 Right. Thank you. Opening the. January. About the right. The January 17th. The meeting of the month, the Roxbury board of school directors opening at 634. 35. And tonight's the first order of business is public comment. Because we had, well, first off, public comment. We have a public comment. And it is an excellent opportunity for the public to give feedback to the board. We do not respond in real time. That does not mean we're not listening. We take all the feedback very seriously. We oftentimes do respond in, in other ways or later. And we really appreciate the effort it takes to give public comment and also recognize that sometimes it can be tough to give public comment. So, you know, some of the matters you bring to us are sensitive and emotional. And we really appreciate that. Also, we do accept comment by email. It's a school board at mpsbt.org. Which is another way both to give additional comment. And if you are not comfortable. In front of a group. We will start with anyone in the room and then go to online. We have a slightly different process for online because at our last meeting, we had some people who used the open chat function to do disruptive things. So, when we open the public comment period. As usual, please introduce your public record. So attendees who use the raise hand feature to indicate they would like to speak. And to do so, there's, if you click over reactions, which is down at the bottom of the screen. There's a little raise hand function that pops up. If you're joined by calling in, you can raise your hand by dialing nine. And we'll notify you once you've raised your hand. That is your time to speak. And you'll be able to do that. That is your time to speak. And you'll be prompted. And then you'll be able to unmute yourself, but folks on the call will just not be able to speak at random by unmuting themselves. And then also. We will not have video. So it will be audio only. So again, if you're speaking. I would like to be on video, please. So at the start of your comment on the host, I believe can temporary convert you to a panelist, but if that doesn't happen, you will be just audio. Online and. Yeah, sorry. This is more complicated than it has been, but again, it was abused last time. So if anyone in the room wants to speak, please just go ahead and come to the front and introduce yourself. Great. Do we have a second? No, that's it. Brian's data. No, I just want to briefly say, everybody knows for the last eight weeks, there have been a lot of conversations across the district, across the communities, but all kinds of things. Conversations are great. Communication is great to keep it up. I just want to cut knowledge. We've kind of been there before. We've been in big scary places in the past. We all lived through act 46. We've all lived through this. We've all lived through that. And at the end of the day, this district has produced really good things for a lot of people all over the place. And as we're sitting here today in the uncertainty of act 127, what's going to happen with this? Where are we going to go with that? I'm going to say I'm certain that this board and the communities in the district administration is going to be able to come up with a solution that will at the end of the day still provide, excuse me, produce and provide those really positive things all across the community that all of our families, our community members have all become used to and our district. So I just want to acknowledge that that we've been able to do a lot of good things and really hard times in the past. And I'm optimistic that we as a district, we as two communities can do the same going forward. So as always, thanks to the whole board for their community service. Everybody appreciates it. And yeah, we will be in touch. Thank you. Yeah, I don't think you're on. What's that? Anyone else in the room? Yeah. I haven't been here. I'm so sorry. It's my son's gymnastics meeting at the same time. I did try and talk a couple of times. Jacqueline Frazier, my father's Thomas Frazier. He's a lot of more colorful. We have a home across the way, the greenhouse business and I went to the school. So I'm a graduate of this elementary school and my kids are now half Ugandan and also attendees of this school. So at one point, this room was actually first through six and we divided it in the middle and we had first through three and four through six on the other. It was really chaotic. And a snake got loose actually at one point and it was like all hell broke loose. And then the teacher, she like got it with her foot and like the head and it was just like, just nuts. And that was during the expansion operation. So just as a Roxbury and thank you so much. And we're here. We are here. We're just not always here. Thanks so much. Thank you. Anyone else in the room? I'm Angela Ballard. My kids also attended here. My daughter was in the first class. So I don't know why you said emotion. And I was like, no, this is not emotional. This is serious. But when I think about her transition into the big pond, it was emotional. And now I just see her thriving. So I just want to thank you as a board for the hard work that you do. I'm really grateful for the opportunity to have our kids in the bigger pond. They experienced so many more opportunities. I feel like the quality of education and getting them out clear is stellar. I feel like the communication between their community and ours while we do have our dips in certain areas. For the most part is really strong. Like I praise you, Libby. So often as a teacher who's in a district where we don't have that strong communication from our, from our leadership. So I appreciate all that you're doing. And I think one of the awesome things that has come out of some of our conversations of late is seeing our Roxbury families come together and recognize so many of the good things. Like it's one thing for us to recognize what our Roxbury kids get from being a part of the Mount Carrier community. Right? They have access to so many more opportunities than they would if they were just here as my daughter puts it under a rock. But at the same time, it's really cool to hear, excuse me, feedback from coaches and teachers and other families. Like thank you for sharing your kids with us. Like we, our, our peer groups are expanding because they have the opportunity to hang out with kids who've had a different elementary school experience. And that's been a really cool thing to be able to connect with families. Like part of it started out of necessity. Like who can take my kid after school because I can't get there to pick them up. And at first that felt heavy, but now it feels like, like an experience that has brought a lot of us together. They, we have grown friendships. I hang out with my kids friends, parents now, which I didn't see when the merger was happening as being a benefit of that. So I really appreciate the coming together. I think it is a true benefit for the kids that grew up here and had their rural lifestyle, but are still now just opened up to new opportunities that they wouldn't have had otherwise. So thank you for that. Thank you, Angela. Hi everyone. My name is Claire. I have lived next door to the school for going on 47 years. And I can't imagine a better next door neighbor. I have watched little kids like Jackie, graduates of this school, mature into lovely young parents. And you tell me what I need to do to keep the school intact. And I'll do it. Thank you. Anyone else in the room. And online and do part of it. So we have Lisa Burns. Can you hear me? Yes. Okay. So I wanted to move away from the kind of Roxbury budget thing into the academics that'll be presented here this evening. And I was very excited to see as Ms. Bone steel noted in her letter that her flywheel is turning faster on reading. So, and I'm sure there's many parents in the district who are happy to see that there's been some improvement in early literacy, which was extremely concerning. So hats off. But I wanted to just briefly discuss math. And Ms. Bone steel also noted in her letter that that's problematic. But looking at the district's own data. As it is right now, the graduating class, the data that you've presented 36% of this year's class is proficient in the last reported. State math tests, 36% when prior to the pandemic, 56% of them had been proficient. And when they started in the third grade, 74% of them were proficient. So we seriously have a problem with math. And as one of the pillars of learning in our school district is a timely intervention. I think we've gone long past. Timely intervention and math. And on the principle of every kid being able to do everything, it seems once they finish, every kid can do everything unless they need skills, math skills beyond the sixth grade level. So as we hear the data presentation, and I do understand as Ms. Bone steel has been very patient to point out to me many times. This star Renaissance data cannot be used in any way to assess a whole class. She's informed me that it's only for looking at each individual student, but nonetheless, I think the data is concerning and the other data. And I hope that some of you will ask questions because as I said, a timely system to intervene is well past 36% of graduates being proficient in math, not acceptable. The last state testing showed our average scores for the seventh, eighth, and ninth graders below sixth grade proficiency. Something has to be done. And I think you people need to start asking some questions and I very much appreciate it if you did. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Lisa. Anyone else on. So we are on the agenda. So consent agenda is next to have a motion to approve the consent agenda. Second. Any discussion. I just want to encourage folks to read the superintendent's report because I really appreciated the. I appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. That was coming out of that because of the improvements that the district is making. I recognize, of course, there's always more room to grow, but it was really nice to see such a positive note. So now Mike Barry. Oh, we have a vote. How's the paper? Hi. Any opposed. Now I'm like very. Thank you for putting this together. I know that we had some last minute changes on the agenda. And this was. Earlier than you had anticipated. So. We appreciate the fact that we probably had to do some. Some juggling to make this happen. So, so thank you for being flexible. Thanks. We're actually we're getting really good. You know, we've had our data work. We're improving every time. And so it wasn't as difficult to put this together. Unsure notice, but. I'm going to give kind of a broad overview on, on things that we saw and things that we're doing well and things that we need to focus in on. And then answer any questions that folks have. So one thing that we're seeing immediately is this is a lot of hard work by our teachers. A bunch of hard work by our principals. Oh, thank you. That's amazing. Really cold in here. No, if people start putting on jackets, don't worry. I can, I can, yeah, I can. I think that's just collecting audio, but not amplifying my voice. I'll give it a shot. I'm sorry. So we're seeing this response to our literacy work and the consistency that's coming with that. And we're hearing positive reports from our teachers. We're seeing students respond across the different settings. And that's really wonderful. And we're learning a lot as we go. And we're seeing that in the results in the data. We're seeing that in the results in the classroom. We're feeling really good about that. As I mentioned earlier, our data literacy is improving every day. We are getting better at finding metrics, identifying metrics, using them in conversations, having our collaborative teams. That's our gray level teams or content teams, discuss data on a regular basis or guiding coalitions or leadership teams in schools. And even as an administrative team, we're spending much more time talking about data and responding to it. In thoughtful and intuitive ways. It's really, it's really great. Our MTSS model is going through an iterative process where we're really developing what does our MTSS model look like? How do we respond to student needs at different levels? And our goal by the end of this year is to really articulate that in a clear way to our school population in school and out of school so that everybody knows how that system works. But we've learned a ton this year on all of that. And tools like Panorama have really helped us along the way to do that. So we're pretty proud of that. Our intervention systems are moving like lightning. It's been amazing. Our interventionists are very committed to working with our students in need and getting them the support they need to be able to access what's going on in the classroom. And we've got systems down. We've got people stepping into leadership roles. We've got all sorts of things happening in the intervention space, along with a new move towards collaboration with special educators. So we're working with students in special education, as well as general education students in the intervention space and vice versa. And that is all new for everybody. And we're doing a really good job at exploring that and defining systems to support kids. And that's been, that's been wonderful. We're seeing scores go up in consistent ways. And we're looking at growth metrics with our eyes wide open. So we are now able to measure in different ways the rate at which students are growing. This is particularly important for our intervention students that may be multiple grade levels behind. We want to see them learning at a rate that's higher than average. They have more to learn in less time. And so now we have metrics to be able to do that to see if what we're doing in interventions in particular is working. And if it's not to be able to adjust. So that's been really great focus for us. And we're really proud of our interventionists across all the schools. They're working extra hard as well as their special educators. Areas that we need to focus in on, as mentioned before, we do need to look at math. The great news I have about looking at math is a couple of things. One, we've learned a lot about how to look at things that aren't working and figure out how to identify what needs to change and move through that through those. So our educators and our administrators and our leaders are all pretty practiced at that. So this is going to be a very manageable look for us. The other thing I think this is my opinion based on what I know about what's happening in classrooms and the data that we're seeing is this is not an effort problem. On our part with mathematics, our math educators are more motivated than anyone to dial in the system. And they're working really hard. So I think what we have is some misalignment vertically. We have some things that are kind of out of order or not aligning between schools. And then we probably have a small amount of misprioritization. So for example, we may need to look at data and measurement at the elementary schools a little bit more than we have been. And but now we have the data to really identify what it is. And hone in on those things and fix them. And we've also got a lot of successes in mathematics. We've done some great strides between the transition from algebra one to the high school, the work that we're doing at the middle school, our interventionists and mathematics have been doing some great work. So we have some successes in there too. We do know that we need to find some alignment and tweak a few things and take a look at that. We're still working to find data for different areas of content and how to make that meaningful. So for example, social studies, really important content area. This is something that a lot of schools in Vermont struggle with. How do we measure how we're doing in social studies instruction? And how do we inform our curriculum design around that? So we're looking into some things that we can do some assessments and data that we can pull based on standards and social studies. And that's one example, but that applies to other content areas as well, beyond math and literacy. So we're still working on that. We're still refining all of our systems. And every day, I feel like we learned something new. I go to an interventionist meeting and they have seven new ideas about how we could improve our system and we start implementing them. And so we're getting really great at that process of identifying something that could be more efficient, putting it into place, implementing it, reflecting on it and doing that. It has become our fluid motion now. And I think Libby's probably mentioned it before our PLC structures are in high gear right now. From our leadership teams and schools to our content and collaborative teams and on down. It's been great. I think one of the things that we continue to need to focus on is the sustainability of it all. So our literacy work this year, the teachers serve a big part on the back. It's been a ton of work. And they've really focused in on there. And especially at the elementary school where teachers are generalists. It's really hard to switch gears when we have this big focus on literacy, which is amazing and say, okay, now we got to talk about math for 15 minutes and we got to do this. So finding those sustainable ways to keep the conversation going has been key. That's where I think we're doing the right work by focusing in on the PLC structures and getting collaborative teams to discuss things on a regular basis and having that internal leadership that we're getting from our educators is pretty amazing. We continue to work on and refine the information that we have for the community about our curriculum and our curriculum work. So we are literally adding to the website weekly. And really trying to increase our transparency and what's going on there, whether it's in draft form or messy or whatever, we're trying to do a better job of getting that out there. So that people are informed. We have redrafted, for example, we've redrafted our report cards at the elementary school level and we've drafted communications to families that have been looked at by parent groups to get feedback, to see how can we better communicate via report cards or other reporting measures. So we're really excited to get that going. We're still working really hard to find the right data for the high school that's useful to the high school educators. The high school kind of shifts once you get past ninth grade in terms of what information is really useful to classroom teachers in different content areas and to students depending on their goals and their focus. So we're really still working on that. And Jason, Gingel, Emily Therian and myself have been spending a lot of time discussing that as well as our core team. We're still getting comfortable with Act 173 and special education and intervention folks. That's a lot of kind of different systems learning to talk to each other in a fluid way. And in some cases it's a system that has never really been fluid before. And so now we're working hard to try and figure that out in small ways. But we've seen some successes, but we still have a long way to go on that one. And then the last thing that we really, really need to focus on is being able to articulate our MTSS structure clearly to the community, to our scholars and our teachers, so that everybody kind of understands how everything works right now internally. We feel like we, we know it, but it's not articulated in one spot in a clear way. So we're really working to do that by the end of this year. That's a big focus for our core team. Myself, Peggy Sue and Jess and Nick. We're spending a lot of time on that. And that's kind of my, my big overview. In a way that maybe somebody's not as deeply a meshed in education, what an interventionist does, like what their role is. Yeah. So we have teams of academic interventionists at each school. And those are folks that focus in. Typically they're, they're in one content or another here at Roxbury that goes into both, but they focus in on students. That may be below grade level. Typically not students that are on an IEP for those supports. So these are general education students sometimes. And they work with them on really focused, targeted skills in short cycles of three to six weeks, depending on which school you're in. And the idea is to focus on the goal of, you know, linear fashion that move them towards where they need to be. So we have maps of skills that take them from A to Z. And if the students at D, we're going to start with D and we're going to do E and we're going to do F and we're going to keep going in that process and moving them along on those skills that they may be lacking to access what's going on at grade level. Yep. And we've got really smart, like, I mean, very interested to hear more about what we're doing to bridge knowledge gaps at the high school level, just anecdotally, I'm in an algebra two class and a lot of my classmates. I find it a little concerning just like the. Real difference in levels people are at some folks. Can't solve basic algebra equations. And I know that a lot of that is caused by COVID, but I totally understand it's a lot more difficult at the high school level. I'm just curious what we're working on with that. Yeah. So there's a couple of things to that story. One piece of data that's really interesting to look at is we looked at students that moved into the district after third grade. And there's a really large amount of students that have moved into the district after third grade. It's important to know that and to think about that. And that has changed how we address students moving into the district. So we screen students moving into the district early so that we can see what's going on. We look at their data from a previous school and really try to understand where they're at in terms of their exposure to pre algebra skills. Leading up to the high school. So that's that's an interesting piece of data that we're looking at and considering. One of the challenges in supporting students at the high school is the schedule. It's a it's a it's a big thing. So at an elementary level or middle school level when a student enters an intervention, they go five days a week. 40 minutes. For six weeks. At the high school. It depends on soul and block green and white days. And if the student is assigned to the class and they're going to get credit for it. So we what we've struggled with at the high school in terms of intervention and we're continuing to work on it is. Time on intervention. So a student at the middle school and six week intervention may have 30 days of intervention. A student at the high school may have eight. In that time. And so how do you how do you move students that have 30 days of intervention? And so how do you how do you move students that have a deficit in some foundational skills in eight days over six weeks? It's really difficult. So we're finding new ways to do that by looking at learning labs and looking at someone block differently and coming up with some course offerings that we can do where students are taking a course that essentially addresses those needs and those skills. So we're working on it. We're working on it. We're working on it. We're working on it in terms of that support. The other thing that we're doing is we're trying to find ways to understand that data better. So if students have skills lacking in algebra two, what are those skills? Are they consistently the same skills that they're lacking? And where can we trace that back to. So the high school made a big shift this year to really focus in algebra one and students that come into ninth grade before that was kind of spread between the middle school. So we've made a big shift this year that I think it's going to make it a lot better for students to be able to get all those pre-algebra skills at the middle school, be able to come in the ninth grade confident and be placed appropriately. That's the other component. There's a lot of pressure in mathematics to get to pre-calc. And so that sometimes overrides what where a student really should be focusing on their skills when they get into high school. And as I said before, our math educators are more motivated than anyone to dial all that in. So we're actually we're going to be piloting a new assessment this spring that assesses all students in mathematics at the high school and algebra one skills so that we can see where those gaps line up no matter which mathematics class that they're in. So that's Tammy Beatty is kind of leading that charge. So we're going to see what's going on. Great question. Ask me again in like two months. Yeah. Thanks, Jim. Did you say my name? I can't. I didn't hear clearly, but I guess. Thank you. Thank you, Mike. Actually something in Miriam's question made me think a little bit about some of the some of the data. And so I guess first off, I just want to say as a scientist, I'm not going to say anything about the history of data and try to interpret what I'm seeing. And one of the things here, I'm flipping between screens, but one of the. One of the pieces I saw. Oh yeah. So in the reading, I'm running record broken down by grade level. I'm wondering the pattern that I'm seeing. If I do the math correctly, the grade three, those folks would have been maybe in kindergarten. The beginning of COVID. And so I'm wondering if that. If what we're seeing is there's a sort of lagging effect of COVID. Disruptions in the way that. Students were taught and now, you know, the grade one level, they're, you know, up to 90%, which is awesome. And so I guess two part question is one. Am I seeing that sort of. That wave that, that will be moving as the, the students that were kindergarten at the beginning of the COVID disruptions as they move forward. And then if so, what. Yeah. What can we as a district do to sort of backfill. For those, for those kids that were most impacted by. By the disruptions. Yeah, I'd have to say I'd need more data to be certain that I could point to that as a causal relationship. For example, I don't have in front of me the numbers for multilingual students, which impacts this data. Significantly. I don't have a sense of the cohort data from year to year. And the other thing I'd point out is just that this is the second time we've given this assessment. And this is the second time we've given this assessment. So it's still pretty young to us in terms of being able to say, you know, this is spot on and what we're doing. I'm not trying to throw excuses or anything. This, this is the grade level that has the lowest. Proficiency on this assessment. However. I think. I think there's some other factors for us to look at. Generally speaking, what we're seeing is students across all grade levels respond to our folks on literacy. And that is one of those pivotal years. So when we look in the spring, it'll be interesting to see where this data is at and what we see. Thanks, Mike. I mean, can you explain. See between literacy math, it seems like literacy is going well math. You identified a couple of problems like how deep are the problems and why. Yeah. Why do we seem to be having more success in one than the other. Mike, this is my opinion and this is so Amy, Kimball and I are about to embark on a very extensive geeky journey. In the next couple of weeks, once she's out of the classroom at the middle school, we're going to do a pretty deep dive into what's going on in mathematics. And when I say that, I don't want it to sound like there's something drastically wrong going on. I don't believe that there's something drastically wrong going on our math educators, if you ever got them all in one room. I don't think these people want to hammer this out. I really think that what we're looking at is some misalignment vertically between elementary schools, the middle school, the middle school and high school. And the example that I used earlier is at the elementary school, we backed off of measurement and data. Mainly because of research at the time told us this is what we should be focusing on. And several years ago, we were seeing great math results on the S-back assessment. Then we switched assessments. And so we're, we have a new assessment that told us, you know, hey, your scores are a little lower here in mathematics than they were on the S-back. We don't know how to compare that yet. Well, there is a study underway that the state's doing to say a crosswalk between the S-back and the PT cap. We haven't seen that yet. So I can't really, I can't really say it. I do, I do think we're going to see some things in our, our research about order of concepts and skills introduction at different levels, what makes sense and what we're doing. I think that that, that's something. And in curriculum land, that's kind of an easy fix. That's not, you know, we're not throwing out everything and everyone has to go to three years of training and like, no, we're just going to move single digit over here and we're going to move decimals over here. You know, that, that's, that's a thing. I think we're also seeing the need for more consistency and resources for mathematics for our educators. So we do a lot of tight and loose. And I know Libby's talked to the board about that before as well, that we focus in on prioritize standards and proficiency scales. And we allow a lot of flexibility for educators to use their expertise to address those priority standards and proficiency scales. And within that, I think more consistent resources within mathematics in particular could be a real benefit across our schools. So those are the types of things that I'm speculating. The great news for us, I think is that we have gotten so much better at data use and collection. That instead of wondering and working on assumptions and opinions, we're going to be really able to point to these are the three things that we need to talk about in three through five. These are the three things we need to talk about in seventh or nine. And then a follow up question. I mean, yeah. We're about to approve a budget or during a budget cycle where we are probably not going to be able to make the, you know, major investments. Do you think without making major investments, we can significantly. Improve the math. 100%. Now that we have those PLCs rolling the way we do, particularly at KB, that makes that work so much easier and doesn't cost a penny because teachers are learning how to collaborate, not just work in the same room together, but actually collaborate and make that make each other better teachers by studying the expectations, studying the teaching practices, seeing what's worked, what hasn't worked, and being okay to talk about that with each other. So none of that costs anything. That's a scheduling. That's a technical problem, right? So that is a piece that we're getting it go. We've gotten it going. Kate in literacy. Yeah. So the point where teachers are hungry for the data, they're loving the conversations with each other. They're just, they're excited about the work they're doing in the literacy world. So we want them to own that so they don't lose it. And then we want them to have those conversations and math. The other thing that we got on her side is that we're, we're coming off of several years of high quality math, professional development. We had our elementary folks working with Christian quarter match for at least three years. And that work still is there and present and we can pull on that. And then we are middle school and high school folks were working with the teachers development group, which is a fantastic group that focuses on math. Instructional strategies and Amy Kimball is our, our third ace in our pocket. She's a fantastic instructional coach in mathematics. And she can really help us. And to get the organizers and support teachers in it. And she's already on staff. So that's not. So much for the teachers development group is trying to stall the stealer. You're trying. You're trying not successfully. Just a quick follow up. Mike, would you say that the one thing I just heard you say is like, you're, you're about to go or maybe I misheard this, but about to go from sort of like guessing and assumptions to being able to use like point at real date. Would you say you'll be there by June by the next. Yeah. So you'll have a little bit more of like. I'm just waiting for my partner in crime to get out of the classroom. Yeah. Yeah. So Amy Kimball has been teaching math at the middle school for the first half of the year. And once she's in the next two weeks, she's going to transition out of there and back to the, could the coaching role and then we'll, we'll close the doors and get out the whiteboards and go nuts. Yeah. When you say resources for math teachers, can you provide an example of what that looks like? If it's not something that comes out of the budget. Yeah, that's already. So there's a, there's a really well researched and highly rated open source math resource called open up. It's used at the middle school and it provides structure to conversations and mathematics. So it's not necessarily do this on this day. It's more like, oh, we're going to be talking about decimals and fractions today. Here's some activities to get the most yield out of students in conversation and what happens when teachers are using a consistent resource for that, students aren't seeing different approaches to that or different imagery or different visuals to all of those things to get some consistent experience across grade levels in classrooms. And that's where you see some traction starting to happen. So that's an example of something that we could look at for other schools or even just organizing and calibrating around the resources that we do have already can go a really long way. And so that's where we see a lot of that. And that's where we see a lot of that information amongst teachers is really effective tool and improving instruction. That kind of happening when it comes to literacy instruction because that's been a little bit more prioritized and potentially that process will. Could fold over. Yes, but that goes back to the sustainability thing. So right now our elementary educators spend one day a week receiving letters training. And so that's where we see a lot of that. Everything else that we're doing right now, we kind of squeak in in different places. So, you know, you, we don't have a lot of time with our educators. To do big shifts. So that's where we lean on the PLC structure where we have our collaborative teams that are now being led by teacher leaders that can really take these conversations and make sure that they're happening in different places. So that's where we expect to see, okay, you know, in January we're going to take a break from letters and literacy. We're going to focus on math. That's not how it's going to happen. It's going to be more integrated into the work that we're doing. But I think to Libby's point earlier, our folks are really practiced at this right now and they're really comfortable with these conversations in a way that we haven't been before. So it's, it's not like starting from scratch. Yeah. I think this is a good thinking back question, actually to what you're talking about right now, because it sounds like what happens because of, you know, how the approach to elementary education is that they're generalists. I think is what I, the term that I heard you use. So is there any sensibility in terms of model that you go to more specialists versus generalists? Cause it sounds like there has to be a lot of changing of gears. There's like this focus, heavy focus on literacy. And there's a lot of training up that needs to happen and there's a lot of, you know, there's a lot of, you know, there's a lot of, you know, there's a lot of, you know, there's a lot of kind of acclimating to that. And then, and then we can kind of fall behind the math a little bit. So is there any, because there's such a hyper focus on the literacy pieces or in elementary education theory, I guess, you know, is there any sensibility to shifting to kind of more of a specialist. Model. So Mike disagree with me. Yes, there is some school districts do do that. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. And social emotional learning. So at the elementary level, the teacher is still a parent figure for kids. And a, and a large capacity, right? Not quite. But you know, it's a major caregiver in their life. Yeah. And the connection. Yeah. Yeah. And that connection. Suffers when they move from one classroom to another classroom to another classroom. That relationship suffers. Yeah. So I personally don't believe that you get the benefit. When you get the benefit, when you're losing that, that connection. And if that connection is way too important for our little. That's my opinion, but there's also it's, it's. It's done in different ways. Yeah. Yeah. Would you add to that? Living on the fact when I was the principal at Underhill Central School, I'm like a decade ago. We did that. We moved to a specialist model. And it was that exact experience. The teachers said they did some of their best teaching by focusing in on one content area. Yeah. But our students and families really. Struggled with that. And, you know, it made parent conferences a whole different thing. So it has its challenges for sure. But I'm also, you know, I'm, I'm very optimistic about this. I, because we're going to be able to be so specific and. Not to generalize about math educators, but they're, they're pretty fact based. Show me the data and we'll fix it. So there's not a whole lot of. I don't know, I'm pretty confident that we're going to be able to lay this out in a plan that is very specific. That makes sense to everybody because it's based on data. And be able to measure some change. I'm feeling pretty good about it. You're optimistic about the rate of change, basically, in terms of being able to do that quickly. I think, you know, I think you can talk about how like every day counts, right? For every kid. And, you know, when a year goes by and there's, you know, we're not at the level that we're at. Like that is significant. So I am curious about sort of the rate of change. So when, when we can anticipate, you know, when our kids can really start to bump up. And not in that content area. Well, I think I'm confident about it because I'm seeing it already. So today alone, I had three conversations with math teachers that were tracking data and trying to figure out what was going on and talking to other people in other schools. So we're already making change. What Amy and I are going to attempt to do is to organize it so that everybody's on the same page about that change. And that there's a systematic way that we're looking at it and measuring the impact of it. And I, I don't want to, I'm not hedging my bets, but I really anticipate that this is going to be four to five steps. So we're going to be looking at, we're going to be looking at how these shifts in K through 12 that, that involve prioritizing something. We may not be prioritizing as much as we should right now. Identifying common resources and organizing them, which is. That's Amy and I can do that all day long. And then potentially some gaps in vertical alignment. So we're going to be making sure that the, the rigor of the questions that our teachers are using are matching the rigor of the, of the proficiency scale and the priority standards. Right. So just making sure that those are in alignment, but that's a resource question. Can you give us an example of what that looks like, Libby? Sure. Yeah. It's very different for a kid to get a pure addition problem with just the numbers, right? Versus those numbers in a context where they're doing the same skill, right? But it's very different after a problem, right? And an ad versus just seeing two notes, three plus four equals seven, right? It's very different to see those see a word problem and have to figure out what they need to figure out what they need. You know what I mean? Like you can see how the rigor can increase. And so if one teacher's second grade classroom, I just use second grade as an example because I was a second grade teacher. If one teacher is only using the procedural. Adding, right? The next teacher is only using a simple word problem. And then the next teacher is using a combination of all three. Yeah. Yeah. I think that's where their critical thinking skills is in there a little bit more. Yeah. Then that third classroom most likely is going to have kids who, who come out with a different skill level. Does that make sense? Yes. So I think what are you saying is you want to raise the level of rigor. To the third classroom level in all classrooms. I want to make sure all of our teachers on the second grade PLC. Yeah. No, I just pick on that because I was there with them. You know, we need to be able to understand what proficiency means. Yeah. And what that looks like in an assessment item. Yeah. So that they're all it's apples to apples that they're comparing. So when they're writing those common formative assessments, it's where it's where the expectation of the standard is. I'm curious to what extent you feel like you're, like recruiting the wheel, like, you know, having a limited understanding of assessment. I mean, it's a lot of work. You've already just like like built all these systems from ground up, you know We have these significant COVID blood where you were playing the role of a principal, which is you know, no small detail and so we're moving on on these things and I'm just and I I did take note as somebody as an environmental science, you know major We don't have assessments for science or for social studies. And so I'm kind of curious Where are we with that and then just knowing kind of the time and resources and energy to kind of build up all these assessments? When would we see something there? And I'm just curious like in your role, how much do you Like coordinate with other curriculum directors around the state or we just sort of in our like MRPS Silo because we have a really capable team and capable teachers And so we're just sort of like blueprinting our own systems But do you like, you know, do you trade and borrow and learn from other curriculum directors to try to reduce your workload? Because it sounds really significant your workload The science assessment, you know the VTCAP science assessment, so we're getting science data. It's just embargoed forever in a day Yeah So we have science in social studies what we're looking at is actually the the same group that puts out the VTCAP assessment Cognia has these formative assessments in social studies So our social studies folks on our curriculum committees are going to take a look at that to see if that's a viable option for us in terms of assessment One thing I want to respond to When when you say, you know, when will we see these assessments? There's different layers of assessments the the assessments that I'm reporting out on are super high level Assessments, but right now our teaching teams are creating common formative assessments that I'd argue might be more important to the grand scheme of things So and you and I will never see that data data at a board meeting presentation That's for the teacher to really inform their instruction the next day or the next week or those things So right now our teachers are going through that creating formative assessment after formative assessment after formative assessment. And so we've got Tons of assessments happening right now. And we're piloting other things as they go. I do think social studies is a tricky one and nobody And I'm not saying this as an issue, but nobody in the states really hammered this down. That's that's been a constant moving target for a long time for curriculum directors in particular As far as collaborating with curriculum directors that I don't know how to describe it curriculum directors are kind of like a tribe. And and we share everything, everything. So I meet with a regional group every other week. So we have the winnesty valley curriculum leaders group that meets. That's probably about seven or eight of us and we collaborate on everything. We share information that we're getting and receiving from the AOE we share programs and resources that we have You know, Jen Miller Arsenault is the curriculum director in the U32 district and I communicate with her constantly because I think she's brilliant. And so we're always sharing everything and even before that Libby and I were both members of a curriculum director group up in the Champlain Valley. And it was probably the most important meeting we had every month was to go to that meeting and be able to collaborate. And I still talk to those folks to So it's it's yeah. No, no, the other thing to think about too is for our MTSS work, Essex Westford is very similar to us and the work that they're doing and the beliefs around and their MTSS model. So I'm quite good friends with their superintendent and we have been talking for a while about how to get our administrators and our teacher leaders together so that we can Go observe other schools in action and see how their PLCs are working and see how they're starting to get our principals talking about like, how did you solve this problem. So that's another piece to this too is is finding the systems that are most aligned to us then and talking and see if we can get in the same room together so we can talk shop. Yeah. For those who are watching and might not be familiar MTSS. Multi-tiered support. Right here. Jim has been listening. Good job, Jim, you're listening. And multi-tiered system of support might not mean that much to anyone else. So it's essentially like how we ensure that the education is getting through to kids. Yes. Well, I wanted to say thank you again for not only for another robust data report, but also all of the work that's gone into the growth that we've seen so far. So really appreciate that. And I have a few questions that are a little bit just to help me keep learning to understand what we're reading when we read these data reports. The local assessment section is Organized or I guess we're we you're sharing this mean proficiency. Can you tell us what it means what a mean proficiency means. Right. That students did. So for example, kindergarten fall forward counting to 100. The average was 67% proficient. Okay, so so 67% of kindergartners in the fall were proficient. Yeah. And then in the winter 114%. No, can't be. So, no. That is a really good trick. Yeah. No, this is the I'm sorry. This is the mean score from our system VCAT. So this takes the mean score for all of the scores on the assessment. And I don't have it in front of me on what the top amount is. Okay, so it's not it's not like on the report card. No, one through four. No, okay. One of the challenges with these assessments. I was looking at this with Rachel Whalen. Different students take different parts of this in the fall and the winter. It's similar with putting the Math foundational skills assessment, the back pages. So what's tricky with those assessments. So in the fall on the math assessments, for example, Let's say that there's a question that has two digit addition and subtraction in the fall. It has two digits in the winter. It may have three or a decimal. And so the rigor increases, but those assessments are used for classroom teachers to change their instruction versus designed for a once a year proficiency. How are we doing kind of thing. That's the same with those kindergarten assessments. I included them on here to show that we do something different for our youngest learners. In terms of assessment, like they don't take friends star right out of the gate. They don't, you know, so we do a lot different at the kindergarten level and that's why they're included in there. But I can get some more information from Rachel on how that's all. Yeah, I think the thing that would be helpful to know is what are we aiming for. Is it and I don't think this is correct, but where my brain went because to me it looks like the the one to four score that would show up on a report card. I was like, Oh, by the spring assessment or just spring data report we'd want to see the mean be three because we'd want generally the kids to be where they they should be at the, you know, for their grade level. But it sounds like you're saying that's not how to interpret what I'm looking at here. No, I think what we want to look at here is are the students growing. Is there growth from the fall right winter. Okay, the power in these assessments is at the individual student level. So when a classroom teacher is looking at how Joey did on the letter ID or the accounting that's what's really valuable about it. Yeah, and I get that because we don't have the information from the basically like the one standard that is the once a year. Yeah, students take it to determine proficiency. I really appreciate that you're sharing all these other little pieces with us. It's just hard to get what the big picture is from all of it. And one of the, one of the things that I think would be helpful to bring in every time we get a data report is that we have our newly set by the board, academic priority of closing the gap. And, you know, the gap being the one that is historically existed between more privileged students and less privileged students due to racial and socio economic factors. Because none of this data is disaggregated, which I can understand at the kindergarten level, you can't tell us. It's hard to know if we're making any progress on closing the gap and so far I don't think we've actually determined what our gap is currently correct so is there something that we can start to see at the board level about this. Yes, there is. I mean, I have here, you can't see it because it's embargoed. But we took the vt cap data and created a visualization system for us to be able to see the graph, see the achievement gap. And I'd argue that there's actually maybe 12 different achievement gaps. So what I have here is I have ELA math and science broken down by economically disadvantaged and not economically disadvantaged. And I have a line graph and a bar graph but the line graph allows us to see where there's huge gaps, and then when there's not. And we can overlay that from year to year to see if we're bringing those lines closer together. And informally what I can tell you is that. So in social economic land, there is not a significant gap between an ELA and math. Science yes, which was really interesting. And then I did an achievement gap by gender. We have female male and non binary, and there was a larger gap in ELA than math, and then another large gap in science. Then I did IEP status, and also race and ethnicity, and I want to go back and I want to add chronic absenteeism, or SEL data and multilingual. So we will have once the embargo is lifted. I feel like it's some great historical event, but yeah, we will have a metric to discuss the achievement gap for the first time, which I think is really viable. Yeah, and a way for us to really see if we are addressing the achievement gaps that we've identified. Yeah, so we've got it ready to go. You can tell us. I'm that embargo, do you think it has anything to do with you were just saying they're doing a study to see if they can compare apples, make it apples to apples the aspect to the VT cap you don't think it has anything to do with that. No, hopeful thinking I guess. No, we got an update recently that said that they were hoping for February 1. I'm hoping to prepare everyone Libby and I know how this will happen. It'll be a Friday afternoon at four and they'll be a press release. We'll know before we do. Yeah. And then, and then we'll have a chance to rally on Monday. But yeah, I'm hopeful February 1 to be his. Yeah. And then another sort of request because we have now that the boards come up with the indicators we have two indicators that we came up with an in the academic closing the academic gap, which are about establishing a baseline and seeing a pattern of growth across demographics for students in grades eight to 12 self reporting their own confidence in their academic skills. And then another indicator of seeing a pattern of growth in 11th and 12th graders about reporting high levels of confidence in what life looks like beyond school, school, because they're about to graduate. Is that something that you can start to share with us because you're gathering that through panorama already or have you not started getting that information yet. That would be a good just marine question I think is more in the survey land. I'm imagining that's how we would collect that data is through student surveys. That's something that we can discuss for sure. I think that's very easy for us to work in the panorama. Okay, great. Thank you. Other questions or comments. I have a question about you were talking about special education and interventionists and that sort of a work in progress. Is it expected to look like it does for like wind block or whatever block. What I was referencing was at 173 that allows for lack of a better terminology, the mixing of special educators and interventionists. So we have some academic interventionists who are delivering IEP services, because they're the most qualified to do that. And at 173 allows us to do the same thing where special educators could provide intervention to non IEP students. And what it is that this flexibility gives us twice as many people to address student needs and not in silos. But it has been tricky because those two worlds were very separate for a long time you went to intervention and if that wasn't working then we went to you know IEP land. But we're rocking that a little bit and we're saying no let's just put everybody in the same room all the special education interventionists and say here are our kids who's the best person to work with these kids. And so we're trying to get to that land right now. And so we have to interact with 173 show if a student, if we're questioning if anybody's questioning whether or not a student has a learning disability or not. By law now we have to show that we have had an effective MTSS model wrapped around the student. And so that that forces basically our educators to talk to each other in a different way. And so that's our professional learning collaborations for communities are there PLCs for special educators. Yep Peggy Sue is working on that piece. She's going to come at a later date. So a big great question for Peggy Sue. She's been getting us out of, or getting us back on track with our policies and procedures around special education and she's been moving into really, really focusing in on families and ips and ensuring that everybody's experience is similar with that process. She's a lot IP meetings right now, and building the capacity of our special educators in that realm. And she, she is still part of all the conversations that we have as a core team around the system things that Mike, Mike is talking about and she'll be able to continue to move in more. But that's her goal is to get special ed. You know we're working on academics working within the same model or SL working in the same model. Nick presented to the lead team today about chronic SMT isn't within the same and CSS model, and special education will will also start to function in that way so so it's just the way we do business. I had one more thing, referring back to the flywheel analogy. Once the flywheel is spinning, can it become more cost effective. It could. Yeah, it becomes so self sustaining. This is the way this community works. New person comes in, they get sucked into that way of working. Because that's the way it's done, and potentially, maybe coaches take on different roles or move on to different things or whatever. And that is, safely. Like Christian. Yeah, I have a quick question. I have an RVS specific question. We had some pretty big jumps in the run star assessment scores. And I think the last time you were here Mike I asked a question about title one and you know was RVS or other schools in our district eligible for title one and the answer was title one is sort of an enigma but I remember Libby you also like it's not like a people thing we don't need more people we need like different systems. So I'm curious what you all think led to kind of those those jumps at RVS I think there was like an 18.2% increase for reading proficiency. Well, more students took the test. Yeah, exactly. And then there was a 20% increase in math. So I'm curious, you know, so they're Shannon Miller and then are there specific like systems. Shannon Miller has brought in different systems and she is phenomenal. Yeah, here at RVS. And she's a phenomenal educator, and she really, she lives and brings these kids here and making sure that like her expectations are quite high. And she's changing how the educators here talk about kids she's changing how they think about kids she's changing she's wrecked she's getting them to recognize that what they do can change can impact kids learning. And she's just, she's fantastic. She was a fantastic hire. And she is ensuring that the systems are happening the way they're supposed to be happening. I'm looking at Mike to see if he wants to add on but I think Shannon's got a big thing, big reason for it. She was fantastic hire. Absolutely. The leadership has been super helpful. I think the educators also have been working really hard. They're getting the letters training as well. And so they're getting a really substantial boost of literacy, a professional learning on a weekly basis. They're communicating between schools were supporting with new assessments and data there. They're administering that they're looking at that. So everybody's doing a lot. Yeah. And they're responding to the expectations that she said it so cool. It is. Thank you. Thanks. Okay, other questions or comments for Mike or Louie. No, thanks again, this has been super useful and I just want to echo everyone saying we appreciate all the work and we appreciate the data. This really helps us get a snapshot of where we're at and where we're going. And, you know, education is, I know we talk a lot about other things like budgets, but education is, is why we're here and knowing where the kids are at. And this isn't the out of place is super helpful and really appreciate the work and the presentation. Thank you. I have a question for the board just in terms of like accountability to our own goals and we have this document now and there's, you know, let me built in sort of like a tracking section. So kind of like who's going to be responsible for inputting that information and kind of taking what we see here and inputting it into there. Do we have like a system for that. We don't have a system that's a great question and and I will be honest that I just sent it to Jason with your comment around high school just to remind us. Yeah. And I was like, I, I've forgotten a little bit about this with all the budget. Right. Yeah. Yeah, I think that's a good thing for us to focus on when we get through budget season. Yeah, making sure that we are plugging this data into. Yeah. And I appreciate it. Two questions, particularly from me around. You know, tying this back to our goals. All right, so I think we're on to Mike. Yeah, thank you, Mike. On to our board action for the budget. Well, it's on my mind before I forget, I just want to for board members and people the public who haven't picked up seven days. There's a fantastic article in seven days about Joe Carroll's healthy masculinity class at the high school. Several students quoted, but he's really, he's, you know, Joe does fantastic work. He's one of our many excellent educators. But he put together a class, I think kind of coming out of the me too movement. Where boys can get together and just talk about how to be men in society that are caring and loving and healthy and, you know, present masculinity and a positive, positive light and, and a loving carrying light so I want to thank Joe for his great work and thank you, Michael. It's online and share our social media. Wherever you pick up seven days. So thank you, Joe, and thanks to all the students who have participated and thanks to Libby and the leadership for making space in our schools for teachers to take those, those risks and those chances. So we are on to the FY 25 budget with the action of approving the proposed FY 25 budget and warning and I'm going to turn it over to you Libby for any update on. Yeah, Chris is on too. So if anybody has any questions on the webinar. In the agenda, you can see the new chart just we just have the chart for you there's no from our end there hasn't been considerable changes except first taking that additional money from the fund balance out however that was we've got the healthcare new healthcare enrollment with the ending window was sometime in December and late December just early January Christian will know and so people's, you know, some people switch from single to family to you know so that has budget implications and that's finalized right now that was one of the unknowns that was still being finalized. So, this is where we're at now I will point you to the property dollar yield, and the great has decreased again already. We're in the House ways and means committee and we got the education fund outlook and I whispered to Jake during the meeting. That's not the dollar yield I know. He said it's not the dollar yield I know either. So let's hear what Julie Richter has to say. So that has fallen already again. That does not influence our budget because we are capped. The only influence the dollar yield can have on our budget is if it increases significantly, it is not going to do that. So it will fall precipitously. I will tell you just statewide that fall will will impact students or students in districts that were not capped. So that that is where that will have impact. I would like to say to the board that this was a really hard budget season, and I have lived and breathed this for the past, you know, since October and just recently it's pretty much consumed all of my working day I've been working a lot with the V.S. And as a trustee as a member of the statewide trustee group, and I'm really proud of this board and the work that you did in this budget here that was very hard other boards are taking some different routes that I'm happy we're not in that situation so I'm just really proud if you read the BSBA outlook today board members I encourage you to do that. It gives you a picture of what some other boards have decided to do that it's not in the spirit of 127. I'd argue, and so anyway, I just want to say that you've done really good work and I'm proud to be a colleague with you all through this budget season. Thanks, Libby. So anyway, this is our budget. Again, it has not changed much from the last time we met, other than including all the health care and taking out some of that fun fun melts. Christina would you like to add anything to that. No, pretty much nailed it. Great. So we're having to take any questions if you have questions. Yeah, I had a couple of questions on the language of the warning. So we, the way that we have phrased it is the per long term weighted average daily membership, which obviously because that language didn't exist before this year, it was not in previous budget warnings and I'm just curious if there's any what the reason is to use that number rather than like, we just use our, you know, general student population butts in seats, as you like to say. Is there was there a reason. Yeah, like Christina answer that I know that last week Christine is a member of an organization called Vasco, which is the business managers of the state. Last Friday was a tumultuous basketball meeting, but they as a group talked about the warning language. And I see Jake has his hand up to so Jake might want to jump in there too. Christina, do you want to say anything about the warning language and why y'all decided to do the way you did. Well, I just say that because the new term is what we need to use. Excuse me and we can't use equalize people so last year's warning said equalize pupils. So I just wanted it to be very clear of the new language. So this is the way essentially we phrased it last year, we just obviously didn't we use equalize people not long I just couldn't remember if we had used the, you know, like our actual student population, but we did use equalize people. Okay. Jake, do you want to add to that. Sort of, or sort of a curveball, can you hear me okay. Yeah. So the curveball is that the language, we, we don't need to include this language. It was the, it was suspended in act 127 because you're going from equalize people's to long term with the ADM so it doesn't have to be on the ballot this year and also for the next. Maybe it's just this year but it doesn't have to be on the ballot so maybe people want it on the ballot but it's not a legal requirement. You're right Jake it's suspended for the whole term of act 127. I think that's what he means Jill but maybe I don't know if you heard your question. Jake, do you mean the long term weighted average piece. The last sentence of article three. Yeah. Starting with a starting with it is estimated. Yeah, that that whole piece doesn't need to be on the ballot for voters. Just our total budget amount needs to be on there. Yeah, we want one step further just to explain it. And is that something that you all debated Christina and your meeting last Friday. It was kind of all over the map people are last year. Yeah, it was last year it was also suspended. I think it was through act 46 that it was a minimalist it was just that first sentence but we wanted to demonstrate to our taxpayers what their tax rate would be. So it was suspended last year and further suspended this year with 127. So again, everybody, every district is kind of doing it differently. It's a board's decision. Right. Right. And Jake's throwing the curveball out that we could only have the ones first sentence there. Of article three. Yes, that's correct. Christina, I miss what you just said what's the rationale for why we would include anything beyond the question mark in article three. Yeah, I think it's just important to show for transparency purposes to show exactly what we're we're proposing. I, I agree. I think that so that that one thing. I think was like, maybe the best part of act 46. Honestly, it's a great transparency piece. I also understand why the legislature suspended it this year because it's not apples to apples from from last year. And as a voter, you know, voters might wonder like, you know, 9.4 than this is getting big picture here but they might look at that. I would say like 9.45% is a lot. Should it be that high. If it was lower our taxes would be lower. But we all know that that's not true. Right. So it's kind of a can of worms a little bit. But so, so I defer to you guys on what you think should be said there. I'd like to see those last two sentences remain. For a couple of reasons one, we've done a lot of work from the very beginning of this budget season to be transparent with our communities about what we're facing and it feels like if we didn't share this information now it feels a little bit like we're shutting a door that we don't even need to shut you can find this information if you just look on our website. If you can find this information in this budget packet it's it's sitting right here now granted, you'd have to know how to read this spreadsheet, but it is here. So, you know, to me it feels like a continuation of the transparency that we have been striving for throughout this whole process. And then my other thought to contribute to this conversation is the believe the sort of like political word on the street is that school budgets are actually increasing like 12% this year, or something like that you know that's the some sort of sort of like, this is lower than that. So, people who are trying to stay informed might even look at this and say, Oh, this is, you know, our district is trying, you know, with all of the the pressures bearing down on us, trying to do the most responsible thing. So, those are two thoughts I have in response to the idea of removing these two sentences. I just, I wonder in that context, if, because this is 9.45% higher per long term weighted average daily membership. Is that, is that apples to apples the 14573. And do we want to instead to your point I mean I thought our budget overall budget increase was not that so if that's how this is reading, not the per people going up 9.45 but our budget. That might actually be misleading. That's a concern to me if I, I mean, I know we've had some good followings here but my guess is that of the 3000 people that are going to vote on town meeting day. There's maybe 200 that are even close to understanding what this means. It's generous, maybe 20. And I think for the other 2,990 or 980. It's gonna look like we're jacking our budget up on 10%. And which is, I mean it's transparent but it's in the context it's given it's, it's going to give an impression that makes us look pretty we're spending higher than we are. It sounds like Scott wanted to weigh in but then I also have a response that but also when did you. Yeah, I think I think it was Jill who just said that I, the, the comparison between the different statistics that are being reported in the media. It's all over the place and so if we are in article three we're talking about a budget of 32 million. I think the appropriate transparent number would be the increase year to year. And that is a number that people understand. I still don't. I mean, I guess I should understand what the long term weighted average daily membership is, but, but yeah, I think it's, I think it's our job to put, put forward the, the, the most clear information and a year over year budget increase is the most clear information. And that would be, I don't know what, what it's 6% or something like that I can't remember where what it is and sorry for the screaming in the background. And it also doesn't talk about the tax application which is going to because a lot of people are going to see 9.5% higher and I think in people's minds they quickly go that's going to be a 9.5% tax increase too. I don't know. Add something additional to that, that would indicate for in like, you know, the information that people really want to know. Yeah, which is how much money taxes going up or what's the percentage of increase of the budget. Yeah, I mean that's, I guess that's what it goes with transparency. I'm not sure that those two lines do anything other than confusing the people without extra context. And I think it also, it puts the responsibility upon us to explain it. You know, so I think we would have to think about our capacity capability forums opportunities to be able to explain that to people which I think it's all generally figured out upstairs for us but it's it's tricky to communicate. Which we have done in previous budget. Leading into town meeting day as well, you know, Britain op eds and how right public forums. Yeah, which will do it although the public forums was on a piece but I think op eds are. Yeah, good ways and the budget page as well, but also like, like honestly, there's a good person people who who will see this for the first time when they on Tommy and everyone they're walking into it. And that's that is like the that is pretty much all the information they get. Is there a way I know op eds is a great avenue for trying to communicate but is there the possibility that we could say something like as a result of that 20127 the increase will be limited to 5%. By following this is a 9.4% 9.5% increase 9.45% increase. Because is that right, or am I saying that am I wrong. Is this the number this is the 10% we're trying to stay under. This is the 10, yes, yes, you're right. I'm just not sure that languages. I don't know if that language is allowable because I don't know that. And I don't, it's just so complicated. Because if we're going to say, this is a 9.45% increase. Well, you have to further say that it's long term weighted average because if you look at the actual increase to the budget and I'm sorry to interrupt you. The increase to the, you can look at so many percentages down. Are you still looking at the spreadsheet. So our general budget is up 12%. And then our ad spending is up 11.64%. But the number that truly matters in this budget cycle is the ad spending per long term weighted average daily membership, which is the 9.45. So there's, there's a lot of different percentages that you can put out there. You know, it's, it's what the board wants to do. And then we can further talk about the tax rate for our community members where, you know, it's 19% for Montpelier and it's 8.445 for Roxbury, which is because of the CLA syntax, right. So there's a lot of options. Great, Jake. I'm not super familiar with this part of, you know, that finance picture. But, or the ballot language, but I think it's like kind of prescribed. Like, isn't it, you can't just write a few paragraphs about whatever you want. Isn't it kind of, of like a formula of some kind. Well, they suspended everything and only required us to put in the, the budget amount. But could you add, could you say like, you know, we think that that, you know, whatever act 127 is really terrible for us and blah, blah, blah, can you just start talking. I'm proud of this board. You can only state, you know, the percentages and, and word it that way, you know, that the tax rate for Montpelier will increase by this amount. And the tax rate for Roxbury will increase by this amount. So you have to use all the numbers in here. You can't just start talking about things. I think, so I hear rats common. I think it would be pretty complicated to start talking about the 5% because the 5% is on the equalized rate, which nobody even knows what it is basically. And the true experience of taxpayers is what's going to be in that yellow column or orange ish all the way to the right. That's 18.19 for Montpelier and 8.45 for Roxbury. And even then, you know, things are still like kind of uncertain. Montpelier or Roxbury could appeal their equalization study results, which would affect that. Or, you know, maybe the legislature comes up with $200 million to pump into the Ed fund and not that would change. So what goes on with taxes is not set in stone at this point, and it won't be even really set in stone for for March. Which leads to a point, Jake, around just putting the total budget in, because that's what happened this, this for FY 24 for Montpelier because the, the CLA went up so much it was, it was nothing like the number that we passed was not the number that we paid. And what's the, I mean, I think. We didn't include the tax rate in the language last year did we. I don't. Christina, do you know what our warning was last year what we included we debated this last year to. Yeah, we included the tax rate. Anything, any calculation after the yield is going to change the yield always change changes in May. Yeah, so right, but because, well, let me just said that I think we had estimated if the yield, even if it goes down it's not going to impact us because we're capped. Right. If it goes up then it will impact us. Yeah, but we're the numbers that we're looking at right now on the spreadsheet are pretty solid for. Solid for us, as far as tax rate goes because of that 5% cap. And less and less Montpelier does what Jake says with the equalization study contests it for Roxbury or Roxbury hasn't been assessed so it would just be one there. Yeah. I think it's helpful to put out something straightforward to the public that most people who read the ballot can understand. And, you know, knowing that we have a reasonable percentage increase in our budget over the previous year I think might be helpful for people to know. Yeah, I mean, I would feel more comfortable if it had, if we copy out of this was to what exactly what Lynn said, which is what the actual budget increases not the, I mean no one knows what a long term average daily membership. It doesn't even sound like a person. Right, so then you're putting a bigger number in. It's 11.9. Yeah. Joe, what do you think you brought over there. I mean at least that's transparent. I think there is a reason why a lot of boards and administrators I thought, thought that this was a very confusing required language that looks like it expires at some point. This piece about if approved it will result in education spending of blah, blah, blah, pretty close people is blah, blah, blah, like I think there was a reason why they suspended requiring to say that. So I must my, my recommendation would be that we only say the piece about the budget and I would support saying something about this projected spending. Or this represents an 11 point something percent increase in the total budget from the current year or something that's much more like I think this is just confusing. Increase to and then say estimated, because the estimated tax increases, not 11%. It's 19. It's, I know it's, it's 19 total but capped at five right. No, it's 19. Because it's a CLA, because it's CLA. Yeah, you're right. Jake, what did you want to say? We should put that in there. We're going to talk about, so the general budget in the first sentence of article three is 32046. And so if we were going to talk about how that compares to the current year, which we don't have to, but that would be 2608 and that's an increase of 12.02%. That would be extra information you could provide it, but if you want to do apples to apples, you would, you would do total budget for FY 25 compared to total budget for FY 24. If that makes sense. It is the most right way. So much more. Sorry. Yeah, I say that again. Well, Jill was, Jill was saying, saying it's an increase of 11.9%. But that's a different number. And sorry, I should correct my own terminology here. The number and an article three, we're talking about the general budget. That's the number that we have to warn is my understanding of 32046. So if we're going to talk about an increase from the prior year, it would be the general budget from FY 24 is 28608. So we're, we're proposing an increase of 12.02%. Last year just for the board and I've got grabbed the FY 23 or the FY 24 warning for the board's knowledge. So last year article three, right? Shell the voters of the school district adopted budget of 28, whatever, which is the amount of school board is determined to be necessary for the fiscal year. And it is estimated that this proposed budget if approved will result in education spending of 19,670 per equalized people. This projected spending for equalized people is a 9.05% higher than spending for the current year. So you did. So that's what we have this year. You have the same thing this with just this year's numbers. What was proposed was the same thing, except with long term weighted average. So last year we did not include estimated tax rate. No, or tax rate increase. For the increase from the year to your budget. Right. I stand with. In terms of just like the simplicity piece I think the add on of that 14,000 nine point I think I think that washes over most people. And it feels like what's most important, you know, and I realized that that is the highest number is actually in terms of a percentage increase is the general budget number. The highest number is the Montpelier tax rate increase. Trying to avoid that but yes. So but but like you said I mean right that's likely not going to change because of the cap and so. But either way, we're going to have some explaining to do. I mean, 9% 10% 12% like I mean that's, you know, especially if we're talking about there was 9% last year, it's an additional X percentage, you know, this year. You know, either way, you know, it's going to require an explanation, which is what we do every year, you know, you just hope that people, you know, actually read and understand, you know, the op ed, but I also wonder. So what was the total, we didn't have the total budget increase from last year. Is that right. I don't know, just curious how compared. Yeah, but right. Good. Yeah. I'm perfectly fine with having it be the, this represents an increase of 12% basically the general budget increase instead of the, the way it's written right now. I just think since we've written it this way in the past the way it's written now it does make sense to me to, I don't feel all that strongly but I think it does make sense to me to keep it. I think the one thing that we had going in our favor last year with the way this was written it is it at least the word pupil was in there so you could translate it to whatever 13 or 12 or whatever 13,000 per pupil but now with long term weighted average daily that that understanding I can see being lost in the shuffle. And I just want to say, you know, right now we're like wordsmithing the language of the language of learning or the ballot itself. And in the at the end of the day, we as a board have worked very hard and our administration has worked very hard to craft a budget that we're actually quite proud of. And so it won't be that hard for me to go to the people that I know in my community and say, please vote yes on this budget, no matter what that warning language says so I'm perfectly fine if it's, if we represent the general budget increase or the long term whatever increase. I definitely agree that we have worked very hard on the budget. And the thing that that always rocks my world. This year is that if voters think it's they don't like the budget. And they send it back to us, and we knock off, you know another half million dollars, it does nothing to their taxes. You know so we're waiting into this that the extra stuff. You know kind of creates that opening to me. And then that part is super hard to explain. And that that I think might rock their world too because that's very different than how things normally work. And it's very different than how things work for municipal taxes. So, so that's why I'm a little leery of extra information and that and that section. But just to add on to what Jake said like I've run these scenarios, it would cost, I mean, it would, in order to change the tax rate. We would be cutting millions like we're not talking about 100,000 here 100,000 there we're talking. Yeah, millions so I can hear what Jake saying I think, I think, taking a guess as to how our communities will react to budget language when we vote. It's really hard. I mean, really are even behavior given the light of what Jake said. I mean, would it be easier just to cut it off with the question mark, and be transparent in other ways to put on an outfit that put out all the numbers, including the 19%. To put it on our budget page, because I think trying to explain it in a small paragraph of the thing is, and I think what we've learned in the last half hour is it's going to be very confusing. So, maybe this year, because of the complexity, we by transparent we make sure it gets in the bridge we make sure it gets in the times are guess we make sure it's on our web page we make sure we put it on, you know, social media, and put all these numbers out. Yeah, and you know, send letters. Yeah, write a letter of power school to power school to our community. And just be very transparent with all these numbers in the context. And I think that makes more sense because I think we either write a tone, or we confuse people. And I agree with that there's like quite a story this year. Very difficult to convey it, and just a couple sentences and and I think we should tell the whole story. But in the article I think we should keep it, keep it simple. I think our process question, since this is what's before us drafted by Libby and Christina. And we need to vote tonight or hold some a special meeting to vote on it in time to get it to the city clerks, how, if we were going to change this language, how do we propose doing that. We just make an amendment that we do it with the amended language. Yeah. And there's no motion on the table right now. There's no reason on the table right now. You can make a motion I approve the budget. And we usually, I think we usually put the budget and then you have to approve the article so prove the budget and then approve the motion with the suggested. Okay, I'm going to get the somewhat easy one out of the way. I move that we approve the FY 25 budget to a second. Do you have any discussion. I'm sorry to block us at 816, but I want to, we received a letter from the monthly high school science department, but I think just bears mentioning about the cut from mhs sustainability one more time. I really am totally aware that difficult decisions need to be made but I think it doesn't mean that we should not question to pose solutions but consider them more seriously. The cut just doesn't, to me, fit with the rest of the really thoughtful value driven plan that Libby and her team put together. It's a small cut, it wouldn't result in significant savings for the district. And it's likely going to result in the loss of a full time employee. So, I don't know if this is the time for further discussion but I would regret it if I didn't mention that one more time that from a place of understanding the gravity of the decisions we're making. I'm really uncomfortable with that one. Discussion. Thank you for raising that. I think I said my piece and I've lost track of how many meetings. I agree does feel it does feel really unfortunate, especially with so many moving pieces and parts and I just I appreciate the science folks reaching out to explain that to us so I do still feel uncomfortable I'm planning on supporting the budget. Because it doesn't seem like we can change this but I hope every year we don't just continue to kind of death by 1000 cuts and this did feel like it was a very small amount of money. That would be a small impact on our overall budget but would have a significant impact on an individual and a lot of students. So, I do share Miriam's concern. Good job. Yeah, I totally hear that, and I really appreciate the science department reaching out to us and offering some other solutions as I read that read their letter to us. It occurred to me that the options they were presenting, you know, whether or not to implement them don't live at the board level. Yes, they live at the level of our principal at the high school and our curriculum director and our superintendent and so I the where I've landed is that we've established a budget that has the money we need to fund our schools for next year. And I would love for Libby and Mike and Jason to look at those ideas that the science department put forward and say, should we implement this kind of this like new ideas coming through from our science department and if so, let's figure out how to make it work within this budget. So that's, that's where I've landed which is why I support the budget that we have established as far as these are the main dollar figures. Those suggestions be implemented after the budget is passed or not like you would have to happen. That's what I'm saying is and Libby you should correct me if I'm wrong but that's what I'm saying is we vote to say it's $32 million $46,000 and $114 that's the money that our administration has to spend on education, then they go and decide like these are the this is the way we spend it. And I think that, you know, I really appreciate Libby sharing with us at that granular level of like these are my ideas for what staffing cuts look like to give us the sense of like what does this really mean because I think if we only saw them in vague terms it would be even harder to make decisions. But now that we have established this is the money that we need and it results in this kind of a tax rate for citizens in our two towns. It makes sense to me that it's in the, you know, the administration of the high school and our central office team to determine how to use it. Yeah, I'll second that. Yeah, categories. Yeah. Yeah, this is a very thoughtful letter and we definitely appreciate the feedback but these are very operational decisions. And that, you know, the board, the board does not design the classes and you know determine who teaches them. Can I take a moment to appreciate our student representatives. Yes. Thanks. Yeah, no, thank you. You both been excellent. At the risk of being redundant. Yeah, thanks for bringing it up again, because, you know, it's it's not it's not gone away and I kind of arrived at that to just sort of like as an individual who is an environmental science like I really appreciate the idea of more kind of hands on participatory place based science education absolutely as a parent I really appreciate that. And I also realized as a board member there's a point at which, you know, we walk up against a line and don't make those just those decisions and, you know, should miracles happen, you know, at the legislative level and there is some trickle down or some money winds up being in the budget I would definitely support you know that being being looked at again you know I'm also remembering as a board you know we are not zero resolution where we did say in that resolution that we were wanted to support opportunities in environmental literacy and you know participatory science and so on and so forth so this board has also in the past said that you know we certainly support these things and yet we don't make those kind of granular decisions but I would hope if there's an opportunity some miracle money comes to the fore that the administration would kind of look at those decisions again. I'm around that role because I do share your concern that if you knock an already part time position down that much more do you visit personnel together that's very real. So, thank you. Other questions or comments. I was in favor. I. Do we need to hear from. Do they need a voice vote. Any opposed. And do both voted, both voted a, I, I, a, I, a. Okay, I will also register vote as I think it's an important budget and I want to be in the record. Thank you everyone this is a very tough budget season, and I really appreciate the hard work. It has not been easy I'm not done yet. Just making sure. Yeah. Yeah, I really appreciate the hard work this was this was not easy budget season. Yeah, there were a lot of factors. In fact, most of the factors were out of our control. I think we did the best job we could and everyone put in a ton of work, not only just making hard decisions but understanding a completely Byzantine situation that was just just very hard to navigate. So appreciate all the time including the extra meetings and the extra hours. So thank you. Now on to the article. Do you have a motion to approve the article either as is or with discussed amendments. I think it's confusing with the second and third sentence in there. Do you want to make a motion to approve it with those sentences. I'm sorry. You want to make a motion to approve the article of those two sentences stricken. Yeah, I'll make motion that we approve article. Okay. I'll make a motion to approve the article three with the whole thing, the whole, the warning, the warning. Yes, with changes to article three to eliminate everything after the first sentence. Time for discussion. We need a second. Yeah, I heard a lot of seconds. So this would mean that we're not also including the sentence that says it represents an increase of 12% from FY 24. Yes, we're just going with the one sentence. Yes, with the idea that we will explain the full context in multiple public terms. Okay. I think it's really hard to put in a few numbers in such a short place and have it make sense to anyone. I mean, I think it's one of those things where a part of the story is going to be warped. But I think we owe it to the community to explain the whole story in as many places as we can. Any other questions, discussions? All of them ever. I too. I think we've got again, but I think we've got a policy. The policy above. I'll move that we accept the policy monitoring report for C for limited English proficiency students. Second. Any discussion or questions. See your eye. I was in favor. Any opposed. No, I'm not opposed. That was on me. You're not voting against that. Double checking. To motion to adjourn. Second. All those in favor. Thank you everyone.