discussion. Director Holmes, did you prepare that by yourself, chair? >> No. Can you elaborate please? >> It was a group effort. >> I worked with legal counsel. >> Worked with legal counsel. Thank you. >> I want to keep things legal. It's legal. I had I had um two years prior done the exact same thing and you were chair then and we had the special meeting. stifling discussion as director Basset alluded to earlier in this meeting is not good governance. It's clear, crystal clear on how most of these votes go. But when you shut down discussion and call in legal to silence board members, I am floored that we're at this point. >> I knew >> we're going further. You've sent us an email saying that you've fielded complaints or questions. You are supposed to facilitate and bring discussion to the table, not make unilateral decisions. I don't know what you're talking about about that. Numerous times the policy committee, you just read a lengthy list of things and I'm glad we're going to go through them. Policy, I've been following up with emails to you since March and they've gone unressed. ignored. So the the the facilitation of concerns should be decided with the board in discussions. You have not been granted authority to shut down topics. And then I'm going to also elaborate that this board has a lovely lovely phrase called it's a living breathing document. Of course, we can revisit conversations >> and the budget, >> including the budget and policies, and I'm I'm basing on what you just recited from Legal's advice that that is not an accurate or fair statement to represent to this community. This board needs to be run by seven directors, not by legal counsel. >> That's exactly right. The budget is a living document in that once it's enacted by the board, our director, our CFO moves the money around. We are discussing policy committee and other committees this evening. >> Director Basset, >> I think I the hands up here first. >> Your hand first. >> Director Hillbrand. Yeah, I first of all I don't think that approaching this discussion with leading questions that are supposed to be gotcha moments is a very kind way and appropriate way to approach discussion. Um you know that this was prepared with legal and and in fact I've heard you many times say that we have to stay within the rules. We have to ensure that we don't break open meeting rules. And so then when you turn around and say that people shouldn't be using legal counsel is to ensure that we are within the rules that we're following protocols because Robert rules of order and anyone who anyone who operates with them will tell you that it is very complex and it is very hard to follow and it is very easy to make a mistake in them that to ask for advice to ensure that we're doing it properly. I don't I don't think that's fair and I had nothing to do with this. I'm just saying that I don't blame Grea for doing that. And on top of that, I think that, you know, I I the district that I work for, legal counsel sits at the meetings and does provide advice to the board um on these kinds of issues and will speak up at meetings to ensure that they're following Robert's rules of order and that they're that they're within the that they're within legal boundaries. So that it's not true. I'm I'm sure not every district does it, but it's not true that no other district does that. And so I think that we should just think about what we want for ourselves, right? We could also lead the way, even if other districts don't do it. So I don't think we need to be comparing. I think we should be thinking about if we truly want to be following the the rules as they stand. It is great that we have legal counsel here to provide advice because I know for a fact I am not an expert in Robert's rules of order and I don't think anybody sitting at this table is or can say that they are. Um even if you know it quite a bit better than I do. And so I again I've played no part in this agenda setting or anything. I just don't think it's fair to continually be saying that it's wrong to use legal counsel to ensure that we're following rules. Now, if it's truly to stifle voice, that is wrong. But in this case, she's she's citing rules in terms of how we need to go about addressing issues. That is not wrong in my view. >> These decisions are so important. We have to have legal counsel. I >> Yeah. And I don't know. I feel like director Hillbrand Brand was addressing Director Holmes. I don't know if she wants to respond to that before I go or >> chair. I sure I which order would you like me to go in? >> Um I've written my questions down so I'll follow your direction. >> I have my hand up in >> and I think Director Bowman had her hand up too, right? >> No, >> not me. I don't have anything to say. >> We'll go with you and then we'll go we'll go on second times around if people don't have a >> Okay. So, um I went through and I looked to to see about um precedents for doing this. I feel like in the ruling that we got, there was a word added to our bylaws that is not currently in there. It's different when we're talking about for to call for a meeting versus call a meeting. Um what we did was has we have precedents of past practice. So I will pass this out to along with my interpretation of this. I will also email this to the board members. Um I would like this. Yeah. um both of them both of them there's an example of the past presidents with it whereas director Holmes has already brought up um I've had talks with director Basset too where she has uh previously um had a past president's of calling a meeting not calling for a meeting so I think the interpretation of the language is done in a way so that it appeases certain board members ers instead of giving recommendations and following through as to what the lawyer is supposed to be doing for us. Um, so I don't really feel like the lawyer that we have is working for the district. I feel like there's an agenda that is going on with this lawyer and the use has we've brought this up at several different meetings has been to stifle certain board members conversations >> for now is this >> uh this way they did >> okay just because we did something in the past if it wasn't right doesn't mean that we have to continue doing that. I haven't read this yet, but I'm just saying if it was done in the past doesn't mean that we need to do it if it is not the right thing to do. Uh, director Basset, >> um, chair, I think that the conversation that we're having now is is for directors to express their opinions and I think that it it becomes more um adversarial than it needs to be when you're rebutting everything when there's no need. So, um I will just say that um it's been past practice. There have been a number of different times when meetings have been called by three directors. It's not been overly used only on a couple of different occasions. Only one of them was I a part of but there were others and they could call a meeting and then and they really at times didn't even state the agenda. So uh and and to the point that what has happened in the past may not necessarily go forward, I don't quibble with that. In fact, that really is one of the reasons why I talked about what I wanted to that infraction to go first because the first step is to talk about the infraction, which was the just the ignoring of three directors calling for a meeting. That's all our bylaws call for. That was overstepping over because any of the things that got said a few moments ago could have been said in this special meeting and say I think we should redact this, redact that, redact this, redact the other on the agenda. That that wouldn't have hurt harmed it at all. But the issues that were fine to go forward should have been. more important as important as that because issues directors want to talk about if the focus is to try to find consensus among board directors which has always been what what the board has tried to do is to find consensus. That's how people learn how to work together. It's not adversarial to bring an adversarial process into a board meeting is to put in false barriers. is to inhibit conversation, is to inhibit all those things. It's it's not right. And I would venture to say that um and I appreciate director Hillbrand, you given the example of Minneapolis. Minneapolis has been number one in terms of size in the district. It's been number two in terms of size in the in the state rather, and it's been number three. So, it's a large district, but very complex, and although the fundamental issues are the same. So, I respect that. I don't think I said all all districts. I mean I I just want to make that point. I didn't say that. I know that it exists in certain circumstances and I don't think it's a bad idea to have >> Well, and if I can interrupt you for a point of clarification. >> Yes, please. >> There they have general counsel that is hired by the district that is a district staff member, not separate that is working hourly like we have. >> Thank you. Thank you for that clarification, uh, Director Holmes. And I would add too even the selection of the legal counsel. I recall that when uh the question came to the full board about whether we should hire additional counsel and that was a result of a lot of the cross complaints that directors were having with each other. Um the board said yes but then the board should have been brought back for the board to actually select the council. I think that what has happened is that the chair and superintendent at the time selected the council and that's inappropriate. So I think council should have been elected and should be going forward be selected that's going to represent the board that the board has a say in who that council is and that's no no dispersion on the council that got selected necessarily if they were brought in by certain people to do a certain job but the board was was was never included in that. And this is not the first time that various directors have felt that they were not being represented appropriately. So, I'll just that's just an extra, you know, but but I'm saying that I resent having legal counsel interfere in the mechanics of this board. And there's not a director who I've served with who hasn't learned their craft and at times ask other directors sitting here and and talked among each other about what's the most appropriate step to take with regard to Robert's rules. Everybody understands that Robert's rules can be gnarly. I mean, there's no argument there, but directors have sat at this very table, different directors, and have talked together about, well, I don't think that's right, or I think this is right, or I think that's right. And then we all agree that we're going to move on with whatever the decision is. Over time, that serves to build trust among directors, that serves to reinforce people learning how to work together. If we have to have legal counsel sort through every decision that we're making about just communication, that is a significant red flagging problem and it's inappropriate and unnecessary and I and I'll say said it before and I'll say it again. I resent it and quite frankly the legal counsel should work for the entire board. And I moreover, I will say the the main point that I wanted to make and I'm glad I didn't forget it is because the board determines directs when legal counsel is in included, not the chair solely, not any other director at their discretion. The board determines when we're going to not the super. Now, the superintendent can do all she needs to do with first legal counsel with her team. That's her job. But you know, we get a lot of feedback about what is the superintendent's role, what's the board's role. The board hires and and directs its counsel, the board, not the chair. The chair is directed when to engage with legal counsel. And to do that indiscriminately, that's really really what our our bylaws say, that the board under the direction of the board, at the approval of the board engages counsel. And so to have it randomly engaged whenever you feel like you need to do it. You could have come right to that meeting special session and say as the chair I've never disrespected you as a chair on purpose that I do, you know. Well, I mean you may feel different. I'm just saying I never did it on purpose on purpose. So as the chair, if you say I think I need legal counsel on something, far be it from me to interfere. In fact, some of the last information that I got from legal counsel and all information I ever got from C legal counsel as the chair, I had them directly send it all to each board director under confidential. Everybody sitting here are adult full adults, full adults and can read and write and we're voted into these offices and we don't need anybody micromanaging us other than we ourselves. We're capable of it. The dension that this board started with set our superintendent on a path that was un unfortunate that she got set on that path by herself. I'm just saying it was it was it was a lot of chaos and so any superintendent who starts in chaos has a challenge. she herself is talking are >> you talking about this superintendent >> yes this she has she said publicly recently you know and so and I don't want to get sidetracked on that you know she just talked about it's been a year of challenge she came to a tough time everybody knows that because everybody's been watching okay it was a tough time and so the only reason I raise it now is the tough time that this board has had I see the board trying to get past it and the barrier to that is always calling legal counsel when people want to talk about something and doing it when you've not been directed by this board to do so indiscriminately. And that's how I feel and I don't need to rebut. This is what I have observed and it needs to stop. >> Dr. Bowman, >> I think this is a lot to unpack and I first of all [Music] It's a lot to unpack and um in light of the fact that director Bassid had said she doesn't want to rebuttal, does that mean the rest of us need to be silent? I I can >> and not speak our not speak our what we have on our mind. Is that where we're at right now? So, I should >> She meant that I shouldn't say anything. >> Oh, that you shouldn't say anything. >> Okay. >> I just wanted clarity on that because I don't need to. I didn't extend the whole exchange, but I heard my name, man. I you know, um I came I came with a prepared statement. I came with lots of prepared statements in light of the communication that's been flowing through this board over the last couple of weeks. Um uh one of the things I know, but I'm going to go off script. Um one of the things I know is that a lot of these allegations are being uh pointed at me in particular. Uh it's a very personal thing. I was board chair last year. Uh I saw us through the false starts. First of all, when somebody says we are trying to get along and make it all better, I have a different view on that because last year when I was board chair, the full starts of mediation and then that moved into investigations and that moved into attorneys who quit the board because we were so impossible to work with. Uh while I was chair, you're right. I made the decision that we needed legal representation and protection from oursel because one of the things that I saw happening repeatedly at this board table was people with no expertise attempting to make a case for Robert's rules or some other rule of law or for an interpretation of something without the expertise behind it. And so the thing that I did and I'm very proud of the way in which I acted because I said because I said uh when we hired our new superintendent, I think it was at that point or you walked into knowing that we had to do this, we needed legal counsel for the board. And the mistake that everybody makes is that I picked the legal counsel. I did not pick the legal counsel. I didn't even recommend who we should have as legal counsel because I know about this much when it comes to hiring legal counsel, especially in this environment because I've never had to hire legal counsel for myself. So, we had a a meeting. These people seem to be they had the credentials. They work specifically with school districts. We hired them. from that point on the the only I mean okay so that's how that happened the other thing that I'm really amazed at is that and I want to add I have some real big resentments too I really have some resentments about the description the false narrative the fake and false narrative that we are using legal counsel to somehow silence people the only reality is is we're trying to use legal counsel from what I I have not asked legal counsel for anything since they've been on board. I've never once made that request to let's bring legal counsel in on this uh in these six months since I've been off the board off the not chair. But I would proudly ask for legal counsel, which I did when I was chair because guess what? It is not hard for me to say I don't have the expertise. I don't know when it comes to like the thing of the IROD, the decision-making information reaction option and decision an option that this board needs to have is utilizing uh correct information about our bylaws about the rules about about state statutes without having them hijacked by individuals who believe that they know more because that's what's happening here. our does our chair I mean our board has been hijacked by people who all think that they're being experts they know more than our superintendent they know more than our chair they know more than this I cannot tell you the number of times I have been belittled and berated by members on this board and it has nothing to do with whether I've tried to silence people or not the reality of it is is when we come to the table and we vote on something and if you don't prevail nobody has silenced ed you. The reality of it is is that when we vote up here at this table, this is the uh information. I am not an idiot. I get the information from the sources that are available to us. I know information about governance and about how entities and institutions work and I based my vote on that. This is not a conspiracy. And it totally amazes me that we have board members that are out here trying to sell the notion that we have some grand conspiracy going on. I really resent that. I resent board members who call outside agencies in to cover to accuse us of not letting that person have a voice when that person didn't come to us. that person went to an outside agency and brought the outside agency in to yell at us. That's what I resent. Don't sit there, please, and tell us that we are all trying to rebuild there. I see none of that. I sit here quietly and watch this war go on while we have an incredible staff and we have an incredible superintendent that are attempting to build something. We have not moved an inch away from the chaos and the hatred that is self-generated on this board that is nothing but about personalities. We can't have an opinion here before we are forced into it's a personality. We don't want you as chair because your personality is just a little strong. I've got resentments too. None of that has led the way to building peace efforts amongst this board. So here's my final closing on that and that is the stuff on the legal is done. It was not reconsidered in an appropriate time. If you feel that your voice is being silent, then maybe you need to speak what your voice really is. I sit at this table and I watch this. I don't like this. I don't like this. This isn't the way they do it there. This isn't the way they do it here. Somebody please if you are unhappy rewrite the policy and present it to the policy committee because that's how it works in an institution. If you're not happy with something be specific. I'm not going to go through all of your homework that you've done and and try to make sense out of it. None of this even makes sense. So, uh I don't even know where we can go from here. I don't think there is a forward. I think the state should come in and run this school district with superintendent stallow because we have proven in the last two and a half years we do not have the talent at this table to sit like adults and work out our problems as an honorable board should do. >> Done. >> Okay, we have a motion on the floor. >> I just have a one fact correction. >> Okay. And so I'm just going to request that people kind of keep it related to the motion. The next person up is Director Holmes and then Director Hillbrand wrote him down so I could come back. It wasn't an attempt at a gotcha leading question. That email was labeled confidential. There was no other way for me to come around that and I'm not going to let it be presented that it was come up by the chair. So, it's it's it's relevant because I still it shouldn't have been confidential information anyway. This is conversation that should be have at at the table. And again, it's about facilitation for me so the board can speak to one another. That's how we're going to get through these problems. Um, and then beyond that, going into the the the legal costs, it was not this month, but $18,000 in board legal fees the month before. So, we've got to start getting our arms around this. And it's not it I understand the purpose of legal. We all do the conception of steering the board off you know keeping us on the legal path when we're making you know policy or coming to it with um winter days off or whatever that is that comes into and guiding us there but nothing else really. It's it's not facilitating discussion at the table. Well, that is the role of the chair and if if Robert's rules are too complex, um there's training for that and we can all go through that. So, it's I I think we're making it too complicated with Robert's rules. Yes, it's huge. It's a book, you know, we all recognize that gnarly. That's a good word for Robert's rules. Um so, again, the problems with having a meeting and discussing those aren't legal issues. Um, and I guess that's making the case for me because for years this board has voted 70 on budgets for years. 70 on budgets. So questions I just want to be really clear. Questions are not the problem here. We don't want to make the same mistakes again because we did relevant. I we didn't make cuts. We were making so many cuts last year they didn't get made. And I've heard director Basset says that's a red flag for process that something is not happening on our checks and balance level. So that's the goal. And in terms of experts, I've heard compelling testimony from our FA family literacy folks on funding that they they can get and go after and it wasn't accurate and it might be inaccurate, but let's have the conversation. That's what I'm looking for. We had 15 health service staff send us a letter on all of their expert questions they had on on choices that we were making. So, you know who are the experts for health services? Those staff who live and breathe it. Who's the experts for family literacy? The people who know it, who know the funding for it, who know how to fund raise for it. And it's not saying we're going to change our our decision possibly because we don't have money for a half a million dollar program, but they offered to fundraise. They offered to go out for grants and we know we're considering use of buildings so why couldn't we reposition? I'm just saying there are a lot of questions. I'm not pretending to be an expert on any of that. I'm saying there are experts that have come to us with relevant information that I would like to discuss as a full board. Just to close the legal process, I was part um I was vice chair at the time. Formal counsel Martin did say he wasn't going to work with us. I believe there was a call with him and the superintendent and perhaps the chair, I don't know. Um, and MSBA recommended some law firms that came up. Previous council made the call to those two firms and interviews were made with two firms by the superintendent and the chair and one was put forward in consent agenda. Hence leading to my proposal of a consent agenda policy because we have way too much stuff moving through consent agenda that needs to be discussed. and um just bringing it to the policy committee. That's that's a conversation I'll get into later because it's not that easy. It's definitely not that easy. >> Thank you. >> Okay, Director Hillbr, >> I just want to clarify it was uh stated earlier that the bylaws talk about how legal counsel should be used. There's no there's nothing in the bylaws that talk about legal counsel whatsoever. Helen, you did say that. Um, and just to clarify, there's nothing whatsoever about legal counsel, how they should be used, and who should be accessing them in the bylaws. So, I'm just clarifying. >> Um, legal counsel, you have a finger up. >> Yes. I um I actually wanted to address the the same point that Director Helen Bren just brought up. Um, it is in policy 203.1 that, um, the board I believe recently uh modified or at least since the time I've been here was modified. Um that policy does uh grant the board chair uh the authority to contact legal counsel to seek advice on matters within the board's authority. Um so that is where the the full board has granted um the chair uh that authority to to do so. Um I also um do just want to speak to the legal council's role is also to ensure that the district is not in legal uh at risk of lawsuits over the board's actions. So, um it is not our role to stifle or tell you who can and cannot speak. It is our role to tell you the proper purpose for a special meeting, what meetings need to be had in open session, and what types of discussions are permitted to be had in closed session. Um because those types of uh decisions can all lead to litigation. Um so, I did just want to flag those two points. um as they are relevant to this discussion. I would also most of this discussion has not been gerine to the motion that is currently pending. So I would encourage the board to we talked about this in our training as well to debate the motions that are in front of it rather than the bigger picture. >> I know what she's talking about. >> Um I just want to speak to Director Hillbrand if I misspoke that. I do know that. So I may have um you know said that you know and so fine uh you know and I think all of the things that just got said by council I already know I mean that we do the board grants certain authority to the chair. Director Holmes is correct. He says all the things that we talked about that we suggested the discussion about could have been handled at a board meeting. All people had to do was say uh exactly what the attorneys we've already covered this I don't think it's appropriate blah blah blah. I mean the fact of the matter is is it's not rocket science is is it's not and so there's nothing that required all that and even that long speech that we just heard from council is regurgitating stuff that I know I'm not pretending to be an expert. I don't think people have people do people get to have an opinion. That doesn't mean they're holding themselves out as experts. It just means they have a viewpoint. And that's the purpose of a board coming together is for people to to share their perspectives and come to some conclusions. And that's usually happens during dialogue among the people who are are involved. Does not require a legal insertion to say who can say what and when and about what. That's not the role. That's that's too costly. and unnecessary because each director has the authority to vote yes, vote no, abstain, make a comment, and not support something. Nobody's going to march in and say you can't do it. Not it hasn't happened yet and it's not going to happen, you know. So, yeah, >> Director Holmes and then I think we'll vote. Dol. I'm going to ask that you um withdraw your motion based on what Director Long has supplied in terms of the insertion of one call for versus call a meeting. That's an important distinction and that I believe is why it went through two years ago. Um, so you know, I I I I just I think the importance here is to have the conversation and I that's that's how we move forward as a board and that's what's important. If we've been expressing, three members have been expressing in those meetings leading up to the vote of the preliminary budget wanting more conversation and it was not granted. It was not allowed. Like I said earlier, it was spoken to of it's a living breathing document. Of course, we can come back and discuss that. I think those are false statements now. Um, so I guess I don't understand at the beginning of a budget cycle why we wouldn't have conversation now before we got going so we can focus on the conversations of how this is going to impact student achievement, how it's going to impact student supports, our most marginalized students and families. I I I think that's what we've been talking about and how there was a a promise that yes, we can have additional conversations. we need a preliminary budget bylaw so our people can get paid and I went with that and now to have this with one one small word >> in our bylaws four and so I guess that's what it's going to come down to if this doesn't go through this is how we are governing we are governing by majority we are not governing for consensus in my opinion >> thank you okay >> he doesn't have the authority to >> so we have a motion on the floor to not >> can we quash All the side comments, please. There's been a lot of side chatter tonight. >> Okay. I guess I was so focused I wasn't listen. >> Okay. Thank you. Yes. Side conversations, comments to yourself unless you're recognized. I mean, inside thoughts. Can we speak into the mic then because there's some hearing difficulty. >> Good for us all to remember. Okay. So, the motion on the floor is to determine that budget items 1 A, 1 B, and 1 C cannot be reconsidered at a special meeting. And then it gives reasons and it was seconded. So all in favor please say I. >> I. >> Opposed please say nay. >> No. >> Nay. >> Okay. The motion passes. Items 1 A, 1 B, and 1 C will not be reconsidered at a special meeting. I have a second motion. I move that the other items proposed for a special meeting are already being considered on the agenda this evening and are not appropriate for a special meeting at this time. >> So moved. >> I I moved you second. >> Second. Yes. >> Okay. I don't see any hands. All right. All in favor, please say I. I. >> I. >> Oppose say nay. >> No. Nay. >> Okay. the other items now. Second. Okay. Now, two motions passed. We won't be discussing those, but the board needs to determine what the purpose of the special meeting will be. So if you request you requested a special meeting, if we have a proper purpose and we need to have a meeting, we need to say what the purpose of that meeting is so that we can have that meeting. Director Basset. >> Uh, chair, I would suggest that we, uh, not necessarily delve into that. Uh, because the three directors who call for the special meeting, um, with the new information we've gotten from this, I would suggest it might be more productive to have those three directors, which would include myself, you know, have a discuss what we might want to bring to a special meeting. >> Okay. >> And and so that makes it mood at this moment. agreeing. Right. No, not seeing any other comments. We have a new item on our agenda. It's D, the bypass infractions. Director Basset. >> Well, I I I do want to speak to that because uh Chair Evans Becker, our bylaws as they are currently promulgated and approved by this board, irrespective of what legal counsel may have inserted or not. I'm not asserting that. I understand a director has found a word and thinks that's been changed and so I haven't researched that but you know I'm just saying so the way that they have been up until that point um you know and the fact that over time three board directors do have the ability to call a meeting and they don't have to be as specific as we were. they can just simply say um we want to have a meeting to discuss uh the budget because the budget is a is a is a document that can always be amended upon approval of the full board. So you know u so I mean I'm say I'm just saying that the board we can we can amend the agenda to say all kinds of things. So I don't want to get u bogged down into that into some possibility. I just want to stick with the fact that the board is the entity, you know, once three directors, it says right now in our bylaws, three directors can call a meeting. Uh it would have been totally acceptable to me uh as one of the people involved to say for for for the chair to say to send us a note and say or send a note to any one of us so we don't have a serial meeting or anything. Well, everybody doesn't this date may not work with everyone. Can we uh do whatever to come up to an acceptable date? That would be fine with me. Uh because one of my pet peeves is that often things are scheduled and the full board doesn't know that they're scheduled or they're scheduled at the time that's inappropriate. I'm not saying that you did it you do it, but it has happened. Important things happen. I mean, I'm just saying. So, and I have asked at different times, can we change a meeting? maybe not to you but to others at different times and didn't happen. I didn't make a big deal of it. We rolled on. So I I respect and appreciate in the summertime that we could try to schedule a time when everybody could be present. That carries weight with me because I've been on the other end of it. So I I would have been fine with that. I think that um we don't have procedures in place that uh limit add limitations processes or procedures or policies to that statement to that value that to that bylaw statement. Another a work session separate for people to talk about what they what procedures and policies they might like and we could send those to a policy committee. That could happen. It's not in place right now and it was inappropriate for you to determine what process that we needed to use or councel. That's the board's job. And quite frankly, had you just submitted your that comment or question to the three of us, I think for myself, I can speak for me that I would have said, "Okay, fine. Let's figure out a date when everybody can get together." It didn't require that kind of a preemptive strike. And but that's not even the most important point. The most important point is that the bylaws stand. That is the constitution. Neither you nor I nor anyone else can change it and insert a process until the board approves the process. If we don't have one now and it's imperfect now, then we perhaps can talk about what do we do to make it more perfected. There's nothing wrong with that. But until that happens, if three directors call for a special meeting and they do follow what it says that we should do, identify what the subject is and try to figure out time, it's not for you or anybody else to interfere with that. We have the meeting. When we get to the meeting, if anybody's got something they want to assert or object to or, you know, speak to, they can. Nobody's going to stop them. Director Bowman, >> I agree. We have no process in calling a spec meeting that um is viable because the other thing is is what we're talking about is in vague generalities. Three members can call a meeting for what this board has proven to um be frivolous in some of the things we want to talk about. In my mind, it is my personal opinion. Uh and and I can point back to it through board record where where that stuff is. Tonight it's already after seven. We've been at this and and uh I would you know let's what I can agree to is to develop a process around calling a special meeting because here was I disagree with I don't want three members of the board to go we're going to have a meeting and it'll be Thursday night and it'll be 7 o'clock. I'm already working uh on this job with a gratus situation of 600 bucks a month and it's already 20 hours a week. When I was chair it was 40 hours a week and it's a volunteer position and my concern is the abuse that's going to happen if we call a meeting every time some three people get together and go, "Yeah, let's have a meeting about it." And then we want to argue about what can be on the agenda. I'm grateful that uh director uh chair Evans Becker went to legal because what it allowed us to see is what can be brought back. Here's one of the issues this board has. It started when I was on this board at the very beginning two years ago. One of the uh directors sitting up here wanted to go back to a to a previous meeting that she had boarded uh this person had voted on a particular item and wanted to revote on it. And I'm grateful to see that reconsideration is an avenue that can protect us from some of that frivolous stuff. Can we do a better job of communicating? Yeah, if we're not being screamed at and belittled and told that we don't have any, you know, that we're acting in this way or we can't even get a sentence in without being argued with. So, I'd be more than happy to uh go with having the seven of us, each one of us can develop a procedure for item number B here in 5B in the bylaws, which I also want to point out that in order to change the bylaws, it has to be a twothirds vote, >> which is five, >> which is five vote. So, nothing was there's been innuendo here at this table tonight that something was slid in or there's been some words added. Absolutely not true. The bylaws have not been touched. They've sat there as they've sat there since we were elected and beforehand. The approval date on here is the 15th. So, there has been nothing added or subtracted by some magical committee sitting out there that's screwing with these rules. Let's reinforce our position for calling a special meeting. Otherwise, uh, we create chaos, which is what this board is really good at because three people calling meetings at at a whim. At a whim, because that's what it'll be. I'm mad because I didn't prevail at the board table. I didn't win at the board table. Let's rehash it. Let's quickly rehash it so that we're within the time limit. And that's what's going to happen. Exactly. Mark my words. And I want to be on record for that. So, I recommend that we we uh create a uh process on how to call a special meeting that that that complements both Robert's rules and our bylaws uh and what uh Minnesota school board would say and then use that as a launch point or a starting point. >> The need for that. Okay. Next up, I have Long, then Hildenbrand, then Wesset. Yeah, I would really like for us to get to a place where we can as board members have conversations about these things. It would have been nice because the bylaws say call a meeting, but the the memo that we got added the word call for a meeting. And so our bylaws do not say that. I even took a screenshot of our bylaws at the time, pulled them up to see what they say. It says call a meeting. So, based off of what is written in our bylaws and what the memo said, there's there is a difference in it. Um, you know, I would say being vice chair, I felt like, you know, chair, you and I have worked well together and we've been able to have some tough conversations together. And so, I would just hope that going forward that what we've been able to do we could do as a whole board. Um, and I don't see anything wrong in having a meeting and discussing these things and bringing up questions and just really discussing them as a board kind of like how we've done one-on-one with issues. Um, and so for me to get to that where our bylaws don't say that and the word was added into our bylaws in the memo that was sent to us, that part became hard for me to be like, wait a minute, what is going on here? Something's not adding up right. And that's where I'm having issues with this cuz and then that's where it feels like conversation is being stifled for me and especially when we have past presidents where other board members have done this not only just the makeup of this board but the makeup of other boards that have come way way way before us. >> Thank you. Um Director Hillbrand. >> Okay. Well I mean I'm just thinking about this. I think there are several issues. And I think one that came up was who d part of this is just who directs the executive secretary's work was one that came out of that and that hasn't been addressed here and it's not addressed in the bylaws. So that's clearly something that we need to address because that was one of the issues that came up. I also think that um I mean it's clear the bylaws don't have a process. Also, while three members can call a meeting, you need four to hold a meeting. And so that's also Yes. You have to have a motion >> to pass any to pass anything. Sorry. >> I suppose. Yeah. >> I mean, in order to right to pass anything, to vote on anything, you have to have at least four members. And so that seems to me a little glitch as well if you um you know, so that and then um another thing that's not clear to me is you're saying there's an infraction. I'm not clear what the infraction is, what and who is being accused of what and I that's not I mean I think we just need to be clear on that. And also when you talk about the constitution, I mean our constitution isn't just what's written. It's case law. It's opinions. It's it's not just what's physically written. So I don't think that's I mean your comparison actually includes legal opinions. And so actually in this case then your your comparison would include the legal opinions that we received. So uh it actually supports using the legal opinions um because that's how how these kinds of documents kind of live and breathe um because yeah they they don't always include everything. But I think that what we really yes we have something to clear up but also I I don't it's not been made clear what the accusation is here and to whom. >> Director W. >> Thank you. Yeah based on all the information that has been passed I'll say probably the last 20 30 minutes on the same subject. It is very clear that the process procedures are not in place or at least not well identified. I would like to move a motion that we add this to one of our work sessions as a board and then proceed to forward it to the policy committee to look at so it can be brought back to the board for further discussion. >> To be clear, you're having a we have to Can we do that? >> There's no motion pending. So, >> we can do that even though that wasn't perfect because we added this item to our agenda. So, what you're saying is that what we do is put it on a study session and figure out together how we want to make it work. >> Yes. And then pass it on to the >> policy committee, change the bylaws or whatever I just said. >> Second. >> Moved by WH, seconded by Basset. And I don't see any hands up. All in favor, please. Oh. Yes. Can you make those two with two separate because we might not have if we have a work session. It's not guaranteed to produce a policy because we're talking about procedures. So, it's just a starting conversation to see where we are, what needs to be done, if anything, clarification. Correct. >> But then if there's anything that needs to be added to the official document, then it might need to go through the policy committee to get >> or the B or for by >> or the bylaws. Yeah. depending. >> But correct me if I'm wrong. Didn't we just bylaws aren't a policy? That's a board conversation. >> So what he's saying is we get together, we discuss it, we figure it out, and it either goes to policy or bylaws or something happens to it. >> But right so like change >> what work session first. If we have an agreement there and it doesn't need to go to the policy committee, then we are done >> there. Work session. >> Excuse me. There's all this side conversation going on. a work session. The motion, we're clarifying the motion and the motion is to bring a discussion about special meetings to a work session. And you want to stop right there. >> Correct. >> Yes. Okay. >> I'll second that. >> Okay. Moved and seconded. >> Did I saw your hand? Did you >> I did have a question. Um uh just in consideration of the motion that's on the floor. My question would be are the bylaws about uh special meeting suspended until such time? Um again what what I need to know is I want to be really clear that one or two or three board members don't give direction to our executive assistant to post a meeting within three hours of getting an email to occur three nights later. So, I just want to be sure that if if the vote is that we're going to have a process that we don't do anything, is there an agreement that we won't do anything between now and then to request if we don't have the process laid out? And I I think the bylaws state the three board members can call the meeting as you've been discussing. the bylaws do not clarify that the those members say when it is um there has to be a purpose. It doesn't say the agenda. So I just want to be sure that if this vote gets approved and the decision is that the board as a whole determines and creates the process then is this piece of it suspended between now and that time taking place? >> I saw you nodding that that would be No, not you director Basset. Oh, you're wearing your hand. >> I'm just raising my hand. raising her hand. >> Okay. >> Because to speak to what she just said, I I'm I'm really unclear about what the motion. >> The motion is for us in a work session to discuss the the way we can set up special meet calling special calling of special meetings. >> And the suggestion was in the meantime >> we suspend the calling of meetings. But I would say that would have to be with the agreement that we expedite this. >> Dr. Beth, >> well, uh, quite often, um, I have really worked hard to respect when the superintendent says the board is involved in administrative work. I've resisted that. I think this discussion is a board discussion. And I think that we've already demonstrated through comments I've heard, people have demonstrated the willingness to um incorporate um pay attention to when we how we do it so that we can make sure we are um checking to see when people are available and other kinds of things. I mean that just makes sense. I think I also suggested in the last discussion that the three of us who called for the meeting, we didn't even rush to say, "Oh, we want a meeting now. We want to whenever we need to have time to come together and to talk about is there more we want to talk about. We policed ourselves and we put forward ourselves not to rush forward but to say we need to sit and talk about is there since we have these rulings what does that mean to some of the agenda items? All of the agenda items were my agenda items but between the three of us and so we need time to sit and talk about what that is. That is not the business of the superintendent in in in my opinion. the things that were raised which is frequency uh scheduling all those kinds of things are not there are things that if you would just ask me I would adhere to you know they would I I would they're common courtesy you know and operating with common courtesy is something that I think we can do however I just want to really be clear that things that belong to this board. We already are changing the frequency of the meeting. We have a whole host of other things that have been brought to us by you, superintendent. I don't think anybody's been kicking and screaming about it, but you are inserting yourself into board work in my opinion and I'm allowed my opinion. It's not not a put down. I'm just saying if I'm respecting you and your role in your administration, I expect the same that you will allow board members to work through their stuff. And so, uh, and I'm just sharing that with you because I see a little bit of overreach. And I just want to I'm not one who talks behind the back. I'm just saying this right here in in the public, you know, and so and so to the point though about the scheduling, which is really my main point. I just thought I'd share that because I was getting those vibes. Um I think that our commit, we're not even a committee. The three directors who call for a special meeting can get together and can figure it out and work with it. And then um I'm happy to be the one to talk with you. So you're not talking to four people to talk with you chair about what it is we've determined and what you know if there's anything more we want to talk about on the agenda. I mean if we want to have a special meeting again before this is all resolved we'll talk with you about that and we'll go forward and then you can if you want to talk to superintendent you can talk to her you know but I'm just saying that's that's board work and we can manage it. >> Okay. >> We don't need to be micromanaged. I have I have superintendent stalo then Bowman then long then wo >> my my request I clearly understand that it's the board's prerogative I wasn't trying to stop that >> my concern and my job if there's a board meeting being scheduled I have to have my staff there >> absolutely >> and so what I felt right or wrong when I got the information that there was a special meeting with the the with a scheduled meeting for barely over 72 hours. I had no idea if I would have my staff available. That's the concern that I have. That is my job. >> Sure. >> So, I can't My request as you're developing this process is that I don't get an email two days from now that says we're going to request a meeting three days from now. And again, we have lives and we have a lot of really important work to do. >> Absolutely. >> So that's what I am trying to understand is I just want to be sure that this won't happen tomorrow or the next day and so we can be clear that if there's a process being developed to call a special meeting that between now and that time. My request is that since we don't have the process that's clear, we suspend this piece or we don't request a special meeting because I can't have we have two a meeting every two weeks as is. So I'm going to need more notice than three days notice if the expectation is and I would hope you would want the full board there. That would be another concern that I have is that there are times in the year that any three board members could call a meeting for any reason knowing perhaps that people are out of town or they're on vacation or it's over the holidays. And I just want us to be really clear that that would never be something that would happen, which is why perhaps we need more detail in those bylaws. Thank you. >> Procedure. Okay. Uh, Director Bowman, Long W Hill, and Brandon Holmes. Bowman. >> A couple questions. If we're calling uh a special meeting of um will we be able to have attorneys present because again, I don't want to sit in a room where a bunch of non- attorney people and non-licensed people and >> please we we agreed. I don't want to sit in a room where all we do is roll hearsay around or we roll around that sense of this is how I feel about it. I if if we're going to redo uh if we're going to have a discussion about the procedure of a special meeting, I want the attorney present because because and I want to know if we're going to have an attorney present. And then the other thing is number the second thing is since then I'm I'm down to I don't you know I don't agree that doc what Dr. Stallow what happened here that Dr. that it was overreach on the part of Dr. Stalo, her job is to manage her staff and she can't have outsiders come in and dictate to the staff to a staff that she manages and that's just bottom line to me. But to go back to it, the question of whether we have an attorney present really matters to me at this point. >> Dr. Long, >> um I would like to just agree with what uh Director Basset had said. I feel like it's overreach. I feel like there are several times when we're trying to have conversations as board members where things are inserted that shouldn't be inserted so that things go a certain way. Um, could you please not do that? The sighing while I'm talking about something. I don't sit up here and sigh while other people say things in disagreement. So, please don't do that to me. >> I'm having a hard time. No comments, inside thoughts. >> No, I'm not done. But I need a moment right now. That is just rude. Sorry. I sit up here and I rarely talk. And when I do, I'd like to at least be able to say what I need to say so that we can move on to the next person and not constantly be interrupted with people's personal judgment. That's not fair. I'm not doing that to other people. I have had a huge huge issue with we're supposed to be the supervisor, the boss for one employee. And the lines are often extremely blurred in a way where we never really are the bosses. We more are the employees. And so I'm done with being an employee. We need to follow what our bylaws said. We've already had a discussion here at the table about us coming back and letting you guys know when we're thinking we'll have this special meeting and what the agenda will be. And so that is what we will do. Otherwise, if our one employee wants to continue to tell us what we're supposed to make, >> then I I'm having an issue with that. No, don't. Don't. No, don't. Don't. Because no, because we I've talked about this at several meetings before, always having attorneys interject on things. Stop. I have a right to say what I want to say. >> And so, no, this is another brilliant example. What time are we on the clock for this so that we can count this to see when an attorney again is interrupting me when I'm trying to voice something? >> I have asked our attorney to give us points of order when we need a point of order. Oh, it's and it's interesting that certain people get points of order, but other people are allowed to continue on with their rhetoric and they don't ever get a point of order. So community pay attention >> pay attention community >> the point of order that I wanted to make is that the comments were appeared to be getting into the terrain of addressing the performance of the superintendent which is not uh which would be private personnel data is not an appropriate topic. for a public meeting. So I just want to caution the whole board. >> Twisting my words. I would like to caution the whole board to remind them that the the topic being discussed is about uh the I believe the motion is to move this to a future uh discussion at a work session and to remind the board that uh other topics uh particularly those that relate to closed sessions should not be raised at this time. Dylan, do you want to finish? >> Just never mind because when other people here up at the board have said things that are off topic and not gerine to the conversation, they were not objected to. So community again another example of where some pe some board members are being shut out are being told no, they can't say things. Yeah, Director Ruto. >> Yeah, I just have a question for council. So, with the motion on the table, if it's passed, can we pass another motion to suspend the existing bylaws? >> Oh, no, no, no. >> You can. Yes. >> One is director Hillbrand and then Director Holmes. >> Yeah. I wanted to make a friendly amendment to the motion to uh suspend that portion of the bylaws pertaining to the special um meeting the calling the special meetings only because it is still unclear and we will still have this problem regardless until we make a decision on how these are going to move forward. So if if you guys call for another one, which I fully support being able to, the problem will still exist until we're able to resolve this problem. The until we're able to resolve the clarity of the bylaws. So I would I'd like to make a friendly amendment that um what is it? Section VB. >> Sorry, I should have looked at it more closely. >> It's right here. >> Um section B uh 5B would um >> section 5B. It's VB >> VB, right? Aren't those Roman numeral Roman numeral 5B um be temporarily suspended until we and hopefully this would be a very short order brought to work session um and we resolve the um issues that have come up so that then a special meeting can be called with clarity. >> Is that acceptable to the motion maker? >> Yes. Is that acceptable to the seconder? >> I don't agree. So, I'll just vote when it's time to vote on it. I'll just vote no. I mean, I'm just saying I don't agree with that, you know, because I think the motion stands on its own. If you want to make your own second motion following, make it. >> Okay. I have a question. If the seconder doesn't accept it, can someone else accept it? Um you could withdraw the motion and make that so have director remake the motion if somebody else wants to second it. >> Okay. So you need to we would need to withdraw the motion because the seconder didn't accept it. So then if you remake the motion you can make the motion with the added part to it. >> Yeah. So I do want to move the motion to suspend the current bylaw assistance on calling special meetings and uh also ask the board to work on this agently at the next work session >> at the next one. >> Yes. >> Okay, >> I'll second. >> And it was seconded. >> And uh Director Holmes, you're I'm sorry. Don't we need to vote on the first one before we can do another one? >> No, it's with Oh, you did. I missed that. Okay, thank you. So that's withdrawn. Is it my um I I don't think we should be suspending any bylaws because we we did that with FAC and we have yet to have a conversation on that and that's been asked for as well. They are there for a reason. If we can't I'm not going to call a special meeting right now knowing that this is what happened. Um I respect Molly Olsen's I executive assistant's time. I've never been rude. I don't think any of us have been. The three-day notice is by statute. That is for for calling for meetings. That is a requirement. So, that happens. And I think posting we provided the agenda making this look like it was some thing that it's not. Um, I just want to caution us there because it was prepared and I don't doomsday going here isn't the the foundation is there's conversation that wants to be had. Um, so yeah, I can say, you know, a friendly agreement, but I don't I'm not suspending any bylaws. Um, but of course I'm not going to turn around in 24 hours and call for one three days from now. I I don't think I think Director Basset has outlined that. We we know what we're going to do and we're going to meet and figure out what we want to talk about. um because that's what we've been advocating for since we've gone through all of those items in our work sessions, asking for more time, asking for more conversation. And what drove us there is we kept being saying, "Yep, we'll get there. We'll get there." And we didn't. So that is one one process, a tool in our box so we can have conversation and working for consensus in a district that has been divided and has differing opinions and people still coming to us and the challenges we yet to face. I see this as a great opportunity to make a bridge here and bring the community along with us. I've talked about that before. They want to see us talk more and we're going to have to make some hard conversation or decisions. We all understand that. We just do. So I think more conversation questions I'll say it again are not the problem. Questions are not the problem. Information is gold. Director Basset then director were you done? >> I am. Thank you. Uh Director Basset then director W. >> Okay. Um, and I think if I understood director Wah's last the last motion that passed, it was just to have send this issue to a work session at the next work session. It was time certain, which is pretty soon. So, I think that's great. Um, so but but I do want to say that I think in the spirit of what we just talked about these last few minutes about trying to move forward and work together and find consensus, I think is more respectful of that uh sentiment. If directors here say, "Well, we understand that we can wait till then because we have our own work to do." That's what we're saying. We'll get together and figure it out and then we'll talk to you and we'll figure out where it goes from there. >> Are we at the work session? I'm just say I'm just saying if there's something else whatever the content is whenever we get to that place we'll do that. I mean and in the meantime we're going to all come together and talk about what the processes we think should be. We all agreed we're going to have work session. So I don't you know think we need >> it's a needed discussion. Yeah, it is an easy discussion. But but but to to the last thing I'll say about this maybe probably hopefully is that uh director Helen Brand said she wasn't sure. I think it was you who said you weren't sure about what I was objecting to. >> You just said that there was infraction of but you didn't say who and what specifically the infraction. >> Thank you for that. I got it. I mean, thank you. But I didn't, you know, I thought you said that and so I'm going to say explicitly and I think I started out saying it. Um, three directors can call for a board meeting. Three directors did that. The chair unilaterally decided to insert some more processes into that and that wasn't her place to do that. We now have identified a place where we a need to do more of that and we can do more of that. But that should have happened without her abridging our rights in the bylaws as they stand to ask for a meeting. That was an infraction. And I think it's important to say that because why have bylaws if the chair or anybody else can just ignore them and insert their own interpretation or whatever. That's what I that's why I made the motion. That's what I felt and that's what she did cuz she, you know, called an attorney and got them involved and came up with and in fact unilaterally decided we're not having the meeting. I was appalled and because I've been in a number of meetings where people have called a meeting, you go to the meeting and you say what you got to say and then to have everything on our agenda that we talked about instead of sent out to everybody to have this interpretation through legal you know just you know all of that keep that to yourself and then when you come to the meeting just say I don't we for this reason for that reason for the other reason I'm opposed to it and if it has merit it will carry the day. I'm just saying that the whole thing was was quite offensive and it was an infraction of our standing bylaws as they stand. Our chair took it upon herself to unilaterally dismiss the request of three directors to have a meeting and it was not her place to do so. And as I said a few minutes ago, it makes sense to me if you want to send a note and say, "Well, you know, some people may not be able to make it. uh can we maybe move the date? That would have been respectful and it would not only respectful, it would have been also commensurate with her not preempting three directors because we've been functioning so far for quite some time with majority vote and majority has most of the time been four to three and I'm living with it, you know, but the bylaws explicitly say three directors can call a meeting >> and our chair stepped out of that without authority from the board or direction from the board to do anything other than that. I don't care what the attorney said. The attorney doesn't get to determine preemptively our bylaws because there's nothing wrong with them. I have a point of order. I think that we need to re we can look at re look at your motion because I just looked it up and a move to suspend the bylaws is a twothirds vote which would be five votes. So can we go back can we resend that motion go back to your original one about having it at the meeting and then have a separate motion to in in the interest of expediting things. >> May I just make a point of order? The bylaws also explicitly state that Robert's rules of order shall govern govern the school board. And the reason that she pulled the meeting was because the items on the agenda do not um are not allowable under Robert's rules of order. And so um I think you could equally say that she explicitly followed the bylaws by not allowing the meeting. So I think again it comes back to the bylaws um being problematic in the way that they're written. And so we're going to resolve that. And so I think that we should not be um pointing fingers at people but more at the document. And so let's fix the document. >> Okay. So >> comment here. >> Just with a point of order about the motion. >> Yes. I have a point about about the motion. >> I I would like to direct a comment to director Muto. Can you withdraw your motion and make it be would you consider withdrawing your motion and making it be for us to discuss it at the next work session the process of the the special the special meetings >> without without the suspension of the >> and then you can make a second one for the suspension of the bylaws until we figure it out. Otherwise, I think our conversation we're never going to get anywhere. >> Does that make sense? >> So moved. >> Moved. Seconded. All in favor, please say I. >> I. >> Nay. >> Okay. We will discuss this at the next work session. Now, is there a motion to suspend the bylaws and related to section V artic uh 5B? >> Yeah. 5B. >> Yeah. Before a motion, I do also want to state that I know the discussion has been about the current call for a meeting by the three directors. Okay, we all should remember there is seven of us on the board. So even if it's not U3 that may call another meeting, it is very possible that other tree members can call another meeting which is what I want us to caution against till we get this figured out. So suspending is not saying that you three or three directors should not be the ones. Any other three of us can also do the same thing. And to try to avoid that, I do want to motion that we suspend it until we figure the procedure out. >> It's been moved and seconded. Okay. It's a two-thirds vote to suspend those bylaws. I don't see any hands right now. And before I see any hands, how about if we vote, I think everybody knows how they're going to vote on this. And it will need to be a roll call vote so that we know that we what number we have. >> So, what we're voting on is to suspend those bylaws until we get it figured out. The bylaws related to special meeting only. section. I want to be really clear. It's 5B and the five is a Roman numeral V, >> right? >> Okay. Thank you. When you're ready, >> Director Basset, >> no. >> Renee Bowman. Director Bowman votes yes. Uh, Chair Evans Becker, >> yes. >> Uh, Director Hillbrand, >> yes. >> Director Holmes, >> no. Director Long, >> no. >> Uh, Director Wuto, >> yes. >> The motion fails. >> Pardon me. >> The motion fails. We're going to move on. >> We will have a discussion at our next meeting. The bylaws are not suspended. >> Can I just add that the other thing that was missing from this conversation was policy 203 205 AP, which is still an active policy, open and closed meetings. If you were to look down to section A, item number two under special meetings items A through E, you will see that there's a whole bunch of process. None of it makes sense. So it should be uh none of it has seems to have any great and grand purpose anywhere. And what should be included in that is my recommendation is the AP should be discredited as we're trying to get rid of APs or at least fixed in this case because this is a word salad going on in this policy 203 >> and we will have time at a work session >> coming up soon. 203 >> two >> 205 is a 205 205 AP open meetings closed meetings section four under procedures item a >> two that's on my list for the next >> okay >> yes and it I think this is part of our uh policy committee uh agenda for the next meeting >> okay a moment of silence future events are going to scroll Hello. I would like a motion to adjurnn. >> So moved. >> Moved by director Basset. Seconded by. >> I'll second. >> Dr. Holmes. All in favor say I. >> I. >> Opposed. >> We are adjourned. We will start the work s the study session >> by five minutes. >> Oh, that's okay. Doesn't matter. Um It is 7:55 as promised. We are back for the school board study session. I'm Margarita Evans Becker, school board chair. And what you at school board can school board >> Kim Holmes, school board, >> Bob, assistant superintendent. >> Anthony Williams, executive director of community education, athletics, and activities. >> Kristen O'Hisel, chief financial officer. Caroline, school board, school board, superintendent. >> Renee Wman, clerk on the school board. >> Liz Vieira, attorney Ellison, executive assistant to the superintendent school board. >> Thank you. Welcome everybody. We're going to move right away to purpose and agenda. Take it away, D Superintendent St. >> Excellent. Thank you. The purpose of uh board study sessions is to have time for uh board uh and administration to share information to engage with one another to discuss the business of the school board in order to best prepare and be sure that board members have the information that they need for effective and efficient board decision-m. Um in front of you tonight uh we have the uh working document. We've discussed this multiple times throughout the past year and agreed upon by the majority of the board on April 7th um that we would use this at our study sessions. The document provides transparency to our community about the predictable workflow uh in which board will be engaged throughout the year aligned to the five board governance roles. This working document was created using the annual work that's part of the schools board's role as well as forecasting some additional work that um we foresee with this year such as the statutoary operating debt plan and district needs associated with what comes out of the reimagine RDL vision 20 work. Um this document will be updated and posted. It's how u Molly actually how she tracked the work that we did last year. Even though this wasn't a public facing document, this is what we did to be sure that we were tracking and making sure that uh the board um we were bringing forward to the board um information in order for the board to to do their role of the board. Uh so as with any working document um the timely important agenda topics may be added of course however is needed. Um however this work is also a way to predict what's next. Um superintendent board chair worked on this version again it was really carryover as you'll see in this um a lot of this work just becomes what happens every single year. Um so each night when we talk when we look at the agenda for the day we'll do the agenda um according to these five roles. So tonight for the agenda under the district governance and policy the board's going to um have a conversation. There's been some vacancies and some questions about some community work. So, the board's going to talk about that. Uh, also a a carryover conversation about meals and breaks uh from board members under operation performance oversight and organizational direction. Um, I'll provide an update on reimagine Ardale. Um, give you some information about that. Uh, also um wanted to just let you know that for action at the next meeting um the Iowa uh uh designate will be coming. So we wanted just to spend some time on that. Um in the area of board governance, uh the chair will just briefly share some information. We've got board developments in the next two days. We'll talk about that under superintendent relations. Um there is according to my contract uh it states that there needs to be an annual review of superintendent and board communication. So in the packet um is the document that I shared with you last year and we'll uh be um can discuss changes and and requests needed for that. Also uh per my contract and this time of the year um uh we establish goals for the upcoming year. So we'll I'll have a chance to at least just share some perspective with what I see are some high areas and then obviously get input from the board as we move forward with that. under community engagement again carry over and and um making some final decisions about the conversation with land acknowledgement and tribal flag discussion um uh for the evening um and then as soon as we get down about all of that um we'll move into the close session for negotiation strategies. Thank you. Okay, district governance and policy. So I mean did anybody have any questions about this document? I mean, it's really a very good guiding overall picture. Before we move on, Dr. Um I'm wondering uh I I'm wondering about if there's a a way we can actually put just the poor person's responsible a um a column for staff sign administrative staff assigned because then the if the staff person is the executive director but the responsible person that at the end of the day the body of the board is responsible party for board government. Uh and so um I I guess I would like to see who the staff person a column for staff separate then persons responsible because that will tell us who the staff person you have assigned superintendent to work with us on a given area. But I'd like to see this the school board inserted in all of these responsible parties where the school board has a role. And if you take a look at it again in the future, I'm not suggesting that that be all done tonight because there's some work that's gone into this. And I've been to out of town twice, once with a sick relative. And so if I didn't go into this in the greatest detail, but but this is the opportunity to share with you and I'm sharing with you now. >> Is that acceptable to you? >> Yes. So, what I'm hearing is is instead of where it says person responsible, um I can either break that up and have one column. So, the board is underneath all of every single one and then a staff person like I have in there under one side. >> It's helpful to know who the staff is that you've assigned and and I guess I would the only thing I would say to that is that based on that is is my assumption correct then if I had a question I could pose it to both you and that staff person or just to to you about any of these I think we move through the year. >> Yeah. And I think that's that's and and again this can go up. I I used this in a former district as you all know got it from a different district who had used it. This is the way it was done. But we don't even name I mean I know who's responsible for all these things. I think it helps the public understand um which which teams are responsible at times about this. Um, so yeah, we we can certainly I can certainly >> question the question was can that board member then talk? >> No. And and I think when we look at the communications I think when we look at the communications protocol I think it's pretty clear what we use this year and where it still states is that um all questions come to me >> and then and then I will make sure that the appropriate person gets those and we get all the information back to the full board. >> Well, I think this I think that's fair and thank you. So, but but knowing who that person is and so in my own mind would be helpful. So, thank you for you know setting >> and I think in most cases as I look at this in most cases the staff person is called out >> well I did separate columns because at the end of the day your administrative staff and I think one of the things I'm working on is staying in the administration in their role and the board in their role. So if that's an administrative staff person who you have assigned knowing who that is clearly. >> So for the first one where it says I'm sorry for interrupting but for the first one where it says district review district policies per threeyear strike cycle what I have right now under persons responsible policy committee and the executive director of HR. So you would like me to have a column that has the executive director of HR and then policy committee. Obviously, ultimately the board approves. >> I think the board should be in all of these the respon we're appropriate that the board can be because if we're going to be asked to vote on it, the board should clearly understand that they have responsibility in a certain area more so than others. And if there's some things that are just purely administrative that we don't need to weigh in on or take a vote on, >> none of it would be nothing would come in front of the board that there isn't a board role for. And in some cases, it's just monitoring. Well, well, well, then and and the board as a board has not really had a conversation to talk about board setting board goals and they're in synonymous often with what the district goals are. We've not had that conversation yet. So, I mean, I I I hope we do. >> Stay tuned till later this week. >> Well, I mean, I'm saying I hope we do, but we haven't had it. And so, >> okay, but I would caution against putting a name in there. All right. I like I like the title there because >> I like the title the way it is. >> I like title. >> I'm comfortable. >> I'm comfortable. >> Dr. Holmes. >> I was just going to instead of maybe it's just the word responsible. Maybe it's working parties, you know. I I I don't know if we're getting on the work because I don't I don't I understand what you're saying about responsible, but I don't see creating another column um if it's going to be the same. So maybe it's just changing the header of working party or whatever you know it is >> that would work for me and inserting the school board in the places where the school board will have to make a decision because ultimately any policy decisions any policies that come forward have to come before the board. So that's the the board's ultimately the responsible party there. >> Just a second correct me if I'm wrong. All of these are board decisions that are going to be made. This whole thing is decisions to be made by the board. Every single >> That that's exactly what I was going to say. Literally on top it says board of education agenda and working documents. So that implies that everything on here is >> made an explicit definition that states that should be there because I'm saying I would have asked >> it was my turn. >> Oh, I'm sorry. >> Yeah. So I that's I just say that it explicitly says that this is the board working document and agenda. So it seems clear that if that's the heading all of that falls under the board and then the policy for the first one policy committee and the executive director of HR work on it and then then it comes to the board and then the next one the super operational performance strategic you know the whole um superintendent and district administration work on it and then they bring their work to the board. Am I reading that correctly? Yeah. So it's all under that title and I believe that Caroline is >> Dr. Long. So I just um going back on something else that director Basset was saying um on one of their them you have listed district administration. So I I guess could we sus that out like what what does that mean? Who who would be those? I'm not necessarily saying put people's names in there because you know people can come and go but maybe they're the titles. So I think it would be if you're so so director long if you're specifically talking about the operational performance oversight and organizational director that is that what you're looking at that fourth column down. >> Yeah. So that if you recall district nine teams so there were nine teams that came before the board this year each team that was leading one of the priority work teams and work. So there were probably nine teams, at least three administrators, four administrators for each team. Um that that's that's what that would take. So there there are a wide array of administrators and some of it was staff as well that presented on those. So can we leave it like that on the working document but every time it comes before us the names will would be on it >> when when when it comes >> when the presentation came I was asking for titles though to be on here because that would be good. We have a working document that includes what titles are responsible for these or what titles are >> Oh, you mean like like you have a a sponsor for each of like a um sorry co- champions. >> Yeah. Your your champions maybe. It wouldn't be the whole team. >> Right. It would just be the administration administrator that's responsible for whatever academic and achievement or student engagement and wellness. Who is that administrator that's responsible? the way. So I the title, who's the title? >> And I and again again we have so many more important things to do. I don't want to belabor this. I want to be sure that I'm meeting your needs though. So there will be nine teams. So under under those strategic themes, we currently will have nine teams set up next this year to do the work. So underneath academic achievement, there are three teams. So there'll be at least six co- champions for each of those. So is that what you're asking for? >> They're all district administrators. >> Why not? >> May I suggest something? So I see that these are all listed under the themes below. Maybe you could put the the champions on there um on the bottom where you list the theme and the objectives. >> That might be better and easier. Oh, on the second page. Maybe that's >> Wait, that that would be always refer back to it. >> So then you'll know if in on December 5th theme B1 is going to present. You'll know who those champions are. Well, you can do that, but still I would still like the titles >> in that that little box, not just district administration. I don't know what that is for me. That could be everyone or is it everyone? It's there. Sometimes it's directors, sometimes it's executive directors, sometimes it's assistant superintendent, sometimes it's principal, sometimes it's assistant principles. It just depends on who's who's helping lead and work on those teams. Yeah. Cuz then too, I I think that that would help then too. If this is going to be a document that we're going to move forward, then we at least know what we meant when we said district administration for that column, like who that included, you know, cuz we might forget as years go on. >> So, so Molly, >> but I'm not asking for names. I just want job titles. So the other thing that will happen and I I I'd have to look at how we did it this year but we eventually will have you know on October 3rd academic achievement one came forward and shared there so we could have then who those co-ch champions the positions of those co-ch champions a yeah I mean if you want to list them down below but so if that came up who what is the title that's in charge of that >> it depends. Is that student services? >> Oh, no. >> Use people sign up to be a part of these theme groups. So, it's whoever's whoever signs up to be on the team, but there is always going to be co-ch champions that lead that team. >> So, who's leading that team? What's the title of >> So, for each one of these, so so again, underneath the academic achievement, there's three teams. It's always the goal that there's a district central office administrator and a principal who's leading who's leading a team behind them in each and you all saw that you saw that all year as as nine different presentations came forward. Okay. So then that helps me with understanding. >> Okay. >> So then could we have whoever that central office title is leading that just that title >> and and a princip and we could it's always you principal. Yeah. >> Yeah. Yep. Because then going forward that would just help to know what titles were involved in what work. >> Yep. >> But I thought I heard right away the superintendent said, "Yep, she can do that." what I asked you for, you know, >> I'll have a line that has the staff person on that board of education across another and I just would the only other comment I would make is thank you for having time on the work session for us to collectively get board input because it helps me understand where the other directors are coming from and what's important to them. You know, we're trying for consensus around. >> Okay. I think we're ready to move on to district governance polic and district governance and policies. So you have the list of committees here and I want us to take a look at it and first off if we could look at since the question came up about um policy governance policy um someone was talking about maybe we should add policy at the whole other people are saying our policy committee is just doing amazing work now um So would anybody from the policy committee like to speak or Yes, you. [Music] >> We already do policy approval by the whole because we have a policy committee that initially pulls together some of the work, does some research, does some background. The other thing that our policy committee does is we read the policy out aloud verbatim, every single policy. And guess what we have discovered? Most of the policies sail through without a problem because we're not hearing anything that sounds like a problem. When we read it out loud, we're able to pick out those words that we know are going to best serve our students or serve this board. An example of that was uh when I was on the board at 287 and 287 in their strategic plan uses the term of parents uh guardians and caregivers. So in our policy that we were reviewing at the last meeting, the word caregiver was not included. We have included that in our policy because it holds with what the current word usage is. Words matter. So we've updated it that way. And that was a policy we read and that was the only change in that policy. So, we're starting at the beginning because in my level of knowledge, none of those pol those policies all scare me because we don't know really when they were approved. We don't know really who signed off on them. Uh the information that on them is lacking. And so, we are starting at the beginning and moving through. uh and and therefore what I've also done was I did some homework and I uh will pass this out and I went ahead and pulled together some information on uh policy review checklist which is on page one creating new politicies which is on page two and the committee workflow template which is on page three which gives an example of um the work the overriding work that the policy does. This I will admit right up front was done with chat GPT because uh I also know that I have a a lack of credibility among the haters on this board. So I stop I will pull together all right that is why I use GPT. I'm not trying to do something subversive but this was the easiest way to pull together my knowledge of policy work. So, >> okay. >> Sorry. >> Okay. Oh, I all I was going to say is that um my you know short-term experience that when I started it, the um staff person who was on the committee was very it was very disorganized. I was like, is there even an agenda? I don't know what's going on. Um and now um with our current staff lays on bringing so it's much more organized and we're able to and the updates from MSBA are really clear the the um changes to the law are very clear and it's really much easier to go through um those kinds of changes so that um we're able to work through things in a much more efficient manner and that has been very very helpful. So I just wanted to throw that out there that that has made us much more efficient. Finish your presentation. >> Oh, I'm sorry. >> Oh, did I interrupt your presentation? >> Sorry. you can finish. >> You know, because the other side of it is that when you talk about a committee of the whole, that means you're going to pull this whole board together and we're going to read them word by word to one another or we're going to have a policy committee that's going to look at it word by word and is going to either say this is ready for the board to take a look at and this is where the board work comes in place because guess what? Because then you as a board member, you take what we send out to the board and you review it. If you have questions, if you bring questions forward that we haven't seen from the policy committee or weren't asked, that's all viable. Does that then cause us because we have a flowchart. Does that then just cause us as a board to go, we think this needs to go back to committee. So that's the point of it is that it we are a committee of the whole when it comes to these policies. The entire board votes on it. you're utilizing a committee to get through some of the minutia and and add some of the smaller words and make sure like the other thing again the equity policy isn't listed on so many of them. So those are the little things that we find if you're having problems with a policy you're going to find it at that s first read and then perhaps bring it back to the and then bring it back to the committee. And that sort of concludes my >> Thank you, director. Yeah, I was going to say I attended my first meeting and that was my first. So the flow was very good was very organized, very efficient to spend the whole time we were there moving policies through as they need to or bringing them back to the board to consider it. So I can't speak to past experiences, but what happened there was amazing. I for one would like to say to reading the entire policy word for word and coordinating some things. No, thank you. >> I think I think yes, she's next. >> Okay. >> But I would just say I appreciate the work the policy committee is doing and this is a lot and I would not want to put that on the board in addition to everything else that we're trying to go through. Dr. Holmes. So, I was new to the policy committee this year. Something I signed up for. I was looking forward to it. I think it's important. Um, yes, there was shifting around of administrations assigned to it. In fact, we set shutdown for all of April due to that. And I asked the chair to notify the board of that because that's a major thing if your policy committee is not working or not in session. Um, so this goes back to March that I've been asking you to talk about the policy committee because whether it's a whole, yes, it comes to us as votes, but there's a time and place for more discussion and that has been a a struggle point for this board in terms of what requires more discussion as a whole before it even goes to the policy committee so we can get our arms around what is being asked. The one that I continue to use and will use is the district phone policy, the electronics. I'm I'm It's not the formal name, but it's the one that addresses those areas. And this goes back to process and procedure. And I know um in terms of input, who you're talking to, are you talking to stakeholders? Are you talking to families? Are you talking to students? Um those are those are points that are outlined um that should be coming to policy. Okay. And I I'll get to that chart in a minute. Um, and so when I was coming on, I had emailed and had some questions about, you know, where are we starting, what's the agenda, what's the process because, um, it wasn't quite clear to the board from our experiences leading up to new directors coming on board because we had work that was supposed to be done. There wasn't a schedule. So, that was identified, but it was it was told to me, well, no, there are things in in place. Read this. Read this. Okay. Okay. Great. did all of that and yes we did do work on the phone policy will come to go to the policy committee meetings and finding out that that wasn't the case and so it was it was grateful I was grateful that we were going to you know regroup and figure out what are we doing but for board members who were here last year we were told there was work being done director Bowman just said that we are starting from scratch so everybody needs to be well aware of that. One of the meetings we came to there was a draft chart to I address the process we were given and then that came and we were given the Senate. Okay, leave that meeting and come back with your thoughts on what should what is missing. What are we going to talk about any of those things? Was that before the new person on staff came on or after the new person on staff came on? >> Since or was certain? It was given to us. Yes. By the superintendent in HR, they were drafting a document that was providing it. So, we are all supposed to gather input and kind of reflect on where the holes, what do we want it to look like? Again, when you are talking about this kind of level of routing, who's involved? I think the board should be involved so you all know what the expectations are. I mean, we are it was being recreated in terms of how's it going to look when policy starts. How's it going to look if a community member comes, which has happened at our listening hour, and I can't even tell you if we've done any work on their request or gotten back to them. Um, so we all given that task. Come. I too looked up online and said, "Okay, what are good practices for policy and what are the different avenues and I came with my notes and it had been reddrafted by administration." And so now we were working on a new draft and I wanted to know if I could hand my notes out and that was not acceptable. And um my colleagues just approved the new document. So, I'm concerned that it's being I don't want to get just one month because there are pieces on here that need to be talked about as a board and it was very difficult to have conversation and I expressed this all to you and you were you mentioned at the board t at the board table that you were not meeting the polic policy committee wasn't meeting so people were aware >> sure but it's a formal if if If this is a committee of the board, I think the board should be aware of substantial changes and substantial initiatives that are coming along. And so this is all one you should be aware of that was just newly created. My resignation was due to the environment. It is not a free flowing of information. New ideas are not accepted or welcomed. It was very difficult to work in and I don't think it's the committee is operating as it was just portrayed. If you have I was never in a session where it was read word for word. You must have just started that. >> We did the last meeting you were at >> because I can give some more history on that. That's because we had gone into chaos. >> End of a chance at this. I would have appreciated the opportunity to talk about the challenges and the board could have weighed in on expectations of this committee. I've been asking since March to talk about it. It was a struggle >> and so for me it was a struggle. >> Wait one at a time. I understand I did not want to resign from that. You are difficult to have a conversation with. >> Stop. >> You stop that right now because that's more of that gaslighting. >> Yeah, but you were sitting here interrupting her. She would have said that. >> Wait, stop. >> This is well documented. I've talked to you about it >> again. And you said >> that you would adjust the behaviors or we would talk about it. I think it's important that board directors feel comfortable serving on committees. And again, this is a document that you all should be aware of. And now it's morphed into, I guess, a formal process, but I had identified some holes I thought were worth discussing. Um, where's the board's role in it? It's all information that I still have. I'm willing to talk about that did not happen. Okay. So, we have the historical perspective and we've heard from the people on the committee saying things are going well. We have checklists. We're reading every single word. We're looking at everything. >> And the reason why we didn't read every single word beforehand was what went on in the last six months of last year in the board meeting. We couldn't get in the policy meetings. we couldn't get there because of the fighting that was going on. >> Thank you for raising your hand. >> You're welcome. Um, I for one would love to hear the the your perspective about some of the challenges that um and places that you thought the board should be more active if we're going to talk about policy because the policy development for the district and where appropriate administrative procedure goes to the administration. But the policy, the vision, uh the budget supervision of our one staff. That is the primary function of the school board. If there are directors who have input that they think the board should review, the board should have an opportunity to review it. And I for one would like to hear those comments. But now my own so thank you for sharing that. My own comments um kind of go to uh in terms of the culture. I think that there have been nu numerous times over the last two years when the policy committee has come forward with policies and done a lot of work uh from the whole school we got from the uh MSBA and others and I from the board table have said thank you for doing all that. I mean I've always been appreciative of the work the policy committee does. Um but and no but and one of the things that I would say is it's important that um if policies come forward that are being um contemplated that they come to a work session before they come to first reading. So I don't have a conf because my assumption is that the policy committee will review all those things all those things that are just routine in nature that are just a pass through from MSBA or other legal and any other thing that we need to incorporate. They're looking at that. We appreciate that. We'd like them to keep doing that. if there are some subjects that come forward that that they think might be controversial for our district or that the board need the school board needs to weigh in if we want to tailor some policies that should come to work session. It's I mean it's it's not you know it's not rocket science. It's not subversive. It's not adversarial. It's just good business you know because it should come to the board for discussion uh so that we can all find common ground and then it goes to the policy committee to hammer it out. I don't think I've ever interfered with the policy committee. That's a lot of work. I've been there and done that. >> Thank you. So can we come to consensus that we appreciate the policy committee work and um wish them well and keep them as a policy committee. Yes. I find that really interesting that that's the direction that's decided after I've been asking you for a conversation since March on the difficulties of it. I was under the impression that things were going well and and there's a new staff person. They have new procedures and that things were working well and I want to see I mean I don't I don't really want to I want to look ahead. I don't want to look more I mean you explained that it was >> I think I'm going to I'm going to quantify I'm not looking historically. I just took the seat in January and I flagged you in March immediately and there were multiple emails and I included the vice chair. So this is not news um because that's the agenda setting team and I actually asked to bring it to a work session. So I know conversations are uncomfortable but that's okay. That's how we work through it and we get good procedures and work expectations in committees. And so I think if you're if we're just going to push forward and say, "Oh, we're going to bless the policy committee." No, I'm not in support of that until the whole the whole board has come to terms with how this has changed because Director Basket just asked me about the holes that I identified. And so this isn't going to be because you all are going to start watching the time, but I I flagged some of those specifically to you. And then I did make copies for everybody to look at because there is a substantial role for the board on the policy committee and that's something that I identified and it can't just be always turning it over to administration and we saw that when we had a community member come and ask us to review our policy on um magnet age gaps and I don't think it's an appropriate answer to say well we covered that in October so we'll get back to in a year and so it was one of those things where it's kind of really let's work through the the real life instances that have come to our attention already um because we know that happened and so where does that fall? How is community going to expect to be responding to? And then in terms of what director Basset was talking to, that's where a lot of time needs to go into these because we list them as 200s, 300s, 400s, but we've had a a consistent point. If something is going to be viewed as debatable, the work session should be there. And that's one of the things that I discussed in the workflow because it's readings. It's first session or it's first read, second read, but there's also the option for putting it on a work session >> and that has >> and then there's also an admin cabinet role, a board member role, a staff member. There are other examples of our colleagues, counterparts and other organizations, St. Paul in particular, where people can suggest policy and they have forms that are already done and and practices that are working for them. Um, the consent agenda is a policy that we need to do work on or at least have a conversation on, but it doesn't exist for us. So, where does that fall into play? These are all conversations that the board should weigh in on. >> Did you have your hand up before you? Okay. >> So, what we come down to is a whole bunch of words that have always been used. I've been flagged. I've been told. I've been this. I've been that. I want to know policy numbers. I want to know because that's what's never been brought forth to the policy committee. We don't know how Wait a minute. I keep getting word salads. If you have something flagged, then list it out. I know for a fact from the last couple years that you were interested in, I think from the safety and security committee in the student handbook policy and now the phone policy. Those are specifically only the two policies I've ever heard you speak of specifically. And I would love to see a link. >> You're so angry. >> I'm not. What I'm What I'm >> Yes, I am angry at I'm angry at this this sense of uh accusation that we are ignoring you when you do not bring us any work to do. You walked out of that committee. >> I did not. >> You quit the committee. And what I'm saying is what we need what we need as a committee to function is we have standard work that needs to be done. That standard work is 100 through 900 reviewing all those policies that are already there and already in place. We will have decisions about APS that need to either be sucked in or pushed out. But if you have specific one of the things I've not heard from board members, if you have specific policies that you want to amend or change, bring us the list. was going to September 15th email from you telling me that work was done on the phone policy that I'm questioning that you said had occurred and it had not >> it did occur. It did occur under Marty Vo. She did it. >> This is how Marty did. >> You're lying about this was done for Marty Voit and you know it was it was >> okay. Bring it down one person talks at a time. I'm next. >> Dr. Long is next. >> Okay. >> Yeah. I just as the vice chair want to confirm that we have been getting these emails from director Holmes asking us to talk about the policy committee. They have it has been brought up at agenda setting. was not put on the work session at all until just today. Um, so that is a long time to wait to kind of address issues. I would hope that moving forward get better at kind of addressing issues in a more timely fashion. Um, the other piece of it is is director Holmes has brought several different policies to us. like right away in the beginning when she started there was a book uh policy that she brought to us and she was not on the policy committee and she submitted it to that policy committee um where it outlined if parents were uncomfortable with a book that was in the library the steps that they needed to go through >> prevented book banning >> y and that's that was accepted >> that was accepted since then she has brought up the cell phone policy I have also asked about the cell phone policy and wanting changes to it um especially after attending trainings from MSBA and I don't feel like those were listened to. Now there there have been other concerns too that have been brought up about policy committee even before director Holmes was on there um and I was not chair or vice chair at the time but I believe that that person brought it up at several business meetings that they were not being listened to either. So, I guess this this is still where we are as a board is like, yeah, there are selling of us, but we need to all listen to each other and we can't just continue to be like, "No, no, no. You don't get a say. You don't get a spot at this table." That's not right. We were all elected. We all have spots at this table. So, we all need to start listening to each other and stop this thing where we're kind of cutting certain people out of things and listen. Let's have a conversation about it. Let's stop when we have these issues. Let's stop waiting so long before we address them. I mean, cuz time is not healing this wound. It's just making it fester. >> I remember in agenda setting, we had so many things that were on the timeline. I mean, we're just like, what can we already late so I know that it it has been on agenda setting. Can we push that back? Can we push that back? Yeah. And so I'm hoping too with the start of your parking lot that maybe we can start doing things in a more timely manner. >> I think we all can manage that parking lot. Director, are you done? >> Yes. >> Director. >> Yeah. So I just I wanted to address thanks for those comments. I think that a lot of what we are hearing again tonight are things that has happened in the past. Not that they are not relevant now. They are. But I want to encourage us to see a way forward. The charts that we are referencing now has a place that if you have new policy suggestions, a way to bring that forward to the policy committee and we make sure that that is coming in front of the board for discussion. or if you have a policy that you have things in there that need to be adjusted, there is an entry point for you to bring that to the board or to the policy committee for that to be discussed. So, let's please give that a chance going forward. If you have those concerns, email it to the right people and let's see if we can just move forward on these issues that have held us back in the past. I don't think readressing them today will do us any good. Just my opinion in a way. >> Thank you, Dr. Benson. >> Yeah. Um, thank you, director. Um, I sounds good to me. However, I am interested in whatever that list is because if we're going to talk about a new flowchart and a new process, which is what we're debating and discussing, I would like to know if there's a person who's been on the committee who's actually contemplated and given some thought to some places where we need to review some more. I'd be interested in seeing it. So, did you say that you have copies for board members? >> They have moved forward with a new flowchart. So, that should be distributed to everybody is my point. Okay. Well, >> and I have identified some >> Okay. I I have I have two things there. One is for any director who's ever been on any committee, what I think is good practice I try to do is if I know something about work that is happening in any committee, I'll share that. People can accept it or not. So, I would be interested in that. And if we're going to vote on a new flowchart and some I I don't see it and I don't I don't think I have it. >> It's not a It's not a flow. >> Well, no, but I saw a blue chart, you know, so it's not new walking. absolutely not new, >> then great. Can we just see the old If we're going to have this flowchart, I just want to see it. >> And um and and if there's some And not only that, if there's some um some, you know, some input that would be valuable for the board to review, I would like to us to review it because um I haven't heard anybody say they want to get it all up involved in the policy. I know I, >> you know, and neither did I. However, one of the things I did talk about earlier tonight is the board's function is policy and if there's some challenges or some holes or some things that we should be aware of in the flow cuz it's very difficult once you approve something to try to roll it black back and we just saw that tonight. So I don't want anybody to say well you saw you have a flowchart if there's some challenges I don't see that's probably seven of us I don't have to see everything I don't have to I want to depend on my colleagues if they see something or they raise something I like I want to respect that and that's what I've done with that policy committee but if there's some issues that would be illuminate for this board on terms of policy that's one of our major jobs I'd like to see it >> director I would like to point out that all policy committee meeting agendas are posted online publicly. So anybody and everybody including all of us sitting here can look at those agendas, see what policies are coming up. And I believe I I'll have to look at it, but I believe the red lining is on there. >> Yeah. >> Um for all of you to look at ahead of time if you want to. So if you're interested >> and you want to see it ahead of time, you can certainly do that. We've only been passing forward at least the last couple meetings ones that have small changes due to legislation or wording such as like um like uh the the food um you know they changed some of the laws around the food and who can get food and collections having to do with food and things like that for lunch um and breakfast things like that. If but but if there was anything that was new or controversial, we would the whole plan that whole flowchart talks about sending it to work session first, not to first read. That's the whole point. I think one of the the issues that I'm hearing and this is again a clarity thing is who who's even in charge of the committee like who is even determining like right now the the HR um senior officer executive >> executive director sorry um is the one kind of putting together the agenda right and and even when it comes to board reports we're not even sure who's supposed to do it because nobody's the chair of the committee right and I I think that makes it clear as to like if you say like because I would think let's say I'm just making this up I don't want to be chair just to be very clear um but if I were the chair and then you said to me I can we look can you guys take a look at the the electronic you know device policy and here are my issues or the areas I'm concerned and here are my suggestions right then I could make sure it was on the agenda but right now there are three board members on there but none of us are chair Right. And so I think that is a point of clarity maybe that we need to figure out or does it go to the executive director of HR and then she puts it right. I don't know. What I'm saying is it's not clear and that's one of the issues, right? How does it even get onto the agenda? Because I agree. If you say I want to look at and here are my specific concerns, right? Then we can look at it and then bring it back and say, okay, based on your concerns, here's what we did. What do you think? And bring that to a work session. But we don't have a process for that cuz I don't even know who how that works. So I think that is one of the things. But there's no secrecy about what's going to come down the pike because it's all posted online. So you guys can for sure look at it and if you have comments, you know, reach out to any one of us who are on the committee and say, "Hey, I'm concerned about this." and then we're happy to bring your concerns to the policy committee and say, you know, this was brought and so as we're looking at this, we need to put that in the hopper. So, at least I'll speak for myself. I'm certainly willing to do that and anybody feel free to reach out to me. I'm very happy to do that. >> You could reach out to any two people on the policy committee. You just couldn't reach out to all. >> No, that's I'm just saying like whoever you feel comfortable reaching out to. I mean, I I will be able I'm happy to say this was brought up by another board member. I want to make sure it's out in the t-shirt, right? So, I'm putting that out there in the space for me. Um, so anyway, I just that is one space I see that's a little unclear and I think that's causing some of the problems. >> Um, it'll be director Holmes, director Bass and Director. >> So, then can you help me understand why we didn't talk about the phone policy again? because we sat in the work session and the board gave directive and said kick it back to the policy committee and when I went to broach that it was not welcomed it was we just passed that we're not talking about that and that's what we had covered in the work session already and I had identified already my concerns public to the whole board about the gaps that were there and developing that y >> to be clear question so you had concerns but the whole rest of the board already passed that It passed it. >> It had only been passed a few months before. >> Oh, it passed a few months before it passed and I had brought it up at the table. We brought it to a work session. I outlined the concerns. I outlined the holes and how information this there was not input gathered properly. It was designated as a controversial or required discussion policy. the board at that work session, a recent work session since it's been passed agreed to kick it to the policy committee. Okay, got it. Does that make sense? >> Thank you. >> And that we were supposed to talk about it again from my perspective when something's been passed within the past couple of months. I and that comes back to what you were saying earlier at the you know with Robert's rules. You can't be consistently going back to something that was just recently passed. But >> so what was given to me at the table was that it's a living breeding document and yes we can talk about that in policy committee and we got the will of the board to do so because it was passed without board discussion and it was a controversial policy. So we're not living true to our word. But did you go through a first reading and a second reading? >> It did and it was voted on by the board in November of 2024. >> Okay. Okay. >> Okay. Are you pausing? Okay. Director Bass. >> Well, I think that um I'm not sure that my first question about that flowchart was because I was just looking on the thing to see. >> Yeah, it's I saw it's not on there. So, we can definitely bring it or I can email it to the chair and she can send it out. >> Right. or or often you send it to our executive account anyway. Anyway, >> yeah, >> it it it should come out so that we know what it is. And I am interested in whatever feedback directors has from her time on that committee about things she wants to highlight for attention from the board. And I think your comments were really good about you don't have a chair. So I mean I think this further discussion has been helpful because what we were hearing initially is that it's going to be better you know I mean good stuff you know and so uh you got to take the good with the things that we need to still work on and so if you still need a chair then I would urge the committee to actually identify a chair for the committee so that we can pass stuff to the committee and there's a person responsible and accountable to get it move it through your committee and get back to the person so they know what happened to it you you know, um, part of what we talked about a few minutes ago is not having enough procedure around things and that gets us in trouble. So, if we can clarify that, fine. But if we can move on, you know, about this because that's one of our biggest jobs. So, having a chair for that committee is important. And I'm not add I'm glad I remembered this. That's not the administration's job. That's not their job. You know, our job is policy and and the support of staff is important has been important to have a staff person, but staff should not be driving setting policy for the school board. Input is one thing. Advice is important. I've never known anybody who didn't want advice from the administration. That does not take away the responsibility of directors who are on that policy committee to do food work. And if it's somewhat controversial to bring it back to this full board and if there's some some places where there's nclarity or issues, then send it to all of us. You know, we send it through Molly. We can all get it. >> Director Bowman, then director, >> right? I believe that moving forward what we really need to do is to embrace a process. The other thing is is that we get nowhere when we talk about things that we brought up that were brought up during times of incredible chaos. At the end of the last school year, there was nothing being done and then we moved into the new year of the uh of this committee and we were floating without a letter. We have no direction cuz the most important thing that we've been tasked with at this point is not the oneoffs but getting the full body of work reviewed and approved. And I know for myself I will feel much more comfortable when we are at a point where we have reviewed and approved all of our documents. It makes the oneoffs easier. And I am not exaggerating when I say that this information. When you say there's a problem, what does that mean? What kind of a problem has there been a problem reported in the school? That's where you've got the policy review checklist that was put together. Is it relevant? Is it being followed? Is it not giving us what we need? Are students suffering? Are there I mean, what would be a reason? And I don't think that that's an unfair thing to ask to discover a reason for us to look at a policy to fix it because the otherwise it sounds like just like there isn't a rhyme or reason to it and that's what concerns me. Policy work is very regimented from and it's what everybody hates about policy work because it is so regimented. So I think that right now all of those if those documents exist of what needs to be changed or concerns or worries about particular policies, pull them together, send them to Greeda and then Grea can forward them to the full committee which would include uh director uh Hearns and Miss Joanna Joanne and those people on the committee and they could be looked at fully. But right now what we're doing is we're arguing about sort of the he said she said of how it didn't and how it wouldn't and how it can't and this is what didn't and I think you're sort of responsible maybe you are. Could we just do a reset and bring forth what people want to see done get that documented create a work schedule around it and move forward. That's what I would ask. >> Thank you. Um if you have trust issues you can send them to Director Ellen Brand. What do you mean >> about that? >> Her concerns that she said send it to me and we'll get them to the committee. If you have trust issues and you don't want to send it to me, I mean >> I mean do we have not have a protocol for how we should communicate? We either send things to the board or not or to the chair of clarification though if they send them to agree and they agree to sends it to the committee are we violating any open >> I would be CC the committee. >> Right. Okay. >> And I'm not asking for any I'm not asking for them. >> Yeah. >> I'm just asking sending for business won't tell your office. >> And then it gives another set of eyes to who's getting the information also that the information formally passed through. >> Okay. >> Office the chair position. >> Okay. Director, >> I I wanted to suggest that unless it's agent and needs to be done ASAP, if there are policies that need to be forwarded to the policy committee, I will plead with the board to give us an extra two meeting sessions. We have one coming up in July, end of July. And so by the second policy meeting after that July, we will give you or we will give the board who is responsible as a chair. So that site policies can be forwarded over to that list. >> Sounds great. >> Perfect. Sounds great. In le time, we're going to get that flowchart. >> I heard. >> Well, the flowchart is huge. So, I mean, you can send it to >> I'll scan it. >> What do you mean? Wait, which flowchart? >> I said the >> the updated copy of the flowchart that was >> I thought you were talking about this Excel spreadsheet that holds all of our work. Then I will send it to great. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Director Holmes and then we'll move on. What came to us at listening hour was changing the age for the magnet schools. A problem was specifically identified. A suggestion was mentioned. All of that was given. So has that individual been followed up on? And where does that fall? Because that's another gap because it came. And so if we're listening to people, we better have an action item. But we can't just listen to one person. >> It's not listening. It's a response. Nowhere did I say we're taking that person's word and changing the policy. But if somebody's taking the time, and that's why I alluded to St. Paul, they have these sheets that they've already created for anybody because that is a reality. people can come to us and suggest policies and so to have a formal document and presentation is all those were tools I was trying to bring to the table. I by no means expressed that we're taking that person's word and doing policy change. I used it as an identification of a gap that came to us recently and nothing was done on it. Can you send the community? Do we have a community input form or when some person in the committee has community has a good idea? Can we have a form like that? >> Can you can you send it? We'll get we'll just send it to the committee. >> If you send I brought it to the committee. Can you put it in and send it to the committee by by me? I will. I just find it concerning that I had I was a participating committee member and I was bringing tools to the committee and they weren't welcomed but now that they're being discussed and it's not about rehashing issues and going back. It's the fact that they've never been addressed in the first place. So that's why these uncomfortable conversations are coming up because they weren't being addressed before. Okay. Moving on from the policy committee, I would like to move to the ad hoc transportation and infrastructure committee. >> That's another point. >> Well, it it let me let me start and then you can talk. >> All right. >> Okay. It started out because we had to have it go off to bids. We had to figure out what was going on, whether we were at the beginning was were we going to go for bids and then no, we weren't. And then later we next year we were going out for bids and we took care of that. And when we toured the bus garage, it was like, "Oh my gosh, they're lower they're they're changing the tires so the buses can get into the bus garage. We may need to be also infrastructure. But I would like to suggest that ad hoc committee for transportation has done its work and the facilities and infrastructure committee work if there is to be some is is channeled to the financial advisory council because whatever facilities there are it's going to involve money and we need their input. Can you say that one more time? >> Okay. Readers digest version. Get rid of the ad hoc committee for transportation and infrastructure because busing part is done and infrastructure is way bigger than the transportation committee. instead um a lot of the work is being done by the visioning team and um I think we're going to need the input of the FAC on capital and uh infrastructure and so any work that would have been done by the ad hoc transportation committee un under the guise of facilities let it go under the financial advisory council. Because if it's facilities, it's going to involve money. Does that make sense? >> 90% like I'll take 90. Well, I didn't follow. >> Yeah. Okay. I'll get director B. I didn't say agree. Well, as a person who was a part of the committee, um I'm not interested in rehashing things, but I do believe that often when you cannot go forward without acknowledging some things that happened in the past because it's just going to fester if you don't. So I think just like this conversation we just had and we move past it. We have a resolution. I do feel a certain kind of way about the fact that the transportation and and uh infrastructure committee was just abruptly just not scheduled any needs and when we had some and we actually began to reach out to community and have people involved. I do not agree that there was no role for because just because transportation was moved forward there still was some infrastructure questions and in fact I closed many of them the next thing I knew we were getting a report from the administration that a facility study had been done that the board wasn't even aware of and didn't have any input into and the facilities store to the tune of $365,000. Now, I don't know what Lord anybody else has been sitting on, but I just know that that was a concern to me and I knew that it was needed and I didn't appreciate it. I'm just going to get that off my chest. I thought it was inappropriate and um but further going forward I don't see I do think that having that um this is the conversation with the FAC about if they're willing to co-work with the uh infrastructure comm ad hoc and until they say yes the ad hoc infrastructure committee still stands and then when that committee comes together those committees can talk about how they want to work together uh if they do maybe they don't but I do think if we're going to have a conversation in this district about facilities that may end the road may end up at closing facilities or any other thing or major uh investment in facilities. I think that is a school board discussion >> and I think that excuse me it's my turn and so I think that if we have ad hoc committees that are comprised of board directors who are getting information contemporaneously with any other citizen group the bug stops with the board and I think the board should have information and have some discussion about those things. the FAC, which has some our community residents on it, is a perfect partner to partner with the infrastructure committee to really have some deeper diving conversations. I would be open to that as the two of you we two are the only ones remaining on the committee and I'm okay with this suggestion that we perhaps try to have them work together. I don't think there's anything wrong with that. Who wants to make it work? But I think it I'm going on the record with how unhappy I was by the way. Just like we just talked about how the other committee was just shut down. That one was too. And the truth is set you free. I don't believe in carrying stuff into the future, being mad about stuff. I'm not into that. When when I say I want to start fresh and go forward, I really mean it. But I really mean it with respect. It's disrespectful the way that committee was managed. And I don't appreciate it. you know, we're going to go forward because it was just stopped. And I would ask me say, well, we just demanded the committee just even stop having the report on on the agenda just stopped. And there was a committee community people had been invited to a committee meeting and their understanding is that we were going to go forward as well. Nothing. I didn't go out and make a big deal out of it, but I'm saying that right now, you know, and if we're going to go forward, I think we should. I think it makes sense to maybe have that committee kind of work together with our FAC. It already has community participation on it and our previous committee did not necessarily or had not moved to that place and I think there's a lot that's going to be talked about related to infrastructure and I think it's an appropriate conversation from the school board. >> I think it's appropriate. Dr. Long, go ahead. >> Yeah. When we started that ad hoc committee, we had huge concerns about Durham and one of the things that we had discussed as a board is we really did not want to continue on with that contract even though we did. And so that that ad hoc committee was supposed to be looking into other ways so that we could get away from these outside contracts. And one of the things we discussed was bringing some of our busing back in house. And we were going to start with special ed. And I feel like we never, you know, the board voted on that and that that that was one of the things that we wanted that committee to do and then there was no follow through on that or to bring the the special ed transportation back in house. >> What was talked about in the community is just not feasible. >> It was >> it was Yeah. >> Yeah. But I'm just saying it was never brought back to us as to where that landed or what. I mean, you know, when we when I wasn't on the board at the time when that decision was made to go outside and use contractors for our busing versus our drivers that we had in house. Um, but that was super upsetting to the community because that was I remember campaigning and people were really upset with the board about that decision that was made. So, I don't know. And and people were really upset with what was happening with Durham and and I don't know when the community gets that upset, I don't know that I want to continue to give somebody my money for that, you know. And so I guess I my whole thing is I wish that those things could be looked at and I wish that we could figure out a way of having some in-house stuff and not having to deal with outside contractors. >> Um the community talked about that we would have to buy so many buses there would be so expensive that we just it was completely infeas unfeasible. Also, Durham, they had a horrible start. I mean, they just, it was really, really bad when they started, but they turned it around and they had they got the bus drivers trained, they got them in the pipeline, they have satisfied parents now. Um, yes, totally acknowledging it was a bad show to start with, but they did the work and they >> they earned it back. I mean, the the amount of complaints were like and so they earned it back and um I I give them kudos for that. It was horrible at first, but we got they they paid off the they paid the compensation for what went wrong and then that went for the extra charges that we had to pay for keeping bus drivers at a pay level. So anyway, Director Holmes, um I guess I'm going to echo what Director Basset was saying in terms of the importance of the work in front of us with SOD on the table, statutory operating debt for those who are paying attention and the decisions that are looming that have already been alluded to. Um, and if if there are tentative plans about going out for a referendum um based on the work on what Vision's doing, I mean, the Vision team, I I have no doubt they're doing valuable appreciated or appreciated work. It is a small group and I think what director Basset said is everything. The buck stops here and legally we are responsible for that. So I'm really really apprehensive that we've given them the notion that they have more decision-m authority than they do and their input is invaluable. Um but again it's a small piece and so I really see that committee if we could reidentify a purpose and how it's going to guide us through the next 12 18 months as we rightsize this district as I've heard talked about over and over again um and doing work with FAC which we still need to come back around and fix the bylaws there and our expectations. So, I kind of um not kind of I am reiterating I I like that suggestion um and how that lines out and works with FAC and that committee or um you know as we process the vision work here later um I mean because we're going to be looking at decisions in September, October, November and so we've got some I think a lot of details we need to get to that the board needs to process and I think that committee could be regenerated. and empowered to answer some good questions that the board needs to look at or okay and fine if legally we can't repurpose it then you know we give it a new d I I I don't know what it is I'm I'm just really focused in on the work that we have in front of us and um the bucket stops here I'm going to just end it there so I think that's I I what we're considering and enrollment closings all of those that are coming up here as possibilities. I think that committee could do some really good work with >> I'm going to agree with you about the book stops here, but I'm going to disagree that it needs to be in the committee. It needs to be the work done by the whole board. >> Oh, yeah. I'm >> I don't want I don't want the committee to do it and then the board to react to redo it. Okay. I think do that all as all that is a board job >> not a little >> with that being said then are there going to be more substantial conversations than just our regular meetings because the volume of work is what I'm focused on it's not going to fit we've already reduced our schedule here and now we've got um huge information that's coming in August from the vision team and their agendas were pretty substantial. I mean, so I I suspect we're going to have a lot of information to process and digest. So, that's where I was going to need an additional meeting or two, but I really want the entire board to weigh in on all of it and and get the facts and not get the reader digest version from a group of the three of us. I think that we need to have it be group work on that and and get rid of that committee, get group work going on the visioning and all of that and then anything related to uh the facilities when we rewrite the FAC bylaws. That was part of it. >> That's my thought. >> Okay. Well, here's my hand. >> I see your hand. >> Okay. Would you like to speak? >> Yes, please. Go ahead. >> I'll be so polite most of the time. >> Um, you know, so what we were talking about was the transportation infrastructure committee. I heard a suggestion that we've done this work on transportation infrastructure. Whether we keep the transportation word in there or not, far I'm saying is all part of the infrastructure. The physical plants are mostly the infrastructure, but all of that's operational. So what I heard was the suggestion that we perhaps um integrate that work into the finance advisory committee and of course I'm serving on both. So I was supportive of that idea. I mean I I just spoke in support of that idea. Uh and I talked about the fact that the way the old transportation and ad hoc committee got just abandoned was trolls. not going back there, but I'm saying going forward, I'm trying to move with the new bill. Uh, and so I believe that work in that finance advisory committee and in the infrastructure, whatever we call it, committee needs to crosswalk some of that heavy lifting work that's going to come forward to the full board. There needs to be a crosswalk built that has not been built that I can see. updates about what the commit where where we are on some snapshot of what the committee heard about is not the same as cross crosswalking some of the heavy lifting that will need to be done between that committee and this board and our administration. It's a high volume of information and I don't know about anybody else but I haven't been to a bunch of the reimagined stuff. I have no idea what they've been talking, you know, except when we get an update, but they might not be may not be asking or the information may not come forward. That would be questions that I would ask and that's okay. But I'm just saying and the full board has not been engaged in any of it. So, we've got a group of people who've been meeting and working and I have no doubt I fully believe that they've been working hard and getting a lot of information and data. But I'll tell you that when we came come to when it comes to right sizing the district and it's a school board's decision, the last thing I want to do is not be in league or have some understanding or have crosswalk some data in a substantive way with our community whether it's through this merge committee we're talking about or a joint meeting with the reimagining committee or some sense of it. I do not want to get to September, October, whenever it is, and have four or five recommendations that we're looking at for the first time and and and I think I spoke to this already with this reduced meeting schedule, how this volume is getting supposed to be getting done when we have fewer meetings. I'm off for fewer meetings. I mean, I I that's my impression. Maybe it's wrong. I don't need debate it. If it's not, if I'm inaccurate, okay, that's my impression, you know. Um, so I I just think there's a lot of work to get done and uh I see this may be a way that we can potentially we look at the bylaws, check in with the FAC and you and I are on infrastructure committee and so I mean I'm okay with working together with them and we can talk about that later. Don't have to talk about right now but um that committee I think is important >> to clarify. Mhm. I'm not in any way suggesting that the work from the re-imagine group go to the finance committee rather than the board. I mean that work comes to the board when the board has financial type questions or something. It goes to I'm agreeing with that. I didn't suggest that anything otherwise. >> Yes. Just wanted to be clear. >> Yeah. But I I didn't suggest that I because but I did suggest that if there's some crosswalking we can define what crosswalking means. I suggest just crosswalking some of the work that has to do with any recommendations or any data that we're getting about infrastructure in smaller chunks if it's where it's appropriate that it come to FAC and the FAC should not be s getting or receiving volumes of information that is not coming forward in a timely fashion to the full board. That's a process and only through discussion can we arrive at what the with the administration quite frankly can we arrive at a process that makes sense. We are at um the threshold of August and if we're talking about having some kind of decision by September finding language and a process that works for crosswalking some of the information I think is important. Nobody has to agree with me, you know, but that's my view. >> Okay. A committee can only have three people on it from the board. I And you are on the transportation. I step away. You move. You are already on the FAC. Can people just we get I don't think Do you want a motion? >> I put a motion if I don't >> I move I move we disband the committee for transportation and um and charge the FAC to be the one to consider uh items related to facilities. >> I will second the motion. >> Sorry. >> And I just I've made a commitment that I'm not going to let factual inaccuracies go by and that and I apologize that that bel. But we are not having fewer meetings. We are meeting the exact We are not having fewer meetings. We are meeting the exact same number of times we were meeting before. Um >> it's just restructured. >> Just it's just restructured. I just want to make that clear for the community and for everybody else. Um I've just Thank you. So I just want to be clear about that. >> Okay. Director Long, >> I'm just wondering if we're moving something to the FAC, shouldn't we be including FAC in this discussion then? >> Yeah. >> Who the members of the committee? >> I I guess the committee I don't know. >> Well, and I guess so part of the reason we suspended FAC bylaws is because we couldn't get a quorum. So, are we not having participation? Because if we're sending it to a committee that doesn't exist or it's just two people, then that's a bigger problem. So, these are all tied together. And I think that's the importance or the crux of what I'm agreeing with you on is we need to have this how information is flowing doesn't feel sufficient right now to be making decisions in September, October on school closings or a referendum or anything like that. I would not feel comfortable with that because nobody else is going on there except for the school board passing and that's what we're seeing over and over again. These things are presented. So I just the the lift is so heavy right now and ultimately we have to sign off on it. So, how are we going to mirror or match these different groups and entities because it's not just a presentation coming together. So, I think instead of I just I don't want to I want us to hear each other right now because these are going to be huge decisions. Not waiting on baited breaths to counter something. And I feel like that's what it's going. I'm just saying if we are talking about closing schools, repurposing buildings, any of that. These I would expect to have multiple conversations right now. I mean, very detailed, very out there. And so I I just don't see how this is going to help if we disband this committee when if there was something else that was started. And I I I mean I'm going to lay into the point about what is concerning for me is is that price tag that you mentioned about the facilities study that went through. And I know we've already discussed that we're not paying unless we move forward, but through all of this work, we are going to be moving forward on something. So, I just I don't want to play semantics or let's kick it to a committee that doesn't exist. >> Sure. >> That's those are my concerns right now. >> Do you have a clarification? >> It exists. I don't know what the because we we suspended bylaws because of attendance issues and we haven't talked about that again. So, I don't know if that's the >> It's not really attendance issues. That's what I was going to say. I I'm just I being the administr administrator that is responsible for the FAC I am trying to land on what I'm hearing here. What I'm hearing here is at least it's creating confusion for me because we have we have the vision team and the vision team is going to be coming forward with a recommendation to the school board at which time the school board is going to take that recommendation and move forward all the things. however you choose to do that as far as writing a statutory operating debt plan, as far as inclusive in that plan, what does that look like for our our facilities, our buildings, what's shuttered, what's not, all of that. So, I'm a little bit confused what even a facility committee would do because that process, even admittedly in this room, you guys have said that's our decision to make. We're going to move forward. I'm confused by why you'd insert another committee. However, when I think of the finance advisory council and I think of putting infrastructure in there, I'm thinking more along the lines of just true operational components. Yes. >> I'm thinking long-term facility maintenance. What does that look like? Kind of like what we talked about this spring, like do we bond? What does our levy look like? You know, what are our what are our infrastructure needs? What are what are hot spots? What are areas we can do different? There's going to be there's going to be a large amount of work coming out of any school closure decision, including probably a new boundary committee. There's going to be more committees. I mean, it's not going to end. I'm trying to I'm trying to reconcile adding the committee which makes sense to me but in a different capacity than what's being discussed right now. It's more of how are we not what what is statutory operating debt. Sure they might roll in but it's going to be your plan and that plan's going to need to be done in the better part of six months. That committee by the time we get get them up to speed isn't going to be there to be able to necessarily help support you in that. But they will be able to support you from this point moving forward in annual decisions and think about and here's a 3 to 5 year plan. That's to me it's kind of a different that's where I'm my brain is >> right. I was thinking it more about facilities then that way not the report that's coming from 2030. I wasn't thinking about that. I was thinking more your way. You wanted to clarify. >> Oh, I was say that the the attendance issue is more that the difficulty of the bylaws is that it was very difficult to add or remove people from the committee. So what wound up being is that we couldn't get a quorum only because people were remove weren't showing for a long time years who were still in the committee role, right? still on the list even though we have good attendance from a good solid what five six people right so that's the attendance issues we do have a really good solid group of people attending >> yeah so it's not that it's just that we had someone who wasn't attending for two years we had somebody who needed to be who quit but because of the way it set up it's only by a vote of the board can somebody be removed right so we had months of lag before they were removed so it's more that and that's by the the suspension of the violence. So, I just want to explain that because we do have a great group and could we use more? Probably a few more. I don't know. That's I don't know. You don't want a committee to be too large either, but but it is a good group and it can function really well. But, you know, it's also the question that we discussed before. They also have to get the information before the board, review the information and make the recommendations if we want them to function as a true financial advisory committee. If you want the board to have the information first, then there's no purpose to having a financial advisory committee. So that's just the facts. If they're going to get after they feel they they've said that, what's the point? You know, our chair said, "I'm a vice president of a bank. If I'm looking at this information already after it's already been presented to the board, why am I wasting my time here?" So that's that's the other piece of the suspension of the bylaws until we figured out what we wanted. your home's basset long. Did you raise um I think I don't know what I raised my hand for anymore, but based on what you said just with the two groups, I'm leaning into the presentation I reviewed on the vision team and it there's a slide on here with SOD and their components could support the plan. That was alarming to me. um because of how important SOD is and the plan the document that you had sent to all of us at one point I read and I mean that's going to be detailed so we're talking a lot of work and so that's why I was linking the two because that group is not enough feedback for me to make a decision on what we should do with SOD so I was leaning into that committee doing more in-depth work with the community as we're walking through these discussions and we can this vision team is one prop or one component of it. But that committee had also I thought and maybe I misunderstood talked to community members who had expressed input in the infrastructure side and how partnerships could be formed and there was a lot more conversation. So maybe I'm just No, I'm I'm I'm highlighting that that would have been that is valuable input going forward. >> Absolutely. I'm saying it's not going to meet a timeline is my point. It's like to re get that committee up to speed and ahead of you by the time you need to do the work. >> Well, and I guess maybe that's a good thing for me to know because the the thing is is you want to do the the the work of the board, but I don't see any indication that we're going to have multiple conversations about this. And that's what's really alarming when we're talking about SOD and potential school closings and repurposing it should be already on our radar of how many times we're going to be, you know, and we know that that deadline is in here for SOD um that it needs to go to MDE, I'm sorry for acronyms, statutory ball to the Minnesota Department of Education by January 31st. So, those are just all on my radar. I don't know if that cleared it up for you what I was functioning. We just need a lot more conversation with our community. Um because I feel like we're in an echo chamber right now and we've identified, you know, major financial issues and there are living decisions and if we're going to this timeline's really tight. Okay. Before calling, director Basset, did you want to clarify something? >> Yeah. You know, I wish we had have the presentation first before this conversation because I think that would have clarified some things. You know, I I just want to make sure that the community has confidence in the plan that we sent out months ago in the 17,000 different pieces or different people have been a part of it in the work of the vision team and we haven't changed courses from the beginning. We've said this community team is and and this is like most other districts that I know of when you have a huge project like this. There's a community task force that works on understanding and digging in and learning a whole lot to come back with some vision, highle recommendations for the board and the board will grapple with and that's what we've said from the beginning. Nothing has changed and we have a plan moving forward. It's going to be a tight timeline. You're right. And what I said last week was that we'll have we know right now we're going to need we're prepared tonight to share with you again. I wish we had the presentation before this conversation. We're going to need extra study sessions in October and November and December in order to get to the place where you feel comfortable with the information that's come forward. Additional information that you're going to need additional information or vetting of the community if that is something the board wants. Um, and I'm guessing you will in order for you to have what you want to be really confident. So, so part of this is I I want the community to know that we have a really solid plan that hasn't changed from the beginning. We've had a community group that we've said is going to be doing this work and as the recommendations come, we've said to the board that now it's your work. As you look at the recommendations and the vision of what's come forward, that's your work. I have huge concerns with bringing another committee into this at this point. My picture from the beginning and a lot of it's mostly because of what I've heard from you is this has to be work of the board once those recommendations come to y'all. It absolutely has to be. I would say coming forward as as Kristen said and a few others have said, I think that once you have boards made decisions and we have plans, whether it is long-term facility maintenance stuff or bond and and some of the work around that, I think the place for the financials of this to come back could be at FAC. I think that makes sense. the work of building the plan of what happens and the decisions y'all are going to have to make. I think we have to see I think I'm highly suggesting that is not a committee work that is a board as a whole work and that's what we've been planning for >> um well uh director thank you for the comments that you just made about that and actually even some of the I already knew this clarification about we actually were talking about the transportation infrastructure committee But all of this conversation went to FAC uh in terms of the infrastructure and transportation committee. I was trying to think about a way forward for information to flow. And so um as I I don't know how many more meetings are set for this reimagine group. I would suggest that we invite board members to attend those and observe and listen uh because I you know I mean and because in the model that I'm aware of it was all together the community and the board members were all together. So when they weren't separate officer everybody's working together so I think for board directors to begin to come up to speed and be invited to those meetings I think is important. Do I am I advocating dismantling that committee? No. Do I necessarily want to see another committee established? No. Um did I advocate for us going to FAC first because it's their bylaws to see if they're willing to kind of that's the first thing I said to accept some additional um responsibility for infrastructure. I think that'd be an appropriate move to talk to that committee first to see what they think about it. Uh so they know they have a little bit of a bigger piece of of infrastructure. However that happens. Uh I think that that's a good I good thing for us to do and to try to fill that in and it's only under those circumstances would I be favorable of having the infrastructure committee go away because I think it's a lot of work and I think there was work to do when it got disbanded quite frankly you know um and so but I'm going to be labor that but I think going forward I'm trying to figure out a way forward if the way forward is for board directors to be given the calendar and the schedule when the the people are meeting fine for the reimagine committee because I'm fine to go to a meeting and listen and take notes and then come back and ask our superintendent for any questions or any of those things or any of the cabinet for questions that I have. Not to interfere with that process. That's not my agenda is to interfere with a process where we have community people in giving input. That's not it. However, they may not ask the questions that are important to me and I want to make sure my questions get answered if I have to cast a vote. And so I think that that's fair. The board is the community. The community is the board. We're in unison together. We represent them. There is no way the school board should be anathema to being involved or understanding now. you know, I mean, any director who don't want to go don't have to go, you know, but I think that that is something that should be available to board directors because I feel like we need to start coming up to speed with what some of the issues are. And I think I've heard and I know I've said that some of these updates are not doing it for me, you know, and so and I I'm not don't take, you know, I mean, I because I've had more hands-on in the past. So, I'm acknowledging that my own stuff, you know, but that's something I would do. But I don't it's not I shouldn't it should be surreptitious. I shouldn't have to sneak into a meeting where we're talking to the community about what's happening with the future of this district. That's crazy, you know. So, I'm not talking about that secretly. I'm saying I think board members need to be invited to come to some to to know what the schedule is and if they want to go, go. If you don't want to go, don't go. And if and it's and if our role is observation because we don't want to not to disrupt I'll put it like that because my agenda is not to disrupt what people have been doing but my agenda is to make sure I'm ready when it's time to vote and then I understand what's going on and so that's what I would say and that under those circumstances if once we talk to them adop to our finance advisory committee see how they're feeling about if they want to have a little bit bigger role I don't know what that looks like or means right now. But if we get more input from them around infrastructure, fine. But I think that comes first before we say we're going to disband infrastructure because it's hard enough to get information right now. And people can disagree with that. That's my statement. If other people don't feel that way, that's okay with me. I don't need to debate it. I get to feel how I feel just like they do. >> Dr. Long. >> Okay. So, there were two things that came up within the time that I raised my hand for what I want to say. Okay. So, I'm going to start with those first. I think it's a great idea, uh, Director Basset, that we be invited to observe what's going on during the reimagine things. I'd love to see that, um, and attend that, um, attend those. Um, the other thing is the transportation and infrastructure committee, that uh, committee was happening way before reimagined. So I mean I I just >> I mean it hasn't done anything for 9 months. We just need to >> but so the thing that I was raising my hand about though was uh looking at the time it is uh 9:30 a little bit over 9:30. Um kind of wondering if maybe we want to continue this conversation about board committee's next meeting so that we can go on with some of the other stuff on our agenda or what we want to do with that because of where the time is and we also have a closed session too, right? >> Yeah, >> I think you're right. >> So I mean I I just am putting up some suggestions but with where the time's at. >> Okay. Yes. >> I think that if since it was brought up that do we ask the FAC committee if they want to do whatever. I also think that the reimagining committee should be consulted on their feelings on having board members to attend. If that's the route that people want to go, I want to know what the reimagine committee uh has to feel about that. I want to know what sort of guard rules are going to be put into place to let it only be an observing position. I mean there's huge ramifications with uh community members that may not want board members there. So uh that would be that's the only other thing that would improve. I think that board members should not attend. I think we get updates but >> maybe >> but I don't think our presence would be helpful. >> I think that we could intimidate people. I think that we could it's like when you go to observe you automatically change the dynamic in the room and I I it is a big fear of mine that that would happen. Did you end up >> Yeah. And also just to add to that, I think at this stage of the game, there will be a lot of holes in our thinking if we are joining them to just listen to what they have or what they are discussing right now because they've they've been they've had a lot of meetings and I know that the decisions that or the proposals that they're going to bring to us hopefully are not just five or six proposals, right? So if you you go to listen to them let's say the next four meetings you've lost the last 15 meetings right so your thinking process may be different at least that's how I will look at it and also the intimidation factor will be real right just having a board member present some people may or may not speak up agree >> at all so I I would like to suggest that as much as the information gathering is necessary for us to trust that the work they have put in is good work and if we don't think it's good work the final decision will be for us to make. >> Okay. Keeping in mind what Dr. long said >> perhap you were not here but she said it's already after 9:30 with a lot more things perhaps the rest of this discussion should just be at a f at the next work session or future work session >> and you had your hand up I did I just wanted so I looked online because all of this information is posted they have two meetings left July 29th developing right sizing recommendations by analyzing enrollment facilities and geography and then August 13th is finaliz izing recommendations for the board and then September 23rd is presenting to the board. So that's kind of the timeline that is a little crunchy for me and I think you know it's not about intimidation, it's about accountability for our vote and what we have to do and it's listening to the community member. I can commit to sitting in a room and listening. I I I'm not going to comment on anything that anybody's saying and that's my job is to listen to good and bad. And I think again I'm going to just emphasize the importance we're putting on this group which is I think 40 five or six I don't know if everybody always attended um I can't remember where it landed but that that is a that is a small small number um and so again valuable work but if we're using this to lean in to help make our decisions and it is listed here and on sod I want be listening >> and those are those are public meetings. So I don't >> I just I have to step in. >> Yeah. >> Never in my career have we been working a process for six months and as we get to the end of it rules are changing. I I just I don't feel at all supported in the work that our team with this community with a whole slew of other data and to change it at this part because that was part of the community's the vision team's concern from the beginning is is the board even going to trust and and listen to this and that's ultimately what you're going to do. their their their recommendations are going to be gained at the vision of the district, right? What they believe this this district should be. The specifics of that are going to be in your hands and that's on us to make sure that you get the information that you need to make the decisions. But to change the process right now, talk about a a a way to lose trust in the community, >> I I I just I really have to push back on that. I think it's an incredibly unfair thing to put into this process at this point. >> And even if a board member says nothing, their presence changes what people are thinking. They we cannot >> let it work. Let the process work. Thank you, Director Mason. >> Well, I just will say this. I don't think that I'm I may have along this discussion talked about merger or adding or I do think crosswalking is important. Um, none of those comments went to trying to change the structure of what the existing re-imagine group has done. My comments all went to trying to find a way that we could maybe fast track strengthen uh the flow of information about kind of where we are in terms of the decision making with the volume of data. So that is still my interest and I will say that um those so I didn't talk about changing the structure. So, superintendent, as you've mentioned, this is late in the game to be changing the structure. Doing something more formal might give that appearance, and that's not what I want to do. I don't want to derail what they've been doing. I'm not interested in that. What I am interested in is feeling for myself that I have a handle on kind of what where folks are at, what the conversation is, and where the things are going. The meetings are public. We are elected public officials for this district. I'm saying what I'm saying because I don't want to be perceived as sneaking into a meeting or being obstructive to a meeting or any of those things to a meeting. That's not been my history and I don't intend to do it now. But if I decide to go to a meeting is because I need it for myself. other directors who decide they don't want to do that. That's okay with me. I'm not going to belittle them. I'm not going to assign motives to them. That's not what I do. Don't go if you don't feel like you need to. It's not going to make me I mean, whatever you do, I just know that it's going to help me inform my decisions. And if there's only a couple more meetings left, they've gotten through the entire process without having any of that. And so, I'm interested. Now, I may not even make it to the meetings because I have other stuff to do. I don't sit around and figure out what I'm going to how I'm going to do anything to anybody. That is not what I do. That's how I keep my peace. I try to speak here when I'm at the meeting about what I believe. I try to follow through on those things. If I happen to go to a meeting, it's be will be because of things I've said here tonight because I feel like I need more information or I feel like I've been apart from the process and it's hard for me to make a decision at the end of the whole process when I've not been engaged. There's nothing wrong with that statement. It's just a statement of my own personal fact, you know. So, anybody who don't want to go, don't go. You know, >> I still don't think board members should be there. I understand >> board members feeling needing for information. >> Do they ever record those? >> No, >> because that would also be disturbing. >> That would interimate to Okay, never mind. All right, Director Bowman, >> we agreed as a board. >> Sorry, I've had my hand up for a while even before passing >> and I didn't agree. I said what I said >> tonight I said >> I'll have to go long and then >> okay so I guess I'm just feeling micromanaged barriers and lack of trust for some board members and how I'm hearing this conversation go but uh more importantly I'm just wondering about we had talked about at previous work sessions there being um a place where we at board members as board members could go where we could get access to the materials and information that was shared. Um, and so I'm just wondering where that is in the process of being put together so that, you know, we can go there and look at what has been shared so that it's not a huge mountain that we're climbing when we get there. >> Yep. It's And again, I wish that we had been able to have the presentation before this. Everything's online. All the agendas and all the presentations are online. And what about the notes from the meeting so that we can >> I don't know what notes I mean we there's processes that we've gone through to narrow down some things but I don't think there's been a a record keeping of notes per se. I don't know what that would would be. Well, is there any way we could get the information of what was like narrowed down on or what what maybe our lens of focus should be after looking at everything? Yeah. What we have online right now is I don't know what I would recreate to do that right now. What we have online right now is every agenda and every presentation. >> Yeah. And we when we brought to the board um the facility um assessment and the uh uh Hazel Reinhardt the demographic as well. So those two big reports did come to y'all. >> Yeah. because I kind of feel like, you know, before reimagine started, there probably should have been a discussion with the board around components or requirements or criteria or whatever it is, you might want to put a label on it, rubrics, um cuz I feel like that's kind of where we're getting to right now. um where it it just feels like infinite and nothing's really and yeah, the the information really isn't getting to us the way it needs to be, especially if we're supposed to be the ones making the decisions. Um, and you know, I would just like to say, you know, I've brought this up before, my style of learning is not the same as every other board members in here. And so sometimes I do need a little bit more information than other board members might need to feel comfortable in the decisions that I make. And that's why I ask extra questions. It's not about me trying to play a gotcha game or a surprise game. It's about me trying to truly understand. Like even today when we went through the whole process of can we put the titles there and then Molly gave some information and then you gave me some information and then I was like okay this is starting to click in my head about what this is. So yeah, I'm just kind of feeling like it for me it is going to be really rush and it's going to be kind of hard because um there was an opportunity to get information along the way and I I I didn't and now I'm going to feel way behind um when it comes time to to vote on things. So I'm just kind of expressing that um for also for future considerations, you know. And I want board to know that our team will spend whatever hours we may need and you need because we recognize the lift and what's going to be on your shoulders. And again, the the the timeline of the process hasn't changed at all. Nothing has changed from the beginning. And what changed because director Long made that suggestion is we said, "Yeah, let's just get it all for the whole public to see. Let's put everything online." And so what I would ask at this point is that we let the process continue to work. We make sure that we find dates anticipating that there's going to be additional needs and dates. Um, and we even looked at a calendar to suggest some of those uh through this fall because we know there's going to be a lot of information and we will spend whatever time it takes to make sure that we both honor the process that we put in place and you have what you need to make some really difficult decisions. To clarify, if you go online, they have to the vision 2030 team website. They have every meeting and they have every PowerPoint. They have everything. So for information that the team got. It's on it's there's every date, the whole from the welcoming to the reflections. It's all and Dr. Bowman, I have you up next. >> What was that? Is that is that listed easily on? >> Uh yeah, you just go to the vision 2020 team. >> Okay. >> And um >> on the district website. >> On the district website on the landing page, and then it's all under meetings. Keep clicking. >> It's all under meetings. There's like four tabs at the bottom. One is the purpose, one is the vision team membership, one is the process to determine and then under the meetings and we've always had all of the dates of the meetings listed with the what was added was all of the agendas and all the presentations and we crosswalked it with those presentations that also came publicly to the board. And it's all I mean it's got every date. It's got I'm just going to It's got a little plus. You click on it and the whole thing comes down. You can see every meeting. So, I just want to say don't go. I'm sorry. I was not on the list. >> Um, actually, you're not. I have Bowman. I bumped Bowman. Then it's Basset. I'm sorry. You can go for me because I said something. >> Okay, fine. Bowman. Thank you. Um I just want to go back to the the whole notion of breaking the rules that we agreed to that board members would stay away from the reimagined uh meetings. uh I myself if we need to let's go back to those uh meetings and workshops that we had that were tape recorded that showed our agreement because if we do not continue to abide to to the agreement and I remember the discussion so clearly if we do not agree to the things that if we cannot abide by the things that we agree to then we become the rule breakers and that That will mean that this community will never again trust us or the processes and the procedures that we ask them to volunteer to work on. That's my cautionary note and I'm here. My big concern is uh to be an open violator of the rules I find to be disrespectful and disturbing. this. Thank you, directors. >> Yeah. So, this isn't about rule breaking and I'm not trying to change the structure either. I've actually expressed um questions about this process from its inception and um you know what was the end goal? Um I think we talked early on about attending and it wasn't agreed upon. We never voted on anything. We never discussed the budget. We talked I remember the conversation about talking and respecting your privacy, but it's it's you guys, it's it's a small group. It's 46 individuals that's been tasked with huge huge elements that are in our wheelhouse. Analyzing enrollment facilities and geography, those are all things that we have talked about as a board. And so to want to know as it's formulating, that's again not a bad thing. this this is just obtaining more information so we can have educated votes and you know I think how the process went about we're pretending that we all agreed and didn't have concerns about it but that's not how this went down >> it it um you know we had conversations around are we going to be able to see all the survey responses how are those touch points ensured that they're individual touch points and not multiple people you know filling out the survey that the the validity of the work and I that's okay to question that. Um, so again, it's not changing structure. It's I I like how you just summarized that, Director Wong, in terms of how you process and how you learn and how you'll get to the vote. I need lots of information because Superintendent Salo, if you're gonna say you've never been in a process where you've done six months of work, I've never been on a board that is going to have to close schools and walk around and look at people and say, "Yeah, I voted for that." Because I know that's the reality of our situation. I know that. We've known that for a long time. And I'm not afraid to make the vote, but I want to make sure I have the information to do it and I can stand by it. So it's not coming down on these community members. Again, that is a small small group. We also have a board director who was at some of the meetings to begin with before he came on as a board director. So let's not create problems that aren't there. This is a good thing. If we have board members who are going and wanting to hear what people are saying, that's not intimidation. That's that's that's responsibility and accountability for our role as a board director. And again, you know, the hands are going up. I'm just speaking my truth and I I live in this community. I'm around in this community. >> Sorry, Kim. My my hand was up for before you. >> It doesn't matter. Nobody's really listening to one another. I guess that's because we have data. We have so much data. We have so much data. It all needs to come into play. And you all should have access to the data, the survey data that we gathered when we were looking for the superintendent because they had input up about where the district should go. Don't ask me how it got lumped in there, but it did. I I think it was areas of focus. And then when we went through the cuts last year, we had over a thousand residents and students and staff that gave us direction for the district, too. So all of those are components and not just this one group. And again, it's just parts of my puzzle that I need so I can stand by my boat and say, you know, we weighed all of this information and we're not weighing one group more than the other. It's where are the themes? And I think the themes are there for right sizing and closing schools, but how we get there and specifically, I still have a long way to go. And I think this community is going to have a lot of say and feedback for us. Um, so again, it's just information. It's it's knowing the volume of work that I have in front of me and we I think that was said earlier, we all have lives. So, we're all going to have to fit this into our lives somehow about how we're going to process all of this. >> We are super off track. >> I am not. I'm not off track at all. We were talking about the committees. >> No, about she the last that was not the committee. >> Yeah, we were off track for a long time. So it's not him that well that's the way you're making >> 30 committee and right we got >> and I'm not trying to restructure or reshape or break the rules. I'm addressing that sentence that was >> I understand I understand that because I need information shifted. Okay. It's not your It's not your shift. We just got shifted. >> Thank you. >> Mine was just really quick. The teams need to be updated because there's still a schoolboard member on the team. >> Does that list change? >> He hasn't been there. >> Okay. director director hotel director and then go >> then I'm not going to call on anybody else on this topic. We're going to move on. >> Okay. Unless unless you're willing not to speak. >> Well, no. I It's my turn. I waited my turn. Excuse me. I'm here. >> Oh, excuse me. I didn't mean to be porative. Take that back. But anyway, um I um we did not all agree that the board should not be involved, that the board should not be on committees. And I think that that's important to say because it was just stated that rule breaking and all of this kind of stuff like we all have this agreement. We didn't. I know for myself, I just stood down and allowed the superintendent's leadership to move forward. But I I said then when we talked about it, I wasn't okay with it. It was applying to what I have been involved in in the 20 years I've done this district. Just like the superintendent talks about her years of experience, I know mine too. And mine has been different. That's all I said. And I said at that time I thought the board should be involved and in every iteration where we had either strategic planning or any other kind of thing and certainly school closure we've had plenty of input from community and the board has been front and center. So I have stood down and stood back on all of this and I have not interfered in any of it. So for me to say now that I it would be helpful for me to go and observe I do not like to have that characterized as rule breaking because it's not it's been pointed out that we didn't take a vote on this. We did not. And so I think I know I'm trying to be and I perceive that other directors have tried to be supportive of this movement that is as has been envisioned by our superintendent. Nothing that I've said tonight is counter to that. All I've said is in addition to the process that's already ongoing, none of which I've ever tried to stop or interfered with cuz I said right from the beginning I felt the board should be involved and I'm saying that right now and I'm not even saying the same thing now. I just said if anybody want to go don't go. If anybody wants to observe we're elected officials and we can go. That's and I'm standing by that. And I also said, I don't even know if I can make any of the meetings because I'm busy, but I don't want to be, you know, like I have to sneak around to come to a meeting and there's something wrong with it. No, I have a different opinion than a couple of directors here, but there's seven of us. >> Yeah. I I wanted to just say that it was mentioned that I I was on the committee to start and I was I attended three meetings I believe before I got appointed to the board. Um I remember very vividly that during our first two meetings more than more than majority of people that were at those meetings had concerns about are we sure that the school board will welcome the information or recommendations. If not this is waste of time. And secondly, they also were very appreciative that our presence wasn't there, right? Schoolboard presence wasn't there because they felt free to be able to have dialogues and talk through difficult things without feeling like they will be victimized or community members will hear about those things as such. So being that I was there I and now I am here I do want to plead with us to say that they have two meetings left. If we don't have the information we need we have the avenues to ask those questions. Those two meetings I don't see how we are going to change at least much of our thinking process. Let's not devalue the 40 plus people that have put in the work over the last few months so that eight of us can make those decisions for them. The decisions will ultimately be for us, the seven of us to make when the time comes, but for now, please give them the chance to finish what they've started. It's two meetings and I think we can just let it go. Please, >> I would totally agree, Dr. Long. I said what I need to say. >> Thank you. All right, we're moving on. >> Okay. >> Um I am going to take the meal break talk off and we'll work that in somewhere during the professional development Dr. Operational performance oversight and organization direction. we have a lot to do yet and and I'm happy to share that. I also know we've got I also know we've got a close session to get through, but I'm happy to whip through this and I hope it clarifies some of what y'all said. So >> I think it's going to be important for us to hear. >> Thank you. Um can we go ahead? We haven't had the land acknowledgement yet. So we acknowledge Robinsdale Area School is located on the homelands of the Dakota and Ontario people. We acknowledge the history of genocide and forced assimilation of the indigenous inhabitants of this land. We honor and respect the many indigenous peoples who live on and hold sacred these lands and we stand with members of these nations to fight injustice in all its forms. We uphold the preservation of Dakota and white languages, landbased education and tribal sovereignty. We know the mission has been central to the work that the um the division team has been doing and have really um they have worked to keep uh to keep students at the center of decision making um through everything that they've done as we cocreate with our community on future of Brownville area schools. So for you to know um and again I think it's important for you to hear we are um we're on track we're on the exact timeline that we establish and serve established in December. Um we launched reimagining Ardale to help us engage our community in ways that they never have been in a really powerful question. What could students look like if we know what we know about how students learn and we were able to remove some of the barriers? What's the district our kids want being deserved? We've had more than 17,000 individual engagements to point students, staff, families, community members stepping forward to help shape these recommendations. Um I think this level of participation which is amazing kudos not just to the 46 members of the team but to the community at large shows how invested our community is in the district. Um vision team has looked at things along with data and the research and is using it to shape as we look at the vision what it brings then ultimately to you. Um so moving forward um you know this that the design the team was designed to intentionally reflect the diversity and values of the community. Um and you've seen that data before the maker of the community. The four areas that guide what the vision team is doing is that academic programming, the academics, teaching and learning and the lived experience of students. Um the second part is the outcomes and measurements which are really aligning to the portrait of a graduate. We talked about that when we did the study session here where you engaged in the same questions that we have asked the community specific to um the portrait the profile of a graduate work that'll ultimately help input from that will also help with some of the scorecard and outcome work that comes to you as well. The third piece is the enrollment assumptions. Um again um you've seen the report, you've studied the report, the team has as well and that's been part of what the conversations have been as we've looked at then that fourth part um which is the facilities and taking a look at that comprehensive facility assessment um and really exploring different uh facility um scenarios um as we move forward and think about the kind of learning experience that we want for our kids. So all of this is interconnected um and every recommendation that comes forward is these four areas are all a part of that rooted in what's best for kids aligned our finances um and shaped ultimately by our community. So just some recent work in June, the vision team took a field trip. Uh they visited six different schools to explore firsthand how some of the buildings were being used in ways that align to the research and the data that they had been looking at as we look to really re reimagine learning spaces. Um these experiences have sparked some amazing conversations with physical space uh and limits um to student learning and it also helped frame conversations about thinking about right sizing our district. If we're looking at learning spaces differently if we want to make sure there's um complex spaces in every building that's different than classrooms that have desks and 30 kids. In July shifted the focus to what's happening inside those buildings. July 10th, we kind of closed out some of the work that we've been doing on the activity or the academics. Um, and some of that work has been handed over to some of our experts in teaching and learning now as we take what the the um vision team has given us and try to help craft some language, bring it back to them as we bring it to you. Um, so that's kind of what July has looked like. Um, and then as we look to Whoops, sorry. Um, and then as you know, the district must submit a standard operating debt, the SOD plan, um, to MDE by January 31 of 2016. And as we said earlier, this isn't separate or competing processes. In fact, the vision team's recommendation feed into that plan. And again, their recommendations come to you. you are the decision makers in this and that's been very clear to the team from the beginning. Um the team's work whether it's enrollment assumptions, programming or facilities helps make um helps us make the best possible decisions that are both educationally sound and financially reasonable. Um so again as I said this has been a very integrated process. This is where you come in on this next piece. um critical phase in the work. Totally understand where you're at in this. Um but the the the ontime deliverable which we shared with you is they're coming forward with recommendations um at our study session in September. Um and then from there you enter a really tight and important 12-week window for decision- making. And like I said, we will schedule as much time as you need so that you feel confident and hopefully unified in decisions making moving forward. Um that take a look at school um consolidations or closures, programming, staffing impacts and boundary adjustments. um all of which we really do need finalized end of December into January so we can submit the SOD plan January 30 31st. So you can see um we are exactly where we've said all along that we were going to be. We haven't changed anything from this visual. um we'll be coming forward to you in September or the team will be coming forward to you and then we'll work with you and we need to start looking at some of those dates now um to for sure add study sessions in here. That's kind of what we had planned doing. So looking at, you know, we're looking actually at at Mondays. And as we look at Mondays, there's, you know, a few that again, we can work with the the chair and I can work and get some of those dates to you in advance to make sure it works with all of you. Or if there are other nights that work, we can do that. But I think that's part of what we want to do right now is do some scheduling to make sure that we've got time allocated. If we don't need it for some reason, um, we don't have to do it. But uh if we do, we'll make sure that we have that time shared with you the website information. So take a look at that and and see what um what that might connect with you. And then we also I know there was a the question about the um the budget. So we shared that information um with you earlier. I just want to point out on the budget um you know when you look at the scope of what this has entailed, we didn't hire an outside consultant in in 2022 when the board engaged in the strategic planning process. And um I would note this has been far more robust than any strategic planning process I've ever been ever done. Um, just for the consultants, and I looked this up today, just for the consultant, it was $99,500 for the strategic plan consultant. We have not paid anything for an outside consultant of this process. We designed it. I have asked a team who already has beyond full-time jobs to add this to their plates. Four of them are sitting here right now along with um Derek, our communications. Beth Temper's been a part of the planning team. Alyssa Pier as you know um Amy Mahern has um Joanna Rooney and um Molly have done amazing support. So the the the work that's gone into this in order to ensure that that the team has a process that's filled with integrity um has been beyond one of the most amazing things I've been a part of. So I couldn't be more proud of our team. I could be more proud of their community. I understand the faith that any board that's going through a process that aren't sitting on the table. And like I said, you know, Director Basset, you and I have had different experiences. I've never been a part of a strategic planning process or a facilities process like this or boundary changes where board members have sat at the table. It's always been through a community to the board and then the board ultimately to continue to take recommendations um and can make um what you can live with and that's on us to make sure you have the information you need. So hopefully some of the information that's on the website now um for your request uh will help connect some of those dots and then we'll see how the next two months go between now and then. If there's other things that might be useful to you um as we look at those recommendations, let us know. >> Thank you. the whole financial part knowing that it was 99,000 for that one two year three years ago and what we're spending now for this quality work. Amazing. >> But I think we're about $25,000. So 5,000 >> So 25%. >> Yeah. So and and 17,000 people have been engaged. Um community education helped us with uh the uh food for all of the community engagement meetings which was amazing. the flyer um you know was was the biggest expense to date. It was a cost both um the postage of it and then printing and all that was about $12,000. That was the only way we knew how to make sure every single member of this school district and community was aware and was invited to participate. Um, so there was a price tag for that and you know by looking at the numbers of people who took the survey or come to the pop-ins or were at the community engagement meetings um I would say it paid off and then the general fund has covered the rest of the supplies the food for the meetings um and some of the materials. >> So thank you. Thank you. Can you I know I'm just not recalling we've talked about what did those engagement touch points the 17,000 what was included in those? >> Yep. So the community survey there were about 5,000 people that took the survey. There was a different survey for students for staff and for families. >> I'm sorry. And that 5,000 included all of those? >> Yep. Okay. Yep. And then and I don't I don't have the breakdown. I can get it for you. I think we had almost a thousand people and I I I I'm cautious right now of um of saying the numbers but um the pockets it was a it was a pretty significant number and I'm not sure that it was exactly a thousand. >> Um again the engagement so so so we had the community survey we had all of the community engagement meetings where we had the three questions and that's what we put took you guys through those same three questions. So that was every staff. We met with every staff in every building. Um we met with uh eight community meetings in person and two virtual I think. Um and then we also asked students we had groups of students those same questions. Um additionally I met with every secondary class grade level sixth grade through 12th grade. So they're in those numbers. We had also a mentee another smaller survey that they talked they used during that as we guided conversation. So all of the secondary students had an opportunity to participate with the elementary we had the booklets and got some data from them around that. Um and then the piece that we'll be doing yet in August is some teacher focus groups. So that was 17,000 and actually Alyssa did the actual data points and it was 58,000 different data points. >> So the students when you would go and meet with them, they all were surveyed or they would speak. How did that work? How was that? >> Yeah. So those grade level meetings where we I'd be in an auditorium. There was a mentee with like seven survey questions. They would complete the survey on their phones or on their Chromebooks and then we do a a large group discussion. Um so kids would share some of their input with that. So we have that data from their survey um primarily from from all the scan. >> Okay. So they're they're if they were in attendance they're counted or you have data from them. We have how many right we have how many surveys >> um they they took >> and one last thing is that synthesized into themes that's going to so yep that's what we've been doing on our own right now and we're also knowing that the bulk of that data is so important as we report it back to the community that we're looking at some expertise around that again due to cuts we lost some internal staff so um it will be yes some of the questions we're using right now with the themes. Um, we got a grant, we got support with the profile questions. So, we've got a organization that's helping us with that data right now. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. That's a lot. That's amazing. >> Yeah. I mean, if we really talk about co-creating with our community, I this community showed up and and like I said, I I know it's going to be on your shoulders and that's on us to make sure that you have what you need um to make the the decisions once you see the recommendations and then we have to figure out those next steps after that with workshop with you. That's the time I'm done. Thank you. >> Okay, this one is a quick one. >> Is there a place on the website that talks about the cost of different things? >> No, there was an email today, two emails today >> with line item cost or no, >> I think we said what the overall cost was for the community. I think that's the the email Kristen sent. It has the contributions of community ed for food. It has what the districts paid for food for um materials and printing. And then it has the postage and came out for the survey and two different emails that came from Kristen to the board today. Okay. Here. So, if we want more details on there, we'll just email them to you. What what else would you need? >> Was there transportation involved? >> Um, we don't have that bill yet. There was for the the There was for the field trip. Yes, >> legal fees, >> legal fees or consulting fees, anything. Um, I was hazel stuff in there or I don't know the demographic side. So, I I'm not trying to recall the sheet. I'm not I don't recall seeing anything legal or >> I think that's why we're looking if we come up with other questions email. Yeah, because it's >> cuz that it was it was it was food publications, internal publications, um supplies. That was that was the bulk of what I can think of. And then Derek came, hence the second email came and said, "Hey, this got charged to my department, but this was the postcard or whatever went out of the survey." But just I believe that the demographer is something we pay for every year anyway, right? >> That's not annual. >> Not every every so many years has >> it's not we would have needed that no matter what. >> Exactly. That was >> right. That was just had one the year before. >> Yeah. >> So that's why that was kind of a redundancy. >> I did not know. >> Yeah. We had had somebody come in the year before um two guys and they had these colorcoded graphs that they had for us and okay Excel spreadsheets that were interactive. Okay. Oh yeah, this next one is a quick one. designation designated designation of the IO awaken [Music] and at the next meeting we're going to be voting for Dr. to be there. >> He'll be the proxy. I am I am the Iowa. He's my proxy. Um and that's to support uh efficiency of operations when I'm not available to grant designation um to other people. >> Can do we need to take action? >> Well, it'll be the next meeting. We just wanted to be sure everybody knew that it was coming forward. >> Can we get some information especially for people watching why what this is? why it may be important. >> Um I think in the board packet there is there's a whole sheet that talks about what why MDE and PLSB require it to make sure I mean it's really about data privacy and making sure that we've got um the Iowa authorizes the right the right access to um some of the secure systems that we have for with the department of education. >> Yeah. Make sure people are listening. Yep. Yep. Thanks. Appreciate that. >> Okay. Moving on. Thank you governance. Uh the district professional development process. Okay. Starts tomorrow night. 6 o'clock here and there is food tomorrow night at 6:00. >> 5:30. >> At 5 the food, right? But the food starts at 5:30. So the meeting can start right away at 6 o'clock. And it um this part of it is was at the suggestion of director Wong to follow to follow up on um the two people that met with us talking about the inter relationship of the school board and the students and the teachers and the learning and anyway. So that would be great. The next morning we start at 9, but please come earlier because I'm going to be cooking you pancakes. And I picked blueberries yesterday to go with the pancakes. And so >> don't let any of the Hopkins students know about that. >> Well, I was thinking, Ashley, >> but um you don't know this, but I'm fairly famous for pancakes. Would you say that? >> Yes. >> Okay. And so I am making you guys pancakes Wednesday morning. So come earlier because we need to still start our meeting at 9. And it's Dr. David Webb and he is going he's the person with decision making process where you get the information and you get reactions and you have um options and you make a decision and anyway and when it comes to lunch then we'll be just picking our options. Oh no you never mind then we're good. Okay. So be there or be square. Don't be square. Just be there. Okay. All right. Move on. uh superintendent relations the annual review of superintendent of board communication. Okay, this is a document that is not unfamiliar to us. It is who to contact and when we have it in our packets, right? >> Yep. Anybody have any questions? Any concerns about that? The one thing that I questioned when we were meeting was about always contact the superintendent since that superintendent is the only one of the staff that as board members we contact. So I said well what if my computer's having problems and the answer is we still go through the superintendent. We can copy like Joel on it but it always needs to go to the superintendent. And then the superintendent follows through with Joel just yes, please take care of this with the superendent. But always always the superintendent is in the loop and if you want anything done, it always is through the superintendent. And then also uh by email, I'm the official responder. It's got all of the rules. I'm not going to read it to you. You're very good readers. Well, this we wanted to bring back. So, in my contract, it says annually um that we need to to talk about communication between superintendent and the board. So, I thought the starting point for that and I wanted to abide by the the contract um was to you to share again what we had in place last year and then if not tonight soon to talk about how it work, what didn't work, what does work as we move forward um to make sure that we've got the best communication. um moving forward. >> Okay. Uh Dr. I see your hand is up. >> Yeah. Um so I just make sure and I kind of read through that before but um actually um individuals may send a specific email to a director and directors may respond. Um I I think it's great to have this protocol and all these you know things that you've um established here because I think I don't want to speak out of term but I think pretty much everybody follows that quite frankly you know so having it reiterated is not a problem. However I do think that you know people directors have direct relationships with many people across the district and if you get there's no bar against a director responding to a constituent. No, I think the pro and so am I. >> Yeah, I think what what I would what I would always ask, right? And I don't think you'll talk to anybody who would say this, you know, I think that as people come to you with concerns, I think it's always great to to try to help them and remind them of the chain of command if it's, you know, they've got a concern. And I know you know that, right? I think the other thing is if there's information that that you don't have, you could do a couple things. You could either, you know, include me in an email and just say, "Hey, I was in a conversation with so and so and we're wondering about X, Y, and Z. Can you please share that with Yep." Yep. So, I think that's I think that's how we want to get I just I want to be sure you have the information you need as you're talking to >> but I guess the point I was making is that I I that's very appropriate. makes a whole lot of sense. But I think that it's should be clear to the community and they already know that because they already do it. Uh individuals in the community do send emails to specific directors from time to time and there's nothing wrong with that. There are constituents and um and so I just make and and often I will ask them if it's something sensitive, do you I'm gonna let you know I'm going to share this with the superintendent. Is that okay with you? I mean so no surprises. I'm I'm not, you know, shouldn't be any surprises either way. >> Then the other thing in there where it says if you're emailing a staff member, include the superintendent and I was like, oh, sometimes I just like to say I went to the play and I just really enjoyed the way that you directed it. And I thought, yes, that's good to include the superintendent on also because then the teacher gets the recognition from me and and the superintendent said, so that makes sense. At first I was like, well, I just want to let her know that she did such a great job. But that's it. Let her know. And also by letting the superintendent know, that's even better. So that's just another part of that. >> Well, then we'll try that and just send me to Joel. Joel, this this laptop's not working. So >> include her on I'll include her on it. Okay. Any other questions on that? >> Super. Where's my agenda? Moving on. >> So the other thing on here is again it says in my contract that on August, no later than August 1st of 2014. and I think annually after that 2024 and then annually after that um something about my my goals. So right this is the time of year as I'm closing the door with the people that I supervise on the year and then listen to them about what they believe their goals are. I and then I might insert or have ideas or we do it together. I want to do the same same with you um is to um I've obviously reflected on the evaluation process. I know the heavy lifting that we've engaged in and I know what's in front of me as a superintendent, our team and all of you into to the next year. Um, so I want to just share some focus areas with you and then happy to get input that you have. Barb shared this with me um that she said she's sharing with districts now as as they're thinking about what's most important. She said uh there's high priorities, these are important. There's higher priorities. These are even more important. And then there's the highest priority. These are most important and what the superintendent's performance expectations should be based on. Um I'm still responsible for everything else, but the highest priorities should set performance expectations. So I think, you know, as I reflect on the last year's evaluation, um I think I had nine different elements. I think moving into next year it makes sense to have fewer than that. Um and I would say probably the four areas right now that I think are going to be most important and then you may have agree or disagree or have other things that you want me to consider or have in my goals. um the workaround that we've been talking about um the reimagine vision 2030 work um what it will mean to take that team's work to you and work with you um on ultimately you determining uh decisions and and what it is the direction that that you'll approve going forward. um whether that means school closures, boundary changes, facility needs, preparing for a bond, whatever that is, we have huge work. So I believe somewhere in there um you know that's going to be a bulk of time the entire year into probably the next couple of years. Community engagement, communication will be a huge part of that and continuing to to work with our community on that. I think the second area that we've also interconnected is creating and implementing the statuto operating debt plan. Um I think a third area and it just continues to be very clear to me every day is as I look at a very new team um how do I ensure that I am supporting them to be high functioning creating systems of support clarity and efficiency and ultimately getting improved results and moving the system forward. we continue to uncover daily systems that aren't where they need to be. And so, and in every area, we have a whole lot of work to do, and it's on me to provide the support uh to our team that needs to do that. Um, and then lastly, you know, you approved in May the district priority work based on the strategic plan. Obviously, that's always going to be a part of of what we're doing. So I say those are big goal areas and happy to hear uh any input suggestions that you have as well. >> Um homes I was just going to see if we can continue this conversation. We will have to because this is a big topic that deserves focus and we used to say we were done at 10 but I to give give you the focus and feedback I would appreciate doing it on a different evening. >> Yep. Fine that I didn't want it to come back on me that I didn't have a conversation with y'all before August 1st. So, I want to make sure that I get it done and that I'm very clear from this board um what those goals are, what those deliverables are moving forward. So, fine. It's fine. >> Okay. And I would agree. Oh, you go ahead first. >> Thank you. >> Uh well, I was just going to address you and say, chair, when can we have a time that the board talks about uh the goals that we would like to see, too? I see it as a partnership and there's nothing that's on the super. Thank you for that. There's nothing on your list that I don't think, you know, it's all a great idea. So, I'm not opposed to any of that. So, >> but excuse me. >> I thought you were done. Sorry, I wasn't. Um, we just did the superintendent evaluation. I think a lot of good feedback came was discussed during that process. I would like a time for the board to look at that and determine collectively if there's some areas of focus that we think are important. That's a for discussion and which it's married to the superintendent's input always. I the super has always had a majority of the input into whatever we settle as elements whatever we settle as go all of those things is always a process. So I never would want to interfere with that. But also, it's always been just as important that the board talks about things in the goals, you know, so that we can land in a good place. That's historically been the way we've done it. In fact, the board has always had some couple of director, I think three directors were here when we had a conversation about it and selected focus areas and those kinds of things for previous superintendent. So, it's not new. >> Um, it's not new to you. It is to me. No, no. It's and and I think that's right. Part of my learning is that's the way that you have done it here. I've never had >> and that's okay. That's why I directed my comments to our chair and not to you. >> Yeah. >> Uh and so in fact, I said everything that you've said, there's nothing I would argue with. So that's done. I mean, you know, but but a conversation will come back together at a future time. And I think >> Director Holmes asked for some further conversation down the road. But I think that process that the board did in the past which the board looked at the elements and things and so in fact you look at them too and if they're the same or different um because what are those things but what I heard you say is that there are nine you'd like there to be fewer you know you don't have to say any more than that to me now but if you look at those and tweet and identify what they are I want to make sure that we end up at a good place next year and that um that we all feel like that we had our input to what we're looking at and looking for cuz historically that is what I'm used to and that's what we've always done. We've done it year after year after year after year and it's based on MSBA. We take those elements, we're not going to come up with anything crazy and new. We take those elements and we identify which ones we think are important and we marry that information together. >> How would you feel about if she made the draft of her goals and then >> give them to us? >> Pardon me? >> And give them to us. I hope you know that'd be fine, >> right? And then kind of lining them up with the MSBA stuff so that we don't have to like word Smith and stuff and then we get to discuss and have him superintendent would be would be vital. So I mean she could draft it all. >> Well, whatever she drafts is her draft of whatever she's thinking and then the board has its own work. That's a separate thing for us to look at the elements ourselves and recommend among ourselves if there's some ones we think are important. That's artwork. >> Wasn't >> Oh, okay. Well, I'm just Well, I was not opposed to what she said in the beginning. I mean, I you know, did everything I said sound like I didn't was opposed to what you were saying? >> Well, I need interpretation. >> So, my phone's telling me my bedtime was ago. >> Mine too. >> Dr. Um, I just want to emphasize to another session. I don't know where are we on the 22nd. So, it's probably not going to happen before August one. So, I acknowledge, thank you for staying the contract piece, but it needs to happen sooner rather than later. So, because that's what we all agreed upon after the evaluation is that we were going to come together as a board and talk. >> So, I guess I'm putting that on the agenda team to get that scheduled. >> Good. >> Okay. Thank you. Okay. Did you see it in your packet? >> This is what's going to come before us at our next meeting. We had asked for input and so I I want to credit can I credit Beth Beth Grace title probably since we're not all. >> Okay. Thank you. Uh she director. >> Yep. >> Achievement integration. achievement and integration. Thank you. Um if you wrote if you read it, I think it's very well written and there's two parts to it. The first part is that we um support and authorize a regular reading of a land acknowledgement statement at schoolboard meetings by a board director and at other appropriate district events. And the other one is about the tribal flags that Robindale supports the public display of the flags of the 11 federally recognized tribal relations in Minnesota at the education service center boardroom with the goal of implementation beginning August 18th and contingent on the approval August 4th. So we'll vote on this August 4th. They'll figure out how to place the flags and then um they will be displayed on the 18th do. >> Please tell me now if you have a problem with voting posit affirmative on this. There any qualms or any questions? Get them out now. >> Dr. If I'm at a event, but I just want to be at the event as a community person, do I have to land an acknowledgement if it's a part of that event? >> I can't hear you. >> No address. >> No, no, no. Someone will you do not have >> I was just reading that that last one where it says or at >> district events. >> Okay, we'll get that fixed. >> Yeah, we'll get that fixed. It will be read at events usually, but it won't be read by one of us >> unless we're invited. >> I I will agree to that. >> We're invited to read it, >> but every community event. >> Yes. >> No, that is not the that is not the intent. So that this will probably be tweaked a little bit before the next meeting. >> I just don't want to show up at the ice cream social and then they're like, "Oh, you're here." So not >> Thank goodness he's going to read this important statement. >> No, we'll get that. Thank you. Not that I'm opposed to reading it, but >> but I know you'd rather >> I'd rather whoever was originally listening. >> Yeah. >> Sure. >> Okay. And then we had talked about inviting people from Apac. >> So would they be invited to the vote or would they be invited to the actual when it's first >> the flag or the which >> I'm asking? >> Well, would you either one or both? >> Are you putting We can just let APAC know this is we're planning on voting on this date and the contingent that I'm being approved. >> It starts the 18th. We'll let them know vote and then they can just make it on choice. I can do that. We can do that. >> Great. Wonderful. Right on. >> All right. We have a bunch already. Yes. Well, I just think that um that's a it's a it's a very important uh statement and it's coming from our board and I think our board chair should just read it or our board chair or a director but I think it should be the board chair uh you the board chair manages and facilitates all our boarding the whole meeting. >> I'm fine with that. I'm a director. I know. But I just saying I just ask for that language and then the board director, you know, that that's all I'm saying and then we can just >> Well, I know 287 they have uh they have the mission statement read by individual board members and it rotates around the room. People are picked out to read it and I think the board involvement uh in this type of a proclamation is is goes a long way. I I would just disagree that it should always be the board chair that by passing it around the room that might mean once and a half times a year you would read it. >> Let's start with baby steps. I'll start with reading it. See? >> Okay. >> Director I am a board director so fine. >> We're going to go with baby steps. >> Okay. Next thing in a moment of weakness we agreed to do a quiz bowl with students. Awesome. >> Technically, director Long brought it up. Brought it up. It's on her, but I followed through. >> I'm going to do phone a friend while we do it. >> Exactly. >> Anyway, Google. >> I talked with Representative Fber. These are high school students. These are not middle school students. So, it's not Are you smarter than a sixth grader? This is high school students. One of them was invited to compete at a national level. And I said, "How can we prepare for this?" And he said, "Oh, it's just common knowledge stuff." I said, "Great." So, they're not available in August, but they are available as like a kickoff in before one of our September meetings. >> What does that entail >> and public embarrassment [Laughter] ourselves? >> Okay, let's just choose one. >> We're going to have to have real board teamwork here. Why are we doing it with all these dates that are coming up? >> This is be This is going to be before >> 10 minutes. >> It'll be like a 5:00 before. >> Okay, we'll do it like for a h not optional half an hour like at 5:00. So, I will be emailing you guys and you're going to let me know which of the two meetings works best for you or if it doesn't matter for a 5:00 before one of our September meetings because we made the commitment and we are not backing down on that. >> I think we can decide now because they >> and 2023 is 2010 September, right? >> No, not at 5:00 though. >> This is before the board meeting. We're not going to This is not We can make it optional. >> Okay. >> We don't need anybody to feel >> Thank you. >> You can't make it work. >> Oh my goodness. >> I'm watching Celebrity Jeopardy. So, I'm ready. >> I have Google. >> I have Google. Are we okay? >> Future agenda topics. >> Never mind. Do we have anything that we have to have to talk about? >> No. >> All right. Time to conclude the session. Thank you very much everybody. We'll finish another time. Now we have a close