It's Monday, July 13th, and we have a quorum. So, I will call this meeting to order. First order of business is agenda approval. Do I have a motion to approve the agenda for tonight's board meeting? >> So moved. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> We'll vote to approve our agenda. All those in favor say I. >> Any opposed. Tonight's agenda is approved. Uh this month we do not have an excellence in action, but that is not because there's not excellence happening. Uh so I will take a moment instead of that to welcome our newest cabinet member. We have director Freylic who is here as our new director of special education. Welcome. All right, moving on uh is hearing from members of the public and we have no members here to speak to us this evening. So, next up will be our consent agenda. Is there anything anyone would like to remove from the consent agenda? >> Um, Chair Gabler. >> Yes. >> I apologize. I didn't mention this earlier, but I was wondering if we could remove the e-learning days from the consent agenda. >> Sure. So, uh, do, um, is there a motion to remove the e-learning days from the consent agenda? >> So, moved. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> We'll now vote by roll call to remove the consent or to remove the e-learning days from the consent agenda. >> Arum, >> I. >> Barry, >> I. Alenberg >> I >> Gabler I >> man >> I >> and Bman >> I >> all right the e-learning day is removed from the consent agenda um we will come back to that right >> okay um so then we will vote to approve the remainder of the consent agenda is there a motion to approve the consent agenda without the e-learning day >> so moved >> do I have a second >> second >> all Those in favor of approving the consent agenda without the e-learning day, say I. >> I. >> Anyone opposed? The consent agenda has been approved. And now I believe I turn it back over to you, Director Alenberg. >> Um, have a motion to approve the e-learning days. >> Okay. Did you want to >> We have to do a motion to approve. Sorry, Karen. >> No, that's okay. There is there a motion to approve the e-learning days? >> So move. >> Is there a second? >> Second. Director Man and Director Ellenberg. All right, Director Ellenberg. >> The only reason I pulled this off and again I apologize I was did not bring this up earlier is um I wanted to make sure and Superintendent Bitman I was hoping that you could highlight um because e-learning days did shift um I think it was maybe two years ago where we don't automatically go to e-learning days. I was hoping you could just reinforce for the community um how these work in like 10 seconds and that's I just want to make sure we're reinforcing how the e-learning days are working. So, >> Madam Chair, member Ellenburgg, there's been a lot of different things happening with e-learning over the last several years, particularly with uh the recent statute changes and all that happened throughout COVID. This particular plan just involves days that are at-home learning days specific to inclement weather. So these are very specific to that need. Uh this does not have to do with online learning type programs. So this is a partnership between uh the union teaching and learning the school district etc that we partner. The documentation that you have available uh has information about frequently asked questions as well as how each of these days work and it also um begins on the fourth day. So there'll be information specific that people will want to to look at in that particular situation. It's where parents also continue to have information about during those days how their students are getting learning and interaction with both teachers. >> Thank you. I just wanted to highlight that this was part of that was it. Thank you. >> Perfect. Thank you. All right. Uh can I get a motion to a >> No, we already approved that. Uh we will now vote to approve the e-learning day. Um all those in favor of voting for the e-learning day say I. >> I. I. >> Any opposed? >> All right. The e-learning day agenda item has been approved. You made me go off script. That's good. That's good for me. All right. Uh, our first item up for discussion this evening is the schoolboard goals for the 2026 2027 schoolboard year and or school year and uh board members what you have before you you've had a chance to discuss, review, and make changes at our June retreat. The only changes that were captured uh in our discussion at the end of June was around goal three. And uh what you'll see in the edited goals is just the feedback from board members to better embed the five initiatives from last year's goals into that kind of broader uh goal of the five initiatives which were a priority as well as the priority that's been identified of looking at technology and AI in our school system. So I wanted to draw that to your attention. um please make sure that it captures the discussion that you remember from June. And then for the public, the board goals that you see in the board packet were designed based on feedback from all seven board members as well as areas of focus from our beginning and end of the year board evaluations as well as district priorities that the board and Dr. Bitman had identified. So board members, I'll open this up to any questions, comments, or suggestions that you have about the revised goals. Okay, great. Then these will come forward for approval at our August meeting. Thank you. Next item is the superintendent goals. So I'll turn it over to Dr. Bitman. >> Madam Chair, members of the board, those and the public. Uh these two, I think you summarized it well for the goals. The superintendent goals similarly have gone through a process. Board members, you have also seen this and had an opportunity to talk about them in the work session. You will not see significant changes. Uh but there was feedback incorporated around a number of things particularly in goal five related to technology and AI. We will we have identified that those will be separate processes and we're thoughtful about that. There were some language changes to align. The board did talk about the immense number of goals and the amount of a heavy lift that that will that will take on all of us and we agreed that we would continue to work collaboratively and do so with grace just recognizing that each of these particular goals are significant. Um and so I appreciate the feedback and it has been incorporated. With that I'd be happy to take any questions. All right, seeing no no questions, then with that we'll be up for approval at the August meeting as well. Moving on to our last discussion item this evening, we have our policy review of policies 208,50, 503, 520, 601, 616, and 626. And I will turn it over to policy chair director Alenberg. Um, thank you, Chair Gabler. Um, this month we had six policies that we reviewed. Um, first I'm going to um, policy 208. The board discussed this at a work session prior to this evening and it's um, the board's policy for our process for development and adoption of policies. The change to this is recommended by um MSBA um their model policy and what it really gives is discretion or gives the administration the ability to make technical changes um without coming to the board and by technical changes it specifies if there's a grammar error such as um adding a period um and really just gives that clarity that that is allowed. Um the other additional change is um as opposed to specifying in the policy um the ex the actual year and what series of policies are going to be re reviewed during that year um we removed um the year so it was more evergreen um but it still has the same cadence to it. So those were the only changes to this specific policy. Are there questions or concerns about this policy? Okay. Um, we're gonna go a little bit out of order, but I actually strategized tonight to not make people go up and down. Um, so unless you want your steps, um, policies 503 and 626 um, Assistant Superintendent Swinson um, worked with the board on. And so 503 is student attendance and there weren't a lot of changes to this um but provides a little bit more clarity around um some of the definitions and I'll turn it over to Assistant Superintendent Swinson. >> Yeah, thank you very much. Excuse me. Uh very minor uh policy changes to 503. The first being um uh it it spells out more precisely what a habitual truent is. Um and then um you'll notice that instead of uh referencing the student rights and responsibilities handbook, it now references our own handbooks that will hopefully be approved this evening by you all. Um and then finally, there was uh an expansion of the religious exemption to include American Indian cultural practice observance or ceremony um as a qualifying exempt absence as well. Beyond that, you may recall last year this policy went through pretty pretty significant um uh modifications and so the rest of the policy remains largely intact. >> Are there questions or comments about this? Chair Gabler. >> Yes. under habitual truent. The one there's a sentence in there that says also a habitual truent is a child who is 17 years of age who is absent from attendance at school. And then it kind of restates what was said above. Is there something magical about why we call out 17 year olds? because the first sentence says between the ages of 12 and 18. >> I would need to get back back to you on that. I'm not exactly sure. Okay. Um about that, but I can get I can follow up with you on that particular question. >> Okay. >> Because you're you're right. There is >> a good question. It does look redundant. >> It's straight from policy too. >> Okay. >> Or I mean I'm sorry from the uh red line. >> Yeah. Okay. Great. Thank you. It was more of a curiosity and just like since we had crossed off up above under the age of 17 and made it to 18. >> I I will circle back with you about it. It's a good question. >> Thank you. >> Oh, one other thing. Uh the title. So, will 2024 come off? >> Yes. >> Okay. two um very minor additions uh that will be added at the bottom are just statute references. Uh 260C.201 and 12835 are going to be added as well. So you'll see that when it comes around next time. >> We'll check that um question. Oh, I apologize. >> I can speak specifically Madam Chair, in terms of your question regarding the 17 years old, I'm wondering if it's specific to when the compulsory age of education changed and that a 17year-old um a 17-year-old does not I'd have to look back at the compulsory law does not has different rules because they don't necessarily need to be in school. But as we talked about before, I will I will look to that statute and policy. Again, I'm just wondering if it was a a statutory change. I think if I'm not I think what Karen was asking is it seems to be the language seems to be redundant between the two sentences >> that we say a habitual truent is at least 12 and less than 18 who's absent and then it says again also a habitual truent is >> 17 who is absent. So making sure we're not those sentences are actually different and not saying the same thing. Thank you for that clarification. >> And or do we need to make sure that we um if we do do need both sentences, should both sentences say at least 12 years old and less than 18 to make sure we're consistent. >> I will find that out. >> Thank you. >> Yep. >> Does that answer everyone's questions? Okay. Um the next one um that um assistant superintendent Swinson um worked with us on was policy 626 which is about independent provider programs. And for the board or anyone else that doesn't know, we have a lot of um or some activities such as ultimate frisbee uh and rugby that are um provided through independent providers and not through our athletic departments. So, the changes to this policy really are trying to strengthen um accountability um for our independent providers while still allowing broadest access as possible. So, that's what the changes in here are. Um and Assistant Superintendent Swinson, if you'd like to walk through this, any specific changes, that would be great. >> Thank you. Um this was actually a really good exercise in policy development. Um, this policy originally came to the committee several months ago and we had a good discussion about about our practices and procedures that f largely fall outside of the policy and uh so it was good learning for me personally um because what I learned is that we do have a strong practice in place already for our independent providers including forms that are signed including uh insurance certification um including background checks, all of those types of things. Um and at the same time, we were recommending that the appendix, both appendices be removed or struck from the policy because those forms actually already exist um on the high school website. It's what independent providers already fill out. At the same time um we took the opportunity to strengthen our process. So to um there we are are just in the final stages of um an independent provider agreement that has been drawn up by our legal council. And we're also redoing the student and family form that goes along with independent providers too to make it very clear about our role um the district's role in indep independent pro uh providers um which is basically we are completely separate um from them and we want to make sure that the language that we use is really clear and that there are no questions about what our role is uh with independent providers. And so those forms once completed and that should be relatively soon will actually uh be administered by the high school administration with each independent provider moving forward and it will actually strengthen our pro our uh position and our protection as a school district too. >> I had one quick question. Um I noticed that the last time this was revised was in 2021. Is this one of those particular policies that is not reviewed more than every couple years kind of situation? >> Correct. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Can I just ask um can you check if um the independent providers insurance piece of it specifically extends to like the younger ages. Um, so it's not limited to 10th through 12th or whatever age groups it is cuz remember when we were at the capital there was talk about how some of the coverages for the high school didn't extend to nth graders and whatnot. So it'd be good to kind of make sure that the independent if they haven't for younger ages too. >> Well and some of those are even taking middle schoolers. Correct. You like our mountain bike. >> The Yes, I will definitely do that. Um, and there is part of the policy that specifically addresses um, seventh and eighth grade students and how they would fall outside of this. Um, so it's only open to 9th through 12. >> Okay. >> Um, but I will I will find that out specifically. Thanks. >> Great. Um, thank you. Um, next, um, we have policies 520, 601, and 616. And our director of teaching and learning, Jod D. St. Hubert, worked with the board on these. Um, so we can start with, um, policy 520, which is student surveys. Um this has quite a few changes in it. Um and it looks a little daunting. Um I will say that this for some reason our Edina's policy 520 on student surveys has never matched MSBAs ever. Um I don't know why and we had a long discussion about why or why not and none of us could come up with a rationale. Um so what you're seeing here is the recommended model policy for student surveys um according to MSBA. Um and that's where all of this language comes from. Um which is to protect both students and the school district. Um I will then turn it over to um you director Date Hubert um if you want to add any additional context to the any of the specifics in here. >> Okay. Thank you, Director Alenberg, and good evening, Chair Gibbler, Superintendent Bitman, board members. Um, you did a great job explaining the major additions to this. Um, the policy, um, really has not had that section at the very end that was added. Um, in looking at other school districts, um, to see how they have that content in their policies, um, most have it add, and I looked at like five, so I want to be careful to preface that. um most had it added just as is in matches schoolboard or MSBA policy now. So that was a really good leadin to the major conversation and changes here. Um the other part that I just want to pull out is that because of that ad we added the definition section which is section three and so those definitions um were added considering that it would be helpful to have those in place with the larger AD in the the MSBA portion that we added. And then there was something that um was uh Paulie brought to our attention today and just some wording that we're happy we're in discussion at because in section five um 5A it states um in the first sentence. So it states all instructional material materials dot dot dot dot um or other supplementary materials which which will be used in connection with any survey analysis or evaluation. And then we are um recommending now even though it's not um noted in this disc in the markups right now but when we bring it back for discussion that we note this that that matches language in B which is immediately after so that we don't we have um surveys analysis or evaluation where we currently only have survey um so just imagine more detail of the language as we look at that policy um and those were the highlights that I I would only add are there questions or things that we should think about? >> And just to reiterate what director D Huber said, this um as written here um matches and makes us more in line with our peer districts. If you check Minnotonka Weisetta, this is how their policy reads. So we were actually um just had a really different policy. Chair Gabler that is helpful. Um, and I'm wondering, so when I read this, I felt like it read really redundant, >> like it just kept restating the same thing. So that was my comment, but I feel like knowing that >> now you've said, "Yep, that's the way like all the policy wonks have said it should read." I'm like, "Okay, well then then I'm don't need to die on that hill." >> We talked a lot about I I mean I was I was like, "But why why does it say this? Why does and it was like >> right >> we were like do we dissect it or do we just copy and paste what MSBA and their legal team recommends >> and that kind of answers my other question which was why guardians was crossed off because in so much of our policy approach our style guide is that we do approach it that way because it's more inclusive so then to see it but this makes sense that knowing that the policy committee has heavily vetted this and I I can live with that I that makes sense. And we did put um parent in the definition. >> Yeah. >> Right. So that's a great question. >> Just so you know, I also asked that question. So I'm like >> I I was like but why but why doesn't it say guardian? All our other policies say guardian and it's like the specific federal. We were like we need to keep it consistent with MSBA policy and this is how the federal law reads and begrudgingly I was like okay we can do what the law says. So yes. Well, and I appreciate your comment around protection for our students, right? So, the tighter we stay aligned with that, the more protection we have for our students. >> So, I only have a it's a question, but not actually about the policy. Um, it's amazing how much you can learn by by reading things that you don't know anything about and then all the questions that come up to your mind. The one question after I read all this after reading this very long document was how often are students surveys actually conducted to where this policy would need to be adhered to in its administration. >> Not often. >> Okay. >> I had the same like because often when we're reviewing policy as um Mr. Swinson referred to even right like we're trying to match with practice um but not not often at all. And I mean the district has it even had a policy of or a need to have to do certain surveys and things. I mean I get the third party part which is a whole another ball of wax but just from a school district standpoint or even a building standpoint we don't really deploy or employ I should say surveys on of this nature on a regular basis do we >> of this nature I think is the important part right when we're talking about marketing or giving that information to other stakeholder groups. No. Um we might be definitely surveys happen within a classroom where students might even be serving each other surveying each other to get data for a project um or a teacher might be doing an informal survey but not to share that information outside of our instruction and what we need for ourselves. >> Thank you for clarifying that because I think that's really the part that when I just as a parent I was like really how long is how often is this happening would this be allowed? Why would we allow that to begin with? Why would we want to participate with something like that? it doesn't make didn't make a whole lot of sense to me which is why then having a very detailed MSBA standard policy is there to help protect if you for whatever reason decide to do that you've got to follow the law >> it almost makes me think the title should be you know if I was MSBA change that because there are a lot of surveys Panorama is a survey and so when you look at students survey that's where my head went to and then you start reading and you're like this is way beyond >> that kind of things those kind of things >> good point >> well I was going to say exactly that. I think what this is referring to um for example the Minnesota State student health survey that's exactly the type of >> personal student information and we follow this policy which is informing parents that this data is going to be collected if they choose to participate or they can opt out. So there are times that this we do have this, but to the level of some of this, I mean, I can't even think of a time, but I think it is it benefits us to have this in here to protect our students and to protect our district. >> Absolutely. And that's why that's why I brought it up in my question. It's just that not something that I normally have thought about and even experienced in my time on the board or even as a parent, which sort of surprised me. but then listening to it, reading it, thinking about it. This is why we have policies in order to deal with those things if and when they do come up. So, I appreciate all the work. Thank you. >> Anything else on this policy? Um, the next one is policy 601, which luckily I think we don't have a lot of changes or updates to this policy. Um, which is educational competencies, academic standards, instructional curriculum. Um, there's one change around the definition of curriculum. >> Yeah. Um just looking at what we formally had there. Um wanted to adjust that definition to reflect um what we do refer to when we're talking about curriculum. Um and you're right, there are very few other changes throughout that policy. So, um, the only other there were a couple minor changes to the wording throughout the rest of the document, making sure that we had the the couple minor edits and then I would say that the other larger edits were done in the appendex um, where we referred to the talent development framework and we just really wanted to make sure that that wording and that language was matching the language that we've been consistently using this year during our focus area reviews um, working with our parent committees and lots stakeholder groups just trying to get tighter and more clear on how we communicate what talent development is. So we're just again trying to be consistent and so those updates came to reflect that consistency >> question chair Gabler. I'm reluctant to ask this question. Um so that talent development paragraph >> is okay. Mhm. >> Um I wonder if the last sentence in the paragraph that's crossed out. Mhm. I was reading that blue paragraph with the idea of like I'm an outsider like I don't know what I've seen as a board member in this work and I was like what is there what are they trying to say here >> and that last and I thought well let me try to be solutionoriented and so even adding by fostering talent development eina ensures that each and every student has the opportunity to grow at accelerated rates >> it felt like it landed a little bit clearer because I'm the blue paragraph The chart actually does a fantastic job, >> but without the chart, I read that paragraph and I'm like, what do they stand for? >> Okay, that's good. >> Like it sounds like we're saying everybody swims, everybody wins. >> Yeah. So, um, back to that. >> Yes. So, that's just as we tighten that and get better at what our elevators P Yes. pitch is. That was just something, but again, >> when it comes to the policy, if that's what we've been using, then that's what we've been using. But that was my feedback on that. >> I think it's great feedback and we certainly can take that last sentence if that, you know, is a simple solution. Um, and it's a good reminder of like what audience um we're writing for. So that's that's important. So >> yeah, it's good. Thank you. >> Okay. Um we're going to move on to policy 616 which is school district system accountability. Um, and this is another policy that we had a lot of discussion on. And um, before I turn it over to director D St. Hubert, policy 616 is a state required policy, which was the world's best workforce policy has now evolved into the CACR committee policy. Um, and the the stuff that has been crossed out actually mirrors MSBA policy um, but does not mirror Edina public schools process of goal setting. So, we had a long we were we had a long discussion about how do we stay true to the intent of the policy and what we do. And this is how basically what you're seeing here is trying to honor the fact that we're required to have this school district system accountability policy. We also have a goal setting policy. And after probably an hour discussion, we we ended up with what we have right here. And Superintendent Bitman, you look like you have additional >> context you'd like to add. >> I'm happy to do it. So, uh, Director D. St. Hubert and I were the ones who work collaboratively on this behind the scenes and then I was part of the discussion with the policy committee as well. So, I'm happy to take that and then certainly director D. St. Hubert, if there's things to add, uh, please do so. chair or excuse me, director Alenberg did a great job of summarizing this and we recognize that while this originally came from the world's best workforce, things have changed. Nina has a robust system in place that they use their strategic plan, they use their data metrics, they use the goals that they make through CSI and a number of other areas and so the committee really did want to broaden that. The only other so this aligns exactly as uh director Allenberg had spoke to. The only other things were primarily cleanup with the exception of the language around the committee. While the district uh bless you over time has worked diligently to include a robust and comprehensive group of individuals that reflect the reflect the community. There have been times over the years where people have opted out or chosen not to be part of etc. And so we had a robust conversation around the word will and or shall. And so we wanted to be thoughtful about uh what's in there. So basically the committee at the end of the the conversation decided to rely on MDE information as well as as well as practices that we've had and to keep the language which is consistent with our peer districts as well to indicate that we'll keep the information that says we'll reflect the diversity of the community but we will not be prescriptive in who needs to be part of that. While we still have that in place and that will be a goal we just won't have that prescription in the policy itself. Other than that, it was primarily cleanup. And again, thankful for the robust conversation. With that, I would be happy to take any questions or if Director Dain Hubert has anything to add, she's welcome to do so. Director Burman, >> the only question I have about that would be how are we going to um evaluate or or recognize even though we're not explicitly calling out what diversity needs to include in for the committee. How are we going to kind of check some balances to make sure that we are in ensuring enough voices of of diversity across so many different factors are actually effectively being heard. This will be part of the report that that we bring to the uh bring to the board for conversation when they're considering the recommendations as well as included in the report to the Department of Education. >> Great. Thank you very much. Are there other questions about this policy? Okay, thank you. That is all for the policy committee discussion items. >> Thank you, policy committee and administrators that work on this. This is a heavy lift and it's appreciated. All right, we are moving on to the action item of our meeting. Do I have a motion to approve the student handbooks for 2026 2027? >> So moved. >> Is there a second? Second, >> I welcome Assistant Superintendent Nate Swenson up to discuss these handbooks with us. And while he's making his way up, I do want to thank him on behalf of the board in the district. This has been a a new initiative or a revamped initiative, and he and his team have worked extremely hard to uh get these in a good place for the district. So, thank you. >> Yeah. Thank you, Madam Chair, members of the board, Dr. Bitman. um tonight and you've all had now multiple opportunities to review and provide feedback on the student handbooks. Um we're really just looking for the handbooks to uh be approved um and that we get into a rhythm of doing that on an annual basis moving forward. With that, I'm wondering if anybody has any questions about the handbooks yet. All right. Thank you. Uh we will now vote. All those in favor of approving the recommended student handbooks for 2627 say I. >> Any opposed? >> The board has approved the student handbooks for 2627. >> Thank you very much. >> Do I have a motion to approve the long-term facilities maintenance plan for fiscal years 2028 to 2037? >> So moved. >> Is there a second? Second. >> I welcome Director of Finance and Operations Mer Woodard up to talk to us about this item. >> Good evening, Madam Chair, members of the school board. Um so the school board has seen this um in various forms. Um on a couple of different occasions um the first of which was I believe at the April work session. um once again at the May work session and ultimately today we're going to have you approve the um actual financial plan which will actually fund projects beginning with fiscal year 2028 um and then the rest of the nine years of the 10-year plan are also established within that plan. It's kind of a rolling plan that we um reapprove each year. There haven't been any significant changes to the plans. There might be a few projects here or there that either get delayed or moved forward. Um, however, the basis and the kind of the chassis of the plan is unchanged from the prior year. Um, in terms of the the financial figures, we're looking at an increase from the current year's levy of 18,488,184. So, that's for fiscal year 2027. And what is an uh ahead of you tonight is for 20,244,644. So, that's a an increase of roughly $1.75 million. Um, which is almost directly attributed to the timing of principal and interest payments against long-term facilities maintenance bonds that were issued in prior years. We do offset that increase for our taxpayers by reducing the amount that we levy on a pay as you go basis. Overall, the tax rate that is applied um to our capital plan is going to be about 25.5% versus the current year's levy of 25.36%. So, a marginal increase and you can see that depicted graphically in your board packets. There's a page which has a series of bar graphs which illustrate what our tax rate is for our various capital levies and you'll see that for the um next three to five years it's relatively flat with um some really modest increases and then a pretty significant falloff in the outer years um which will allow for this board and future boards to consider additional um facilities enhancements throughout the district. With that, the recommended action is before you. Happy to answer any questions. >> Director Bman, >> the only question I have regarding LFTM or LTFM, excuse me, um is that given the the aging of our infrastructure and our we are a fairly robust, excellent but not new um in terms of facilities. Do we anticipate that our overall cost basis of maintaining our facilities over the next 10 20 years is going to continually grow? So even though we've been able to manage where we are at this time, do we see any need where the demand on what our facilities are going to require for maintenance the costs continue to rise from that will we see a significant increase over time just to keep pace? >> Yeah, that's a great question. I think that over time, actually in the near term anyway, I think our costs might actually flat flatten out and go down a little bit. I think over the last um you know definitely the last five to 10 years we've focused a lot of our resources on some of the more expensive items such as mechanical systems. Um all of our facilities have brand new mechanical systems. We just finished um with the addition exception of one facility. Southview will be the next major mechanical starting next summer. But our high school now has brand new mechanical systems. All of our roofing systems are up to date and we continue to add roofing projects every year. Um all of our electrical components are are in great shape. Um, so I think some of that the heavier ticket items are are taken care of. Um, we're kind of moving more towards interior surfaces as you can kind of see out on the third floor. Um, the first floor of this facility, Highlands and Creek Valley this summer conquered as well. Um, which are um, potentially more pleasing on the eye and easier to notice um, but much less significant in cost. >> Great. Thank you very much. >> All right, we will now Thank you, Director Woodard. We will now vote to approve the long-term facilities maintenance plan for 2028 through 2037. All those in favor say I. >> Anyone opposed? Long-term facilities maintenance plan for 28-37 is approved. Do I have a motion to approve the proposed 2026 through 28 collective bargaining agreement between Independent School District 273 and the Udina Administrative Council? >> So moved. >> Is there a second? Second. >> Uh, I welcome executive director of human resources Sonia Sailor and Mer Wood, director of finance and facilities to present this item. >> Thank you, Madame Chair, Dr. Bitman, members of the school board. Um, we are pleased to announce that our Adina administrative council, which is our district's principles and assistant principles, have ratified the tenative agreement for a new 2-year collective bargaining agreement effective July 1, 2026 through June 30th, 2028. Um, our negotiation teams work collaborative collaboratively together to reach a tenative agreement that's before you this evening. um which also respects the school school board's financial parameters. We would like to thank our EAC negotiations team which includes Paul Pel, Patrick Bass, Chris Holden, and Troy Stein for their willingness to work with us during this important process. The financial highlights of the proposed agreement include step advancement for eligible principles and assistant principles in both years of the agreement, a salary increase of 3.4% 4% in the first year and 4% in the second year for all positions with one exception and that is our high school principal position which will receive a 4% increase in both years of the agreement. Um that additional adjustment is intended to address a market adjustment to ensure competitiveness with our comparison school districts. an annual increase equal to $500 to the district's contribution to the MSRS healthcare savings plan um for principles and assistant principles who are not eligible for retiree um insurance subsidy effective January 1, 2027. There will be an increase of $125 per month towards the district's contribution towards single health a single health insurance plan and an increase of $30 per month towards our single plus one in our family plans and a a 1 half% increase uh to bring the match to 3.5% towards uh the school district's 403b plan. Language within the agreement was revised to improve clarity um align with current practices and also reflect best practices. The two-year total package for this proposed agreement is $7,871,747 which represents an increase of $480,797. Under the MSBA's costing formula, the two-year percentage increases 6.5% which is within the authority provided to the school district's negotiations team. And as a result, we seek your approval for this agreement. Do you have any questions? Thank you to you and our EIC bargaining team for coming to an agreement on this. We'll now vote to approve the proposed collective bargaining agreement between ISD273 and Dina administrative councils for the year 2026 through 2028. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Anyone opposed? >> The proposed 26-28 collective bargaining agreement between ISD 273 and Dina administrative council has been approved. Thank you. >> Thank you. Do I have a motion to approve the proposed 2026 to 28 collective bargaining agreement between ISD 273 and the Service Employees International Union Local 284 transportation employees? >> So moved. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> Director Sers and Wart, please tell us about this item. >> Thank you. So, we're pleased to announce um that our transportation employees ratified the tenative agreement that's before you today. They actually had their vote this morning and let us know by lunchtime, which is why this was a walkedin um uh proposal for this evening. Again, we would like to thank our transportations transportation negotiations team which includes David Harrison, Len Lewis, uh Bruce Balfons, David Hart, Lavina Levina Phillips, Randy Miller, and Jeff Slater for their willingness um to work with us during this important process. The financial highlights of this proposed agreement include step advancement for eligible employees in both years of the agreement, a 3% improvement to step one of the bus driver's wage schedule in both years. a 4% improvement to the longevity steps which are at um year 6, 11, 16, and 21 of the bus driver wage schedule in the first year of agre of the agreement and a four and 12% improvement in the second year. A 5% improvement to the lead mechanic, mechanic, route programmer, and interchool male driver wage schedules in both years of the agreement. a $50 per month increase to the district's contribution towards health insurance beginning on January 1, 2027 with an additional $75 month monthly increase on January 1, 2028 and an adjustment to the vacation schedule for 12 month transportation employees that's consistent with similarly situated um employee groups. language was in in agreement was revised to improve clarity, including the removal of the severance provision that is no longer applicable to any employees employees within this um unit. The two-year total package for this proposed agreement is 7 7,393,314, which represents an increase of 466,48. Under the MSBA's costing formula, the 2-year percentage increase is 6.73% which is within the authority provided to us um by the school board. And as a result, we seek your approval for this agreement. Do you have any questions? >> Um, I was wondering if one of you could speak to um specifically this um bargaining unit and our ability to keep it fully staffed um and in particular um specific positions such as mechanics um lead mechanics. I know that um in the past and across the state in particular, bus drivers are and transportation officials are one of the harder positions to keep staffed. So I just wanted was wondering if you could speak to that. >> Yes, absolutely. So yes, bus drivers in particular um are it is difficult to stay at full staff with bus drivers, which is one of the reasons that we pay such close attention to our um comparison districts and ensuring that we're competitive with our wages. Uh we have improved greatly over the last few years and although we would always like a few more bus drivers um we have maintained uh staffing ratio that has provided what we need over the course of of um the last couple of years for sure. the uh mechanics we we have long tenure with our mechanics and there as well we ensure that we remain very competitive because it is a very difficult position to hire um and so we're we're fortunate to have the mechanics we do and we're fortunate that they're happy in Adina as well because we continue to ensure that they're paid competitively. Uh the route programmers again we have a long tenure with our route programmers. We did notice in this um when doing our comparison data for this particular contract that we were that was an area where we could use a little market adjustment which is why you can see that we actually increased their wages slightly more than our drivers to ensure that we stay competitive there as well. But overall we um we are maintaining um I know that uh if you you know we again we would we're always looking for a few more bus drivers but we're not in a situation that I know that we were in a few years ago um where it was very difficult. Thank you. And thank you for your detail um and analysis of the different positions within the bargaining unit to make sure that we're able to maintain a fully staffed although we would like more bus drivers um um transportation staff. >> Yeah. Thank you. We will now vote to approve the proposed 2026 to 28 collective bargaining agreement between uh ISD273 and the service employees international union 284 transportation employees. All those in favor say I. I. >> Anyone opposed? >> The collective bargaining agreement between the school district 273 and uh the local 284 transportation employees is approved. Thank you both. Do I have a motion to approve policies 410, 539, 618, 629, and 902? >> So moved. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> Policy Chair Ellenburg, is there anything you'd like to say about these policies? >> Um, no. I just uh reiterate that these were um reviewed against um MSBA model policy and um all applicable laws. Um, and there weren't any changes from our discussion last month. So, we'll now vote to approve the policies. Uh, all those in favor say I. >> I. I. >> Anyone opposed? Policies 410, 539, 618, 629, 902 are approved. Board members, do you have any leadership or committee updates? Director Birdman, >> I just wanted to say uh and acknowledge uh the great work that was done for the July 4th parade. Um Assistant Superintendent Nate Swanson who led us in our charge. And if you haven't seen his wonderful uh Edina Hornet Hawaiian shirt, it is something to behold. So if no one has seen that, please ask for a picture. Um, we also have Kathy Renleman in the audience and I want a special thank for her and the Edina Ed Fund for their participation. Not only did the leadership but the huge group of student leaders who make up the Edina Ed Funds board also participated and rode the bus and handed out candy in representing Edina public schools. It was a wonderful morning to be had. Thank you. >> I had one update. Uh, I'd like to draw the public's attention to an item in the information section of our board packet and that is our annual superintendent evaluation and the board had an opportunity to evaluate Dr. Bitman and I wanted to publicly share the board's sentiments that Dr. Bitman's leadership experience and communication skills have had an immediate positive impact on the district. He has a collaborative approach to district work and holds himself and his cabinet to a high standard. Dr. Bitman has been highly engaged in the UDINA community to learn about what makes our district unique and the expectations of excellence this community holds. The board looks forward to continuing to partner with Dr. Bitman to strengthen the district as guided by the strategic plan. So, thank you, Dr. Bitman, for your service over this last year. Now, I'll turn it over to you for any updates you have. >> Very good, Madam Chair, members of the board, those in the public. It's a busy time despite being summer. Just a few quick updates. I had the opportunity today to spend time with our mayor at the regional council of mayors meeting downtown. And so it's just a good opportunity to meet with mayors throughout our area as well as uh other superintendent. Um it's a busy time in terms of staffing and planning. We're wrapping up one year starting the next year. Uh and it's already July, so lots happening. We tonight at tonight's work session, we had a good conversation around safety and security as well as upcoming priorities uh that we that we are having throughout the district. So, our commitment will continue to be transparent. Uh and we're appreciating the conversations with the board as well as stakeholders throughout our communities being involved in that. Uh didn't want to forget that we have a lot of things happening for students throughout our district. And so just appreciation for our folks that are providing uh programming to all of our students from birth uh on. And so while it's quiet in some areas, this is an area that is robust and very very active as we serve thousands and thousands of students. And so just appreciative for our students, families, and staff. And a shout out to our director, Emory Leland. So thank you for that. In addition to that, you might have noticed unlike other places, uh we have a very tight timeline for construction in schools because we don't want to interrupt student learning. And so you might have recognized a number of projects happening. So just a shout out to those who have been involved with our facilities, our board, etc. our various community members, the work with LTFM and a number of other projects on our two and 10-year plan is robust. So thank you for your patience. We we know that that doesn't always bring about the the best in people when it's harder to get places and we're just appreciative of their of their grace throughout the summer and we will be committed to making sure that we continue to have great things happening for our students and community. With that, I'd be happy to take any questions. >> All right. Do I have a motion to adjourn our meeting? >> So moved. >> Is there a second? >> Second. All those in favor of adjourning tonight's meeting say I. I. >> Any opposed? The motion is passed in the June July 13 2026 board meeting is adjourned. Thank you.