I now call the continuence of the Wednesday, December 4th, 2025 Forest Lake Area School Board meeting to order. Please join us while we recite the pledge of allegiance. I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Member clerk, will you please take the roll call of attendance? >> Sure. Member Christensen >> here. >> Member Reveline >> here. >> Member Castle >> here. >> Member Antonson is here. Member Tyson >> here. >> Member Corkran [snorts] >> here. Everybody's here. All right, everybody here. Um although not totally necessary, I'd recommend that we re address the uh meeting agenda. So I would entertain a motion to approve. >> So moved. >> Second. >> Okay, we have a motion and a second on the meeting agenda. Um being a continuence of the the last agenda, I do have an amendment I'd like to make to this. Um I would move to amend the agenda by striking items 6.5 through 6.13. moving item 4.1 to follow item 6.4 and amending the directive of item 4.1 to read discussion of applications to fill board vacancy. Do I have a second? >> Second. >> Okay, we have a motion and a second. I realize that was a loaded motion. So, I would like to ask the board if there are any questions concerning the motion. >> Can you repeat? Well, I did the third part. I got >> Yes, I will repeat the motion. Um, [clears throat] the motion is to strike items 6.5 through 6.13 and to move item 4.1 to follow 6.4 and to amend the directive of item 4.1 [snorts] to read discussion of applicants to fill board vacancy. Is there any discussion on that amendment? Are you also striking 7.1 and two? >> Yeah. >> Um, not with this motion, but if the if the board would like to entertain that, we can certainly amend the amendment. >> We could keep it. >> We could take long. We keep it for if they're here to speak to it, which >> that that's what my thought was is the first readings typically go pretty quick. >> Yep. Let's just leave them. >> So, we keep it. Okay. agreement. >> Okay. Any other discussion on the amendment? >> Seeing none, all those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Those opposed. >> Okay, that motion carries. Um, that brings us back to the main motion on approving the agenda. Um, is there any additional discussion on that? All right, seeing none, all those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. Those opposed. Okay, the motion carries. So just for clarification to those in the crowd and here I'm going to make some updates to my paid paper as well so I follow this along correctly. Um we have now moved the special business of the selection of applicant billboard vacancy to occur after item 6.4 which is certifying the property taxes payable in 2026. We have also amended that item to instead [snorts] of being the selection of application applicant to read the discussion of applications to fill board vacancy and we have removed items 6.5 to 6.13 essentially postponing them to a later date which will bring us immediately to the consent agenda. I would entertain a motion to approve. >> So move second. >> All right. We have a motion and a second on the consent agenda. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> I. Those opposed. Okay. The motion [cough] carries and the consent agenda passes. That brings us to item 6.1, donations. Member Christensen. >> Um yes. Uh we have um a list of donations here. $3,000 from the MidCo Foundation for Foresake Area Community School outdoor recreation project. $275 from Amy Riwi from Forest Lake Area High School general use. $30 from Amber Kasproski Lino Lakes Elementary general use, a portable um AED from the Chad Stamper Memorial uh Forest Lake Area Schools to be used where needed and a snacks and food donation from Faith Lutheran Church from Forest to Forest Lake Area Schools for family uh support of all students in need. a total of 3,35 uh plus additional goods value or excuse me, total 3,35 plus uh goods donated. I vote we move uh or excuse me, I move to approve with gratitude. >> Second. >> All right, we have a motion and a second. Is there any discussion? >> All right, seeing none, all those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. Those opposed. >> All right, the motion carries. Um I haven't noted here that we have no retirement notices. Member Christensen, is that correct? >> Yes. >> Okay, that will dispose of 6.2 will bring us to item 6.3 accept the 2024 2025 financial audit. We'll remind the board that we did have a good presentation on this and for summary director. >> Thank you. [snorts] Good evening. Uh just we did have a presentation on December 4th about this. It's an annual requirement that school districts do uh receive an annual an audit. Uh we choose LB Carlson to be the firm that completes that for us. Uh Jackie presented that we had an unmodified uh opinion which is the best opinion that you can get. So uh she had no uh findings over internal controls or any uh Minnesota state statutes. So with that uh finance department recommend that we accept the audit. >> All right. Are there any questions? >> Second. >> Okay. We have a motion and a second on the table. Perfect. Do we have any questions or comments on this item? >> I already had my questions. >> Yeah, thank you. >> I'll I'll just say again, thank you for you and your team for doing such a fabulous job as always and and working with Jackie and her team is I know it's pretty seamless at this point and really appreciate their hard work and and that we came up with no issues in our audit and it's the best you can get. So, thanks again uh to your team and for your all your hard work. Appreciate it. Yeah, I would echo that and also extend a congratulations to you and your team on making it through an audit is a painful process and I know you're already going to prepare for the uh the next one that's coming up. So, >> it's kind of a continuous cycle. >> All right. So, seeing no other discussion on this, uh, member clerk, will you take the roll call? >> Okay. Uh, member Tyson, >> I. >> Member Antonson votes I. Member Rebeline >> I. >> Member Christensen >> I. >> Member Castle >> I. Member Corkran. >> I have it. >> All right. The motion carries bringing us to item 6.4. Certify 2025 property taxes payable in 2026. Dr. Massie. [snorts] >> Christy. Oh, get it started. >> Director, >> me again. Uh, yes. So, we again had an extensive presentation at 6 p.m. We had our taxation hearing on the 4th. We talked about our overall taxes going up by about 2.4%. Uh again, that has to do with the fact that our general fund levy is going to uh decrease for next year with a long-term facility maintenance adjustment and then our debt fund is going to increase [snorts] uh with some payments that we um put in that year to make sure that taxes stayed as stable as possible for our residents. We did have one uh gentleman come to the hearing [clears throat] that had several questions. So I took time right after the hearing with him to review the information and statements and make sure that he understood where all those taxes were coming from with voter approved versus non voterapproved levies. So beyond that, that was the only question that we had from um the constituents and so we should uh be good to certify the levy. >> All right. I'd like to thank you for spending your time with them and for the presentation that we had last week. And um just as a reminder that this is a continuation of the December 4th meeting that we had. We did have a public hearing there. We did allow for public comment. So, this is just a continuation of that that business. So, we have fulfilled that legal obligation that we have. Um, but as always, questions are welcomed and director Heidi is happy to address them. So, with that, I would move to approve. >> So moved. >> Second. >> All right. We have a motion and second. Any other discussion on that? I just want to add that [snorts] thank you for meeting with him and I hear such good feedback from people when they do that and you take the time with them. I think you're so good at explaining everything in very understandable terms. So we really appreciate you and all the hard work you do. So thank you. >> All set. >> All right. Any other comments, questions? >> All right. Seeing none, member clerk, please take a roll call. >> Okay. Member Rebeline. >> I. Member Castle >> I. >> Member Christensen >> I. >> Member Antonson votes I. Member Corkran >> I. >> Member Tyson >> I. >> Eyes have it. >> All right. That brings us all the way back to 4.1 um which we've amended to read the discussion of applicants to uh to fill the board vacancy. And I know that we're here. Um I'm going to start this off with a motion that we eliminate applicate applicants [clears throat] Denzinski Smith and Durangu from consideration since they failed to secure majority support last week. >> Second. Okay, we have a motion and a second on that. Is there any discussion? >> All right, seeing none, all those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Those opposed? Okay, that motion carries, which I I would recommend we now turn our focus on the other five applicants. And I'd recommend that without discussion, um, and we simply just do a show of hands. >> Um, can can we change the wording uh about show of hands to just a roll call to have more clarity and some more to keep track a little better? >> Yeah, absolutely. Yep. Yep. We can do a roll call. Would you would you like me just to go around the room or would you like me to work with the clerk and have it go through in the random order >> or I think around the room is fine. >> Around the room is fine. Okay. >> Yeah. >> Okay. In that case, I'll I'll turn back to this here. Um without discussion, I'll simply uh ask around the room. Uh just to uh indicate if you have support of giving an applicant further consideration. This is not a I will vote for them to be on the board, but I would like to think about this applicant further and this will help help us narrow the field. Um, now we have five applicants left and uh it'll help us narrow the field down to kind of see where we go from here. Um, do the members of the board understand that suggestion? >> Mhm. And >> it might be helpful if you could clarify um the result if a me if a candidate does not receive a majority. >> Sure. >> The intent of the board's intent in terms of moving forward for a candidate who does not obtain a majority. So, my recommendation would be if we if we don't have a majority consensus on this type of a vote where we're willing to um give a candidate further consideration that we uh remove them from the selection process and we move forward only with applicants that do have a majority consensus for consideration. And if we get to the point where none of the applicants do, um we cross that bridge when we get there. And uh that brings us to further discussion um at the end of the process. >> Member Tyson, >> one question just to clarify. So it doesn't depend there's no bearing on number of people. It's just yes or no to further >> correct >> discussion. Yep. We we have five um eligible applicants left here and I'll I'll go through them in uh alphabetical order and we can each member can say they support all five. Each member could say they don't support any of the five and and we just we're looking for a count of four to move forward. >> Does that make sense? >> Yep. Thank you. >> All right. With alphabetical order in mind, then we'll start with uh Mr. Cornier and I'll start with member Tyson. >> Yes. >> Member Castle. >> Yes. >> Uh member Oh, I just lost my train of thought. Member Anton, >> no. Member Corkran. >> Yes. >> Member Christensen. >> Yes. >> Okay. We have we have four uh for Mr. Cornia. And that will bring us >> Yes, >> you did. >> Oh, no I did not. Um my my vote would be no on member or Mr. Cornier, but uh he met the threshold of four. Anyhow, and I'm just kind of doing a staring compare here. I think that brings us to Mrs. Hansen. I'll start at the other end of the table this time. Uh, member Christensen. >> Yes. >> Okay. Member Corkran. >> Yes. >> All right. Member Antonson. >> Yes. >> Member Castle. >> Yes. >> Member Tyson. >> No. >> Okay. Um, member Rebeline, I I vote I. That brings us to five in the affirmative for member Hansen. And please, if other board members could keep track, too. I'm trying to do the count, but if I get it wrong, please let me know. >> Small piece. Candidate Hansen, not member. Oh, thank you. Thank you. Applicant Hansen. >> Joy. [clears throat] He's kidding. >> Oh, that. >> Yeah, I keep moving from member Mr. Mrs. candidate. Okay. Um, if I know my ABCs correctly. I think that brings us to Mr. Peas. Um, I I'll start with myself. I I do not support Mr. Peas. Member Anton. Hi. >> Um, member Castle, >> no. >> Member Tyson, >> yes. >> Okay. Member Corkran. >> Yes. >> And member Christensen? >> Yes. >> Okay. Is that four in the affirmative for Mr. >> Ps? Correct. >> Okay. Um, that brings us to Mr. Rutford. Uh, Mr. Rutford, we'll start with Member Corkran. >> No. >> Member Christensen? >> No. >> Member Tyson? >> No. Member Castle, >> no. >> Member Antonson, >> yes. >> And member Rebeline votes no. Um, that individual will be eliminated. Um, that brings us to Mr. Tuat. Um, Mr. Tuat, let's start with member Castle. >> Yes. >> Member Anton, >> yes. >> Member Redline would vote yes. Member Tyson, >> no. >> Okay. Um, member Corkran, >> no. >> Member Christensen, >> no. Okay, that eliminates uh Mr. Two out. So, if I gather that correctly, that brings us u Mr. P's uh Mrs. Hansen and Mr. Cornier all having a majority support to move forward in the process. Would that be correct? >> Correct. That's what I have too. Okay. >> Correct. >> All right. So, in this case, we have multiple applicants who have support for consideration. Um, in this case, um, I would recommend to the board a motion to formally eliminate, uh, Mr. Rutford and Mr. Tuat for consideration. >> So moved. >> Second. >> All right, we have a motion and a second. Is there any discussion on that? >> All right, seeing none, all those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> I. Those opposed. All right, that motion carries, which brings us to I guess let me ask, what would the board like to do with the November 20th resolution? We can amend it or we can resend it. >> I move to resend. >> Second. >> All right. A motion and a second to resend the resolution. That will actually simplify things moving forward. >> Is there any discussion on that? All right, I just add this will will simplify things. So, let's go ahead and resend it. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Those opposed. >> Okay, that resolution is rescended, which is going to simplify things for us moving forward here. Um, I would recommend that at this point we move to the next order of business. We give the board and the public time to reflect on the three finalists that we have now named for consideration for next week and uh uh member Corkran and I >> work in the background to kind of determine what the proposed agenda item will be for the 18th and we'll get that finalized back to the board by Friday afternoon as is typical. That'll be released to the public sometime on Monday. Um, now that we have no resolution in place, we are not required to take any action on any specific items on the 18th. Um, we can set our own timeline and if it pleases the board, I think that member Corker and I can can work that out in the background. >> Then we'll just bring some back to the board next steps. >> Okay. >> Yeah, >> sounds good. >> I appreciate that. Yeah. >> And >> yeah, go ahead. I mean, I just want to I don't know [clears throat] where we're going here quickly, but I just want to say thank you to all of the applicants for this process and your patience because I know this has probably been a long week of not really knowing what's happening. Um, so we apologize for >> that unknown and um appreciate so much public involvement and interest in this whole process. It's been really kind of it's just I think it's amazing. I just I was reading something else about another school board who only had one applicant when they had a ran their you know same kind of process. So I think that shows a lot of care. >> So thank you. >> I would like to echo those sentiments and for the a couple uh applicants that kind of uh went through a lot. I I the last meeting I I I truly um you know I appreciate you know their willingness to stand with us and uh I know the process can be long and we do appreciate the people that have really sent emails and just support and and been really uh very involved in the process. So it's a lot of a lot of interest and people really care. So it's very evident that this is an important decision that we [clears throat] cannot rush >> and I do really appreciate all the support. Yeah, I would I would echo all of those statements and even add that uh you know it became very apparent through a very painful process and a very painful meeting last week that uh all six board members care deeply about the future of the district and we all want to make sure that we go in the right direction. Um we felt very strongly about some of our preferred candidates and we have now elected to move on from them and and look at some other candidates and we're going to we'll figure out the way forward. Uh I agree with member Tyson's statement that we can be a very high function. >> Um I just find it difficult um to even really be sitting here. Uh what transpired last Thursday uh until 2:00 in the morning was um extremely difficult. Uh and I just I just feel like we have to acknowledge that. I think we're all we're all just sitting here all of a sudden, you know, everyone's getting along and we're like thank apologizing to the candidates for the process. I mean, perhaps there should be some apologies around the board table. I don't know. I mean, it was it was um yeah, I wrote down a lot of things I could say. I'm just going to stay above the fray, but I just want to acknowledge that that meeting was incredibly difficult, unnecessary. Um, and a lot of trust has been broken. I'm very glad uh to hear the chair and vice chair uh moving forward to some resolution. I'm certainly not interested in going back where we came from, but I just want to somehow acknowledge that. I think it's really awkward that that, you know, we're not acknowledging what happened and apologizing to the candidates and perhaps not apologizing um to each other. Um, so yeah, I hope that we can u move forward and I pray that something like that never happens again. I mean, I just want to remind us all we're here for the students, staff, parents. What what transpired here last Thursday certainly did not serve any of those um constituencies. So, thank you. [clears throat] >> All right. Thank you, Member Christensen. Member Tyson. So I just want to add to what member Christensen's saying is that you know whatever kept us here in this room till that time of the morning and for that eight hours was really a disservice to the people that had to stay in the meeting and we're sitting in the gallery to the young man that comes to report on our meetings to Joy who had probably been here since 7 in the morning and to Renee. So, I think we could at least apologize to them and then start holding ourselves accountable for keeping our relationships um moving in a positive way and empowering each other to work together [clears throat] and find that middle ground because like member Christensen said, we do not want that to happen again. That was stressful. That was exhausting. and it was so um void of why we're here. We're here for our students and our district and we all know that. We're very passionate about that. So, let's just continue down that road of positivity and trying to build relationships with each other. And to end, I just want to say concur with what Tessa said that we do need to thank our applicants and apologize. I mean, we really kind of went off the rails and we didn't have a plan. So, I'm hopeful that the chair and the vice chair can think about some of the things that have been said. Member Castle had a great idea last week's meeting and just move forward from that, but find more parameters so that we aren't um going to go off the rails and subject our candidates to >> anything that isn't appropriate. >> Yes, I agree. >> Um and and I also want to say thank you. There's multiple people in the community that sent in really good ideas as to ways to move forward. So, I appreciate those as well, and I think you two obviously are going to look at them all and figure out a way forward for us. So, >> yeah. >> Yeah. >> And I'd add to that too that you know, member Corkran and I will we'll look at them. We'll make recommendations to the board, but this this board will be making that decision. member Corker and I have no decision-making authority outside of our two votes at this table and it's going to take at least four to get this done. So, um just so that's clear to everybody, we're simply going to recommend a process and agree with member Tyson that the relationships are important and um I'll be the first to say it's much easier to preside over a meeting where there's agreement rather than disagreement and gridlock. that that gets difficult especially when uh you're in a position where you need to enforce the rules and the the resolutions and stuff that have been put forward. So that that put me in a tough position as well because I wanted to see it get done last week. But uh at the same time I had to um meet the directive of of the board's will as a majority and um now that the majority's changed that will and and we've dissolved that resolution that will make that much easier going forward. So if we reach an impass again, we'll have a a few more options that we can recommend at least from the chair here. Do we have any additional discussion on 4.1 or should we move to 7.1? >> I think we can move on. >> Seeing none, let's move right to 7.1. First reading administrator code of ethics policy 1306. Dr. Massie. >> Again, these are new action item or new items. So no action [snorts] necessary tonight. The purpose of this policy is to establish the requirements of the school board that school administrators adhere to the standards of ethics and professional conduct in this policy and in accordance with Minnesota law. You'll notice on this policy there's an additional item with respect to disciplinary action. That language is pulled from statute as it relates to other employment groups um in in public service and public schools. So take a look at that and reach out if you have any questions. >> All right. Thank you, Dr. Massie. Um 7.2 first reading school weapons policy [clears throat] 1501 which is a re number from 532. This the purpose of this policy is to ensure a safe environment for student staff and the public. There are a number of definition changes reference changes in this policy. Specifically, you will see that there's a a a bit of a shift of decision making on ultimate consequences for a student who brings a legally identified firearm to school. That that is um per statute and within the language of of the statute. that that would be at the discretion of the school board um as it relates to the the potential of expulsion for students with firearms. So again, take a look at the recommended changes in this policy. Reach out if you have any questions. There's quite a bit going on here and we can uh move for action at the next meeting. >> All right. Thank you, Dr. Massie. Brings us to reviewing upcoming calendar dates. Reminder to everybody, we have >> Oh, sorry. I feel like I should have said something else and I wrote it down. Um that we should also thank our superintendent. [snorts] Um he helped the chair and I work uh to work through these issues and came up with um a process and um some really good guidance and without that I think you know we might still be at our standstill. So I really do appreciate all his time and effort and expertise. he helped get through this really troubling time trying to work with us and uh I know it's not always easy. So, but thank [snorts] you so much for your guidance. Appreciate it. >> Thank you. >> Yep. >> Yeah. I would add to that and say thank you for your willingness to reach out to member Corkman to set up that meeting. >> And to really help facilitate [snorts] those discussions. >> Yeah. Um, I think it was really helpful in in moving forward, obtaining a quorum here this evening and >> we'll we'll reach a solution at some point. >> Yes, we will. >> I enjoyed [snorts] I I did appreciate getting the email from the board chair here tonight and I knew that you guys had spoken with Dr. Massie and it [snorts] it it did spark that there's a shift happening. So, I like and I enjoyed that shift. to see it to spread it like that and know that it's coming to all of us and that you guys collaborated. >> So, thank you everybody. >> Yeah, >> thank you member. [snorts] And to that point, just so people aren't wondering about the email and the crowd here is I did um after my discussions with member Corkran and multiple over the last few days, um we summarized kind of what we've been talking about, what we thought about and and kind of how we envision the process for this meeting going tonight. Um, I summarized all that and just sent it to all board members um, just so they were clear and understood when they got here kind of what the expectation was, at least from me presiding over the meeting. Um, obviously a single member of the board can't direct the board in any direction, but uh, um, I can make suggestions and see if the board is uh, willing to follow those um, suggestions. I feel like it went really well tonight and if we adjourn here shortly, we'll do it in less than 30 minutes. So, I feel like it was extremely productive and and well used and that's probably a process we'll carry forward in the future as we work through um this and any other contentious issues where we um try to inform the board of suggestions that may come in the meeting if especially if members see that as helpful. No me member castle >> will we eventually perhaps make a policy regarding the process in the future with as we have once we've gone through this and [snorts] have some >> good guidelines to use >> such as you come to an impass like we have >> today we decided to take those impass people and you know check them off and then go to the remaining candidates. >> Yeah, it's not a bad suggestion. It's something that >> maybe member Corker and I will discuss here. >> Yeah, we'll probably to have some procedures in place for sure of if this happens this, you know, just so we have so we don't to me it's like I don't like being blindsided. I don't I like to know kind of expectations. That's why I was so appreciative of the email because we knew walking in kind of how this was going to go and if we have that if we do come on the impass again that we'll have something in writing or some procedure to follow so we will not be stalling out almost. >> Yeah. At least then we like you said you you have expectations you know what to expect. Uh >> um that is simply a one-way communication that came from the chair. I expected no response from that because we have to be very careful that we don't uh violate open meeting law or have serial meetings or anything along that that to that effect and I hope it was beneficial to members when they came here this evening to at least have some expectations of how this might fall uh how this might go this evening. Member Tyson, did you have something to add? >> Yes, I just wanted to add and yeah, this adds a lot of clarity and I think I've said that I'm very visual so when things are typed up and written and I can follow them, I really appreciate that. Just want to add that for future resolutions, I think it'll be better to before their roll call than to send them out for us to preview it. Everybody get a chance to read it, digest it, and then bring it to a roll call and just kind of follow that protocol from here on out so we don't get tripped up and embedded with some resolution that isn't working for all of us. >> I like that suggestion as well because even if we go back to November 20th, um I did have that quasi typed out. I sent it out. I know it had some phonetics in there and some misspellings and stuff, but uh would have given you maybe we go with short recess, give some people time to read it and digest it. I think we can figure that process out as we go. >> Um but yeah, I think that's a good idea. >> Great. Thank you. >> I do. >> All right. We got a little offkilter there, but I think it was good. >> Sorry. >> Um so I to review calendar dates, just as a reminder here, we have our next board meeting on the 18th. Um I haven't noted that we have committee meetings that night as well. So we'll start get it started at 5:00 pm. And with that I would entertain a motion to adjurnn. >> So moved. Second. Second. Okay. >> We have a motion to second. Is there any discussion on adjourning? Seeing none, all those in favor signify by saying I. I. Those opposed. All right. We are journed.