 So thanks, everyone, for waiting. Sorry, that took longer than the schedule. Reconvening the meeting to open session. We'll be taking public comment first. And then I do want to, probably a lot of you are here for the superintendent transition portion. So please feel welcome to make comments on that now. Depending on how that goes, we may allow additional comments during the discussion. But please make the preparator any planned comments we have on that now. So is there a place to sign up to make comments? I don't think we have a formal sign-in sheet. If you could just kind of line up organically. We don't have huge, huge crowds. So I think we can do this manageably. If several of you want to speak, could people raise their hand? If you want to speak, so we've got about four or five. If you could try to limit your comments to a minute or two, that would be fantastic. Just a couple of quick words before we launch into public comment. I do want to thank everyone for coming out. I know that there's a lot of transition. And I think some questions. The last meeting, if you are here, Michelle read a statement that I think really did a fantastic job of explaining the situation as much as we could explain the situation. I think now and at this board, we're really focused on what we think is a tremendous opportunity. We're very excited about the new district. We're excited to move forward with searches for both the superintendent position and some other positions. We have fantastic people. We are parting ways with someone who served the previous 12 for seven years. And as someone we have a lot of respect for and wish the best of. And as Michelle explained, we came to a mutual agreement. And it got some unfortunate press. And we really hope that people respect that everyone did what was in their best interests. And it's time to, I think, turn the page and really look forward. And we are, again, very excited about the new district and very excited about the opportunity to build on the great things that both these communities have and to bring leadership to this district that I think really reflects both the strengths that these school districts have and the tremendous values that we've been building on and want to build on further. So we very much afford to hearing what you have to say and a discussion about a process that I think will really kick off the district in a great way. Since you're wearing a suit. Yes. I'm not supposed to speak. Do you see that with that? My name is Nathan Souter. I'm a rock, a Montpelier resident. Good job. Good job. Good job. As always, thank you guys. That's what we hope. It is a read. It is a new week. I want to thank you all for serving and doing what you do. I'm here tonight because I'm watching carefully the process of finding new leadership for a number of really important positions in the administrative team for the Montpelier-Roxbury foreign schools. And I want to express concern that we make those processes inclusive in terms of whose own committees and how the criteria are determined for how those positions we've chosen and how people will be vetted. I want to make sure that they are deliberate processes in a way that makes it possible to attract really exciting, visionary, highly capable candidates. I understand that there are vagaries in terms of their constraints in Vermont, especially about how administrative contracts are and what the window is for availability of people. And so I want to make sure the search committee for the curriculum and technology position, I believe, has a parent rep who's been found for that committee, which is fine. It strikes me that when the school board seeks to put together a committee, people are submitting letters to say this is why I think I should be on this committee and there's a deliberative process about who's included and why. And I would love to see that applied to these processes as well. How many parents should be on that committee? What's the makeup of those parents? Same thing with faculty. And then, so I think that there are ways within the process, even within a fairly short timeframe, that these processes can be more robust, more inclusive and to reflect the community that we have in terms of population and their interests and also to be sensitive to some of the topics that this district has been really courageous about confronting in the last year. And so let's not lose ground in that. Let's take those opportunities and move them forward. That particular search closes this Friday. I would love if we were able to leave that open until filled, such that if we're doing affirmative recruiting, trying to attract candidates from further field or different backgrounds, that those folks have a chance to react to the search that windows open only for two weeks. And then we're, that's a precursor to other searches. We've got a principal open, we've got a superintendent position open. Let's, as much as we can, let's get really good at doing this kind of process well, being inclusive in terms of who, from our communities, is involved and intentional about how we are asking questions and what we're expecting of those candidates and then being aggressive about attracting great people to this district. I think we've got potentially one of the best districts in Vermont and one of the best districts in the Northeast, period. And let's make it so that these hires are really important. So please do as much as we can to make them well. Thank you. Next person, please. This is Son. It doesn't project. It just goes to you, but I can hear you. Cool. My name is Sylvia Fagan. I'm a Montpelier resident. I'm a homeowner, a taxpayer and a teacher here in the Montpelier schools. I'd like to thank you all for your service to the Montpelier Roxbury School Board and Dr. Ricca for your seven years of service here. As a teacher, I'm both proud and encouraged by our young people of color who have stood in this position over the past months to demand that their lives are acknowledged and respected. I'm here in solidarity with them because as an adult in this community, I am humbled by their courage and I am abashed by the fact that they needed to make this demand of us. I'm here tonight to suggest that as the school district faces several open administrative positions, a purposeful effort is made to recruit a cohort of candidates from communities traditionally underrepresented in public school leadership. For example, women, people of color and the LGBT community. I've heard from colleagues of color around Vermont that it is exhausting and demoralizing to be the only teacher of color in their district. I suspect administrators of color feel the same way. A cohort opportunity would provide support for folks as they would take on leadership roles in a primarily white district and state. I'd also like to encourage the board to adopt a policy that will ensure that a diverse candidate pool is intentionally solicited for all open positions in the district. And to that end, I'd like to encourage you all to learn about best practices in this regard of hiring, recruiting and retaining candidates of color and from underserved and underrepresented communities. We have several local organizations who could provide best practices like CQ strategies, the Anti-Defamation League, the Center for Whole Communities and regionally and nationally, the Learning Policy Institute and the Great Schools Partnership in Maine. Both have resources on this and I can provide these links if you'd like them. By the year 2045, people of color will make up a demographic majority in the United States. We've heard that data. But by around 2020, more than half of the nation's children are expected to be part of a minority race or ethnic group and that means that the students who are leaving our district very soon are going to go into a world that's not as white as Montpelier. And the question I would ask us all is will we allow our learners to leave our community having never encountered a school leader who is not white? Thank you for your time and your consideration of these ideas. Thank you. Next please. I think you'll hear a theme. My name is Morgan Lloyd and I'm, let's see if I can get all of this. I'm a parent of two children in the Montpelier schools. I'm a Montpelier resident and taxpayer. I'm a teacher at the elementary school in fourth grade and I'm a person of color who, I would like to start by thanking the board for your listening over the last several months to Montpelier's students of color for listening to their experiences and for honoring their voices by making the decision to fly the Black Lives Matter flag. And I actually, those four open positions that we have been weighing really heavily on me in the last week. And so I have been thinking a lot and losing a lot of sleep too about this transition and hoping like Nathan and Sylvia and other community members who are here that our district can really take advantage of this opportunity and so I'd like to make a connection between that symbolic gesture of flying a flag in front of our high school to some really concrete actions that our school board and our district can take. These are critical positions. The superintendent, the director of curriculum building principle and the facilities director that are gonna have a really a long-term impact for years to come on hundreds of students. And so I encourage our district to recognize this as an opportunity to not just make a token higher of a person of color or a woman or a person who is a member of the LGBTQ community but I'm talking about proactively adopting a hiring process that will continue in years to come for all of our open positions to help us find highly qualified candidates who understand the importance of the work that we set out on when we made that decision, when you helped us make that decision to fly who will really prioritize it and help us make this world better. So thank you for the work you're doing. Thank you for being conscientious supporters of our students and of our community. Thank you. I'm sorry. Thank you. Hi, my name is Amanda Garces. I am an affiliate resident and mother of two, one that was going to enter kindergarten this year. So I'm very excited that is entering. And I am here as a mother of a multiracial children who will be entering the school system that might not reflect herself. And I would like to encourage you to think about the students who are a minority, 10 to 15%, if I understand correctly, of the body of the students are non-white. And so finding a place as also coming as an immigrant that came to the school system not in Vermont, I could relate of what that feels like to a lot of the students that are here. So from an experience, having somebody that is a role model that reflects yourself is a huge advantage to coming out of the school system into a person that looks at the world in a very different way. I would love to encourage you to think about how to recruit and retain people of color that is not somebody that is the token. I have been the token Latina in many places and that also doesn't feel good. So how do we think about retaining people that will stay within our communities that live here and are with our kids in the long term? How do we think about curriculum? We're gonna hire a curriculum person that's gonna think about what kind of bias are we bringing into the curriculum system. So thinking about all of those things and really making an effort that is educated, there's so much out there to be able to learn about how to do the right way. I wanna thank for the support that the school district has done with the Racial Justice Alliance. To all the students that have come out and are very strong as a community, I would like to really thank you and hope that you continue to support them and to continue to support the ones that are coming that are growing and my kid that's gonna come and hope that she will find a place where she can reflect her Latina mom and her wife, father and see herself in some of those role models. So thank you for your time. Thank you. Others? Well thank you, officer, very helpful and well said comments. Moving on to action items. We have approval of the minutes. Can I add one, please? Yes, please do. Approval of teacher contracts. Not new, but teacher contracts for the MRPS for FY 19. We don't have a consent agenda for this board yet. So I would do them to be punctual. I do them individually. I move that we approve the minutes. Is that the version? No. Second that. All those favor? Aye. Any opposed? Mr. Chair, so superintendent's suggestion that we add something to the agenda is that to be actioned? Do we have to add it by action? I don't believe so. I believe a member can add an agenda item at the top as long as it's one of the first items for consideration. Okay. One of the first. Okay. Oh, the new teacher contracts. Those are different. Those are new teachers. Okay. New hire. New hire. New hire. Approval of the new teacher contracts. I will move the approval of the new teacher contracts. I'll second the approval of the new teacher contracts. Any discussion? All in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Approval of the 2018-2013 school calendar. I move that we approve the 2018-2013 school calendar. I'll second. Discussion? All those favor? Can it be better than last year's calendar? The calendar spring break. You know what happens? The calendar spring break. I'm just gonna say that every year we approve the calendar. And I know that the calendar is put together by this consortium of many districts. And it's really hard to get everybody's schedules lined up and there are a lot of considerations. But then every year there's some obvious problem with the calendar. And I wind up saying, who approved this? I can speak to one of the ones that we discussed because the MEA had a very thoughtful calendar committee with me. One of the problems that we run into when town meeting day is later, as in the five, six, or seven, it pushes hours a week. One of the calendar committee members has recalled us during the time of the month of printemps in the past seven years. Ending in the second week of June. And as we looked back at the dates for town meeting day that was typically when town meeting day was closer to the first or the second. If you'll note the last couple of years town meeting day has been as late as it can be, which is the six or the seventh, which pushes our February break out a little bit because it lines up with town meeting day. And that's collectively bargained with one of our units that has both town meeting day and the day before off. So in order to make that change, which was a possible recommendation from the MEA, we would have to do that through collective bargaining at this point. We also had some data in which the leadership team discussed thoughtfully the idea of starting a little bit earlier instead of having a three, four, five start. Three days the first week, four days the second week, and five days the third week. That idea was met with substantial resistance from the MEA. They did not want to start any earlier. We looked at a number of different options. And we're really unable to settle on any massive changes to this year's calendar. What I will say though is, and it's worth noting that in September, December, February, and March, there is an L listed on the second Wednesday in each of those months. That will be a late start for students for more professional development for teachers. We've heard consistently over a number of years how teachers are interested in more professional development. We at the leadership team agree that there is a need for more of that. And with a bare majority of 275 responses, 50.4 of the 274 thought a late start would be better than the 49.6% who thought an early release would be better. So the rationale for this decision was that we have an existing late start schedule that we are already using, that we occasionally have to utilize in order. It's well known to all. And it also is indicative of the fact that one of the few things, I can't think of something that I'm more reluctant to do than to do an early release where I cannot guarantee students are going home to something that is safe and supervised. So given all that, we chose to do those four late start dates which would give us 10 additional hours of professional development without compromising any of our student days for next year. Still honoring the collective bargaining agreement. Great, thank you for that. And the December break is a million longer than this year's December break, which was too short. Well, and you know that what ends up happening is we try to go along with the federal holidays that we know that we have to evolve. And again, depending on where that holiday fall, those holidays fall, we have to make adjustments that are reasonable to those dates. Does anyone else remember what any problems with last year's calendar work? Summer's too short. It's all gone. Okay. Okay. That wasn't fair. All right. Opposed? Thank you. Okay, so that's all the items? Nope. Yeah, that's all the items for the action of most of the teams. So I move that we improve the MRPS teacher contrast. Second. Second that. Discussion? All those of ever? Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Great. Thank you very much. Oh, you're welcome. Now we have two parent requests that we are going to discuss. One is a request to protect privacy rights. It's a public document. Okay. One is a request for a student to be exempted from the grandfather policy as part of 406 merger agreement that will be governing our district. And the second is a request to allow an early start in preschool, again, in violation of the policies that we have in our district. I don't want to put you on the spot, Ryan, but I know Ryan has given a lot of thought to how to deal with these situations. We do want to stick as closely as possible to the agreements we made out of fairness and not to open the floodgates to, you know, requests that may occur. And also, frankly, to really be true to the structure that we put together. And we feel like we put together a good structure. We feel it will work if people work with it. And so those are important, but Ryan, if you don't put them in. Are we going to discuss them separately? Huh? Are we going to discuss them separately or do you? I thought, Ryan, I'd just give a quick overview of the 406 policy that we can discuss separately. I think the only statement that I would really make now is that I would reaffirm the work that the 706 committee did last spring in coming up with a proposal that was acceptable to both communities. We knew that there would be some folks who wouldn't be happy paying a few tuition costs for some of the Roxbury families who were still moving out. We knew there might be some Roxbury families who would have their hopes set on whatever plan was for their school education for some of their children. But at some point in time, we had to find something that was acceptable to both communities. And what we had found was that all children who were in seventh grade as of this year will not be grandfathered. So that was a cutoff that was chosen for the grandfathering of those kids who were Roxbury residents or Roxbury district residents moving into the new district. And it is kind of tough. We're gonna have, I've had a lot of phone calls. We'll have other requests coming forward to us in regards of, well, I wanted this or my brother had this. So I suspect this is not a solo request. I suspect we will see some more stuff, especially this first year since everything is so new. So I do, it is tricky because use was small town and having exemptions here and there. But I really do think we would need to do our best to stick to the 706 committee agreement. Ryan, can you just repeat that? So the 706 agreement was that all students who are in seventh grade this year will come to Montpelier next year. Exactly, yeah. Because they were in sixth grade last year. And the thinking was that they had basically notice, right? It was an incentive to those students to really come to Main Street Middle School this year. Steve. I mean, having served on that committee also, I wanna emphasize that this was a compromise between two communities to establish a proposal that we thought would be balanced and acceptable to both communities. And so we understood going in that there would be, as Ryan said, voters, community members on both sides that would struggle with this decision and that we needed to come up with something that we thought struck a balance. And those compromises are difficult and that was the nature of this particular provision. And it was not unanimous, but we established it in good faith through a negotiation effectively between communities. And so it seems that now is the time to, in this first year, especially, to stick with the agreement that the voters voted on. Great. So let's do discusses individually. I think we'll do nothing but for now. Do, yes, are either one of the people who wrote the letters here? You can come on. Yes, please do. I'm right. Well, he was the president of Rockstar, wasn't he? Those are my twin daughters. And I really didn't know quite what I was requesting. When I put that forward, I was just kind of trying to be proactive and get some information. And after considering, you know, from my self and my West perspective, the costs going down the road of them starting earlier are not worth the short-term benefit of them getting into a more sort of enriched environment. So I need to withdraw the request or what, but. Which one are you? I'm sorry. I'm the second one. The preschool. The preschool, right? Yeah, the preschool. Which has nothing to do with the rat or anything. I just was trying to get information and I didn't realize that this would be the result of that. That's encouraging actually. I'm happy about it. And we'll have to be part of this system. Do you need more information about preschool? Is it? No, I just, no. So you would be happy if we followed the rules that were already set. Yes. Thank you very much. Okay. Thank you. Okay, one minute. Yes. Thank you, Rhett. Yeah, thank you, Rhett. Thanks for coming and all those rocks there. Okay, well then, that's... Is there someone here from the other family? I'm glad you have someone. Is there anyone else from the other family? I'm gonna, Solenja, we need Solenja Holter. Solenja. Solenja? They are not here. They are not here. Discussion on this one, just to summarize, this is a student who, I believe, wants a sibling to be able to join another sibling at Sharon Academy, a younger sibling. The older sibling is his grandfather. I think it's two older siblings. Yes. The younger sibling, they want to be able to join at Sharon Academy. Obviously, my thoughts, I sympathize with this family quite a bit. I understand the desire to have continuity with your children. Also feel this is probably a situation that there are more than one of. And I think we have to be very careful about the precedent we set and be mindful of some of the things that Ryan outlined. So, for that, anyone? I'll say, having been on the 706 Committee also, that we knew it was a hard decision and we knew it would affect some families. Just as this is affecting this family, but we had to make a decision. We've made the decision and I think we need to stick to it because I'm sure there'll be lots of other families that would have some children in one place and they'd wish to have more. And I'd like us to stick with that decision. Your comments or a formal motion? I think you can just take the response to the requests. There's no, it's not, because there would be no, you know, a formal motion would be fine. Okay. So, is it a motion to deny it? It would be a motion to deny the request. Do I have a motion to deny the request? The motion's always made in the affirmative. I know, that's why I was puzzling over that. I would make a motion to stick, I would make a motion to stick to the original agreement that the 706 Committee made as to who could, who could be grandfathered and who could not. How's that for a motion? Is that too convoluted or maybe too broadlier to the folks who had a direct petition? Well, I think Brian will be writing them a letter that will be declared. How about a motion? Can we write an affirmative motion for Brian to write a letter to deny the request? No. I don't know. I don't know. The superintendent could deny the request. Can we express that we feel terrible that it knows? I think expressing our rationale might be appropriate. That the, to be consistent with the agreement that was recently voted on by both communities. And we do understand the difficulty of this. We had a lot of discussion about it when we were making this. Yeah, this is not being made in a flip or in a sensitive way at all. And, you know, we, again, we discussed these at length as having this committee and, you know, we're cognizant that we're going to be some, you know, families that were put in less than ideal situations. Second. Any discussion, any further discussion? I would just say, I would abstain from this vote simply because these are the girls that babysit my boys. And I support everything we have discussed. And I'm not backing away from those statements. I just feel bad making the vote on my babysitters. Understood. She saw a quick count of the audience. I wanted to ask, I want someone on the board to ask how many families are in this position to hear the rationale that there's certainly going to be more requests down the road. And it's important to speak to the policy. But I wonder if that's by a family to 20 families or if somebody knows how many of them are in this position. Oh, yeah. So that would be younger siblings. While you're thinking, Ryan, this student is currently in sixth grade also. So it's that if we were making exceptions for a sixth grader this year, then that would be sixth graders and seventh graders potentially. It might be a snowball too. Well, in that case, it doubles the numbers. So we were discussing this as if this was the specific provision in the agreement around the seventh graders. But now we're hearing it's actually not that group. It's a group that is younger than that. So we'd have to look at all children who are currently throughout the system who may have a sibling that's older. So now the numbers are more like 40 or something like that. 40 potential kids, fewer families, fewer that would be in that bind. Yeah, and it does mean in the cost estimates we put together for the merger, we only plan on tuitioning a certain number of kids. And every time, this is not just making an exception that's cost-neutral. This is an exception that's $100,000 is used to the district. I think the other thing to say that we recognized, sort of agonized over is Roxbury has had a choice until now. And now they no longer have a choice. And we appreciate the fact that that was something that Roxbury gave to them. All right. I think they're voting. Yeah, I think we're voting. Did I just take a suggestion? And that probably just reminds me that we don't want to get into it. I just might not want to. I might leave a tiny window for extreme economic or other duress. I wouldn't necessarily make a statement now that cannot be. There may be time. I would just be careful of the. I would just not want to. Say never, never. That something would happen to a parent. And who knows what. I just wouldn't want to have an overwhelmingly all-encompassing ruling that never left an opening for the possibility of future events. If someone who knows. Yeah, and that's why I discourage Tina's. Because there may be health or other reasons why we may want to make an exception. But I think this honestly is the type of circumstance that we contemplated and decided could lead to. This is the tough choice that we decided, unfortunately, was going to fall on the way it was out of bounds. I lost track of the process. Have we had a vote? We don't. We don't. OK. No. I think the second. All those in favor? Aye. Ryan of the staining. Staining, please. Any opposed? Thank you. This was drawn. This was drawn. OK. So Grant put the minutes show that the request was withdrawn after learning for their information. So now, superintendent transition, I just want to give, I think, a lot of my opening remarks at the beginning. We obviously are looking for, actually, this will be the first superintendent for this district. We are looking for an open, inclusive, and transparent search. We really want to find the right leader for this district, a district who can be a superintendent who can build on the incredible success that these two districts have and really make the union of these two towns and these two districts into I want to make it the best school district in the state and one of the best in the Northeast and one of the best in the country. And I think we can do that. I think we've got the community. I think we've got the resources. I think we have fantastic people who work in this district. And I think we have the community support to do that. So I am very, very excited about this search. People are already working hard and thinking about it. You know, that said, it's going to be, I think, a fast-paced and challenging few weeks. We want to do this right. I really appreciate the concerns and the comments to making this an inclusive search and a search for a leader who is going to really, I can carry forward some of the great steps that we've taken on diversity, equity, and inclusion. When we raised the Black Lives Matter flag, it was really a historic and very proud event for this district. I think certainly in this and other hires, we need leadership that's going to build on that. We have made some symbolic gestures. And I think that we need to follow those up. We have made some real gestures as well. But we need to continue moving forward on that path. I think that's also a longer-term discussion, too. We certainly want to get the right leader in who reflects those values, reflects other community values, absolutely committed to educational excellence. I do want to speak that we've got a short time frame. We are going to do as much as we can on diversity, equity, and inclusion. We are probably not going to be able to put all the systems in place that we'd ideally like to. And that's going to be, I think, part of a longer-term discussion. So it's going to be very realistic about that. And we want input from all of you as the process moves forward on how best to do that. But we do have a time limitation. We are probably talking about a four to five week search, just given where we're at. Let's get a question from the floor. Yes. Is an interim position a possibility? Are you in a superintendent position? We are going to talk about that. So I don't know if anybody else wants to give some quick, some quick, high-level views about the search. And please try to make them quick, because we have a lot of time. I just want to just, so for folks listening, this is the very beginning of the process question, of the process thing. So no one's missed anything up to this point. We're really defining the process now. And that is the balance, is speed versus ideal. And that's where we're going to have to focus on, with this process, is those compromises as we go along. And Jim, might I ask, since it was brought up from the public viewers, saying the item is to discuss the superintendent transition, are you also discussing the curriculum coordinator in the principal position and the process would be the same for all of them or not? I think we can discuss this as part of the overall transition. I think the process is probably going to be slightly different. Jim, can you describe that? Because some of those processes are already moving. We have a lot of new board members, and so if you could describe how we do hiring different levels, that would be great. Or maybe Brian could do that. Brian can help. I'll take a stab. And Brian can help. What we usually do, I think it depends on the level of the position. This is my first superintendent search. I think it's the different board members' first superintendent search. Yes. And this is part of the reason we're asking for help with VSBA and others. And Virginia and I can brief on a meeting we have. Yeah, I think one of the first steps is to do the mechanical things that are not easy, but you need to get done, job description, putting it out on school spring, putting it out on other venues, setting forth a process. Is school spring a national? Yes, it is. School spring is a national. Yes. Well, let me step back. I think the first step is sitting here tonight and setting up the process we want to put forward and just getting some parameters about time frame, kind of how we want the position to look, how we want the search process to look. And then once we decide on that, very quickly moving to candidate recruitment, advertising the position, getting word out there, doing so in a way that brings in as broad and inclusive a candidate pool as possible, which I think is very, very important. Then it's setting up a committee to do the hiring and again that would be a representative committee that we would want to be as broad and representative as possible that would include members of the staff and faculty, members of the board, members of the community, and parents, yes, which I consider the broader community, and students as well. And how would that parents want to know how that selection will be made? Have we decided that yet? We have not decided that yet. We have not decided anything. Yeah, I think certainly that, to me, the selection of the committee, I think, given the short timeframe we're on, is one of the things we can do, I think, with the time that we have to bring in a lot of the diversity, equity, and inclusion issues. I think making sure that we get a very represented, that is something we can do. And I'm not sure we can do a lot of detailed trainings in five weeks, but I think we can get the right mix of people in. I think we can sit down and put together a rubric that accounts for the values we want to see, the values and the skill set we want to see in this position and do that in a very deliberate way. So putting that, I think we have to decide a process to put that committee together. And I think one of the things we should really focus on is making sure that it's a very representative committee. And includes, we don't want it to get too huge, but we certainly want all the various sectors of our community represented. And kind of within those sectors, students, faculty, board, et cetera, we want to be as representative as we can begin and really get all the voices from our community involved. Would it be helpful if we kind of went through what we learned from the VSBA consultant? He gave us a lot of detail, and I'm happy to know what he gave us. So Jim and I had a call with the consultant that works with the Vermont School of Words Association. We could hire them to help us as a search consultant to conduct the search. And so this was a preliminary meeting to find out what that would look like to get some preliminary information. His name is Mike DeWise. He's a retired superintendent in Vermont. He basically outlined the expedited process for a full superintendent search that would start essentially immediately. He gave us a sample schedule. So this was his sense of the timing. And his sample schedule would start with first meeting with the board would be next week. So that would be the board's chance to meet the consultant and get the lay of the land. And the screening committee would immediately start meeting after that. And the advertisements would go out right after that meeting too. So the job would start to be posted on school spring. Choices about advertising would be made and it would be advertised. And the screening committee would start looking at applications, then reviewing applications, having their interviews. And so his process would basically, to have someone in the position by July 1st would have the board doing final interviews the week of June 11th. So it's basically, one, two, three, a six week process that starts next week. So I'm not saying that he didn't say there was no flexibility in that, but he basically said that's where the district would be at this point. Their services to the board knows that the services of the consultant would cost $8,000. No, it would cost $13,000. His services would cost $8,000. And then he estimated another 5,400 and other costs related to the search, like doing the advertising and that sort of thing. Which is a cost we would bear whether we have a consultant or not. And most of it, I think that's right. Some of it. The advertising is most of that number which we would have regardless of travel costs for interviews. If the superintendent worked for us, the scope of service, I'll describe this, includes managing a board-appointed screening committee guidance with board advertising recruitment efforts and support for the board interviewing finalists and board selection of its superintendent. He did not really get into the screening committee exactly what it would look like. But that would obviously be a very early step in the process. He also talked to us about interim appointments and permanent appointments. And was indicating that advertising for interim appointment was not likely to garner very many candidates and that it might even be too early to find an interim appointment. He also pointed out that it's unusual to find someone who wants to do an interim appointment for a full year because retired superintendents who might want to come out of retirement to do short-term gigs can't come out and do a full year's work and still stay in the retirement system. So that's a consideration that he raised. He said, you can do both. You can do a full-scale permanent search. Search for a permanent person now with the interim as a fallback if you don't find someone you want. And he also brought up the possibility of doing a full-scale search with the understanding that it would be a one-year contract. And then, did I put that, everything I said in there? Yeah, I think so. Yeah, and the exact time where we laid out was, it's all in the meeting before the 16th. The screening committee would have its first meeting the week of April 30th. Then there would be a second meeting in the week of May 7th. Third meeting of the week of May 21st. This would all be screening candidates doing interviews. Final meeting of the screening committee the week of May 28th. And then board interviews and some likely choir. The week of June 11th. I had a further conversation today with Nicole Mays. She had a slightly different take on, to be honest with you, we've heard. Every different argument. Yeah, every different argument. We are definitely later in the process than ideally we'd like to be. A lot of people have signed contracts. It would be difficult for a lot of candidates to either get out of their contracts, they might need permission or they might feel it's unfair to their district at this time to pull out. That said, we have heard that there may be, this is an attractive district. We may still be able to get a lot of attractive candidates. I think given that, this is something we're gonna have to discuss and decide on now. Some sort of short-term initial situation is probably has a lot of the two options that have basically given to that as Bridget said is either actually go for a true interim. Someone with the understanding that they'd just be here for a year. We would begin a search as soon as we could within that year. The drawbacks of that, as Bridget said, it might be difficult to find someone willing to do that. The second drawback is oftentimes anyone in that position is really gonna be in kind of a keep the wheels on the bus mode. The other kind of short-term option would be to do a one-year contract where that candidate would have the knowledge that it was both one year and that we may, we would have an early evaluation process. So by say October or November, we made a decision whether this person is wowing us and the person we want or whether we conduct a search because now we're at a point where we're gonna have a richer applicant pool and where maybe we don't feel it's working out with this candidate. That would probably attract a slightly different pool. We may get people who obviously are, want the job on a more permanent basis. We may get, for instance, a principal who is ready to take the next step or another school-wide administrator who's ready to take the next step and wants to come in and impress us for a year. So those are kind of, I think with the time frame, the options we have, we could obviously discuss doing a search for someone at a longer term, but from one-on-one discussions I've had with board members, I feel that there's not a lot of appetite for that. And certainly, this is a tight time frame and we want to make this process as inclusive as possible. There's a lot of work to be done both to meet this time frame and to cast a wide net both in terms of candidate pool and in terms of process that's very inclusive and very involved. Steve? I'm not sure. A lot of times when we do go through hiring processes, we find that our decision is based on who we come up with. It's a fishing expedition, effectively. And I'm wondering if maybe we fish in two pools at once with looking at advertising for an interim and advertising for a permanent one-year contract or something and we see the applicants we get. It may be, there may be some very practical reasons not to do that, but it is, if those truly are two different types of applicants, we might find that we're finding stronger applicants in one area rather than the other. It certainly adds to our workload a little bit, at least at the beginning, but I don't think it really changed anything as you get into it. So at least throw it out there as something to put in the pot to mix up. I've often found when I'm doing hirings, I'm hiring for multiple positions at the same time and there's a lot of cross-fertilization in that process and you end up finding people in one pool that you want in the other or whatever. And just one more point before I go to Tina. The other thing that Mike said and some others that we've talked to have said is that the urgency for a one-year contract, then the timeframe here is for someone on a one-year contract or a logger. I don't think we want a logger, we can have that discussion. Like a true interim, like getting a retired superintendent to come out for a year and with the understanding that they truly would be only there for a year and then they'd go back to retirement or subway retirement. The timeframe for that is not as urgent. That's something we could start sending out feelers for say in May or you got it. Just to follow up on that too, I think the sense from, I got from Mike Dewey's was that it's also a really different process. It's not this process of taking that back. I think it's much more of a headhunter kind of process. Got it, yeah. Yeah, don't really go into South Carolina again this winter. We'd rather run this district type of thing. Got it. I guess I would reiterate the same thing. I would say Steve, running them both at once just confuses the world and that if you were to go out and say, I would like a superintendent, see who applies, if you don't get someone that you think is acceptable for the job, then you're later in the process and you'll find someone who might be an interim. Well, that's a convenient sequence, so that works, yeah. He says he wanted to get it. Having been involved with a lot of hiring around the school calendar and higher education, I can tell you that trying to fast track this over the next six weeks will probably fail on two levels. One is there will not be a sense of community involvement and two, that you will be dipping into what would be a very shallow pool of people who are looking to make a change this late in the school year. And so I think that they're, you know, Steve said maybe we can hedge a little bit and think about putting it out there and see who applies and maybe, you know, we get lucky. But, you know, on this kind of timeframe in terms of engaging the community and seeing, you know, having an applicant pool that is meeting the requirements of what we've been talking about all night, I think it's a long shot at best. So I just think that, you know, there needs to be sort of a short term, like how do we manage into the next school year as well as thinking about the broader vision of what, how do we make it work for, you know, multiple years of help? I just, I'm worried about six weeks. Like I just don't see how that could happen. Yeah, I echo those sentiments and I'll let other board members speak. But my thought, for what we have practical concern, we have to have someone, a super technical engineer. And we've got not a lot of time to make that happen. You know, my sense is that regardless of who comes on, whether we have a true in them, where we absolutely know that we're gonna do a search starting in the fall, where we're gonna have time to have the process of that that's gonna be inclusive as we want it to be inclusive. By then we'd have time to really, I think, think about some of the suggestions we've had about really digging deep on making sure that we've got practices in place that ensure that diversity, equity and inclusion are part of that, rather than kind of doing what we can in the next six weeks, which I think will be meaningful. But more time is always better on something like that. Even if we don't go true interim, I think any higher we make before June 30th would be with the understanding either that we'd evaluate in, say, October, November, and if we had a superstar, great, otherwise we'd enter that type of process. Or frankly, do a one year contract regardless of the person's performance, tell that person that we're going to do a search and you're welcome to apply. And if we love the person, they'll certainly be at the top of the queue. But make a commitment basically to the community that there will be some sort of a revisitation of the higher in the fall, whether it's just an evaluation if we do have the right person or whether we just commit to a process and if we have the right person, they apply again and they stick with it. So others? Well, I was going to say that I've agonized over this for the last little while because an interim usually means sort of status quo or keeping things as they are. I happen to think we're doing quite well in Montpelier and so that doesn't hurt me as much as it would perhaps somewhere else. But I like to go forward. So it's an agony of if I could find the perfect person that would walk in the door now, I'd love it, right? But as you said, it's late in the game and it worries us. So I have to tell you, I've been back and forth about it. The members of the leadership team are here and I know they have thoughts on the process. I would love to get their thoughts, particularly on interim versus one year versus one year with telling the person that we're going to do a search and they're welcome to apply. And so any of the leadership team members want to speak. And don't just let me reply to that question. You can weigh in on processes as extensively as you want to. I just want to cover some of the hip hop that's come up this year. All right. Thanks for the petition and thanks to the community that spoke so eloquently earlier today to appreciate your thoughtful participation. It's just awesome. So thank you all. And I think that we just agree that we see the challenge that we want to cast a wide net and find a great person to lead the district for many years. And we recognize that we have some work to do in our practices and how we go about hiring. We want to improve those. We want to be as equitable as possible. We want to do better than what we already do. And we're in this really difficult time pinch. And so I think that those things are in tension with one another. I think our perspective and my colleagues will correct me if I'm wrong is that we should put it out and do the good work like you were saying of putting together a really good committee either way and asking really thoughtful questions, being as inclusive as possible, being in quick studies and trying to cast as wide a net as possible and then see where we are. And at that point when you see what kind of applicants we have, we can make decisions from there about one-year contract. I think is what we think that you're gonna attract more people if you go along lines with what you're saying, Jim, of having a one-year contract and just are upfront with that person that we're going to put this back out in a year and you're welcome to apply or that gives those people a chance that we might attract a few more people rather than what is probably a fairly small pool of existing Vermont superintendents that would be interested in an interim position. Is that fair? Okay. Thanks, Mike. Yeah, thanks, Mike. Anybody else wanna go or do you like to do a great job of something to that? Yeah, and the only thing I would add is that... Would you add it at the microphone so they can see you. Here, you're gonna have a problem. I have a big mouth. We all gotta do it, fam. Thanks, oh yeah. I was just gonna say that I appreciate the fact that you've reached out to Mike Dewey. He's somebody who I have a lot of respect for. I think he knows the educational world in Vermont and whatever advice he's giving you, I would trust that he's giving you accurate information. So I just wanted to say thank you for reaching out to some folks who understand the world of looking for superintendents. That's all I wanted to add to Mike's eloquent speech. Great. We don't wing things as much as people think we do. I said we don't wing things as much as people think we do. We get a lot of help. Yeah. But I'm not here all the time, so I don't know that. I just wanted to say thank you for that. Thanks, yeah. I just also had to Tina's point. This won't be a status quo. There's an operational merger that's happening. Yeah, yeah. Even if an interim was being entertained, I would certainly echo everything that my colleagues are saying that there's real operational work to be done. It's not a let's just keep the trains on the track type situation. So I would fully support what's been said so far because I think there will be a lot of opportunities going forward that you're going to. I would suggest you as a board are going to want someone who has a deeper level of commitment than just an interim. I'll just keep everything as it is going forward because that's not defined for next year yet. We don't know what it is yet. Yeah, yeah, that's a very good point. Why don't we do this? I know there's some people who want to speak to this. Why don't I give another four or five minutes for public comment for anybody who does want to talk. And then I get to shut you guys down. But then I think we have to make some decisions about process. But I see some hands. So if anybody wants to add to this, please feel free to come up to the mic and do so. Because I know this is a big decision and I think it's worth hearing just a little bit of experience. Nathan again, thanks again. I love the discussion you're having. I think that as we've all said, there's a lot at stake. And Brian just made a great point about it's not just that as well. I think that the more bait you put on the hook, the better fish you're going to get to continue with that metaphor. And so one year or longer, it's going to attract probably higher quality candidates. And I wonder if we can borrow some from the professional sports world and all its glory. What does it take to lure candidates out of existing positions? Do you have to pay that district a fee as in professional soccer? I'm just spitballing here. But furthermore, one year and you're definitely going to have to compete for your position again. OK, maybe that's high stakes if I'm moving my family or something like that. If it were one year and then if you throw this many touchdown passes and just a few interceptions, you get another two years on that contract and a bonus. It's capitalism. We're swimming in capitalism. Let's play that game. Maybe this is high stakes. And I think we could be creative about it. And I think that we don't want to encourage good professionals to leave commitments they've made to their districts. On the other hand, we're on the back end of that because we've got a bunch of professionals who are leaving for other places. And so let's be aggressive about it. And the other thing to say, which is on the back of what somebody like I think was just saying, is as a board, as a leadership team, as a community, the more we practice doing good selection process, doing good process, the better we'll be at it. And so an interim is like, we don't get to do that practice. We hire some headhunter. They look at a known pool of people they think might be decent. And we don't get to practice that. Let's do this. Let's get a good community together and let's try. And we'll make some mistakes. But at least we're pushing forward and we're hearing from the community as you are tonight. And the more repetitions we get at that, we've got four chances right now. We've got four processes about to happen. So I would say, at the very least, do the check-down of at least a full year and then only an interim if we're desperate. And then maybe put more on the table, even though it's a short process, because we are trying to attract the best person who can possibly attract. Great. Thanks. Anyone else? Great. Thank you. So in terms of decisions, the decision we have tonight is whether we move forward with like Louise, which means that it would be a commitment to hire at least a one-year contract. And I think we can work out later whether it would be one year with an evaluation, one year when telling the person there's definitely going to be a search. I think we'll work that out later. But I think we have to make a decision tonight about whether we're going to go down that road or whether we're going to say no. We'll kind of do a true interim, which I think is a process of working with the BSBA. We're going to do Vermont Superintendents Association, finding a list of potential candidates who would be interested in that and reaching out kind of a headhunter situation. So I think that's the immediate question. So let's talk about that. And then make a motion to take action. Steve? So would the motion be that we would hire Mike DeWise and pursue a candidate for a one-year or more position? Is that how the motion might read? So it's two things. It's a compound kind of question there. That's fine. I don't know much about him. And I hear a lot of good things. But I also know that our unique community may not fit the cookie cutter approach. And I want to be careful because I don't know what his particular expertise or experiences in tapping into underrepresented communities. And I don't know if he has a demonstrated success record in any way in doing that or even trying to do that. So I look to some advice for that. The other is, is there anything with that contract include any headhunting? No. So would we want to be doing that simultaneously is getting out there and using a human resources person to be making some contacts at high levels to try to identify people who may be not actively looking but who might be the perfect candidate? And I wonder if we should be combining that approach and not relying on the let them come to us approach because we're late when you might need to double down on our efforts. So those two things would be my only hesitation. Otherwise, I'm full on with the approach. Yeah, Ryan. OK, so a little more info on Mike and what he has provided for us. So if we were to go forward with a one year contract with the intention of doing a further search in the future, at what point in time does Mike leave us? So if we hire someone on June 11, is that the last that we work with Mike for the $8,000 or $13,000 that will cost us? Or would he stick with us through the rest of the year as we continue maybe the second phase of the search if that is the route we ended up going? If you pay him more, he'll stay with you. So June 11 would be the conclusion of all of our work with Mike. Yeah, we would have to pay him more for going instead of doing our larger search. Which? A second search would be a second search. Yeah, exactly. We have a contract from the VSBA, like a blind contract. They sent us what it would be. If we signed it, the consultant would meet with members of the leadership team and educators to establish goals for the search process, would assist the board to develop a written charge for the screening committee. These are all a little bit longer. I'm just summarizing them. Work with the board to identify priorities intended to assist the screening committee. Guide the development of selection criteria, salary benefits, et cetera. Assist with planning for the inclusion of internal candidates if that comes to be. Actually, this list goes on for quite a while. Scheduling interviews, helping to process legal, helping formulate questions, including legal questions, guiding the screening committee and conducting reference checks, scheduling the appointments, organizing school and community forums, arranging for people to visit where that finalist candidates work, as well as having them visit here. That was not even the entire list. That just gives you a sense of the time. Yeah, and my sense from talking with Mike was that he was welcoming of community of all causes. And they kind of go into your point, Steve, that he's not going to be with it. It wasn't a type of thing where, like, I've got it. You go away. Or if we say, look, we want to do some active recruitment and bring some people to this process, that's going to be welcome and not shut down. So I think that he's going to perform some very basic and important functions. But I didn't get the impression that he would shut down an active community that was looking to expand the applicant pool that was looking to do reach out. It was looking to do things beyond that, didn't it? But when you were reading that list, I didn't hear. Yeah, I was trying to see if that was. Well, I mean, obviously allowing an additional contract for someone else to do something else would be a great plug-in. But is there a plumbing for values in the community first before you go to the advertising stage? There's a lot about criteria in the development of criteria at the meeting with the community. And the leadership team and such, yeah. I think you're going to find, Steve, that there's very few in Vermont, seeing as we're one of two schools that have a Black Lives Matter flag up, I think we are at the leading edge of a commitment to equity both symbolically and in practice. And so I think guiding Mike or whoever the consultant is in that, as you often say, value for this community, because I would be hard pressed to name another consultant, given the demographics of Vermont, who has had substantial experience, simply because we're out there as one of the first to demonstrate a value and a physical value, as well as a continuous improvement plan value to the notion of equity. So your sense is that he has the skills to do what we need him to do in terms of reflecting, in terms of building a process around our values. Yes, sir. Yes. I would say he certainly has the skills. I would also say that, short of a headhunter, the only thing you're going to be able to do is advertise in different places. It'll cost you more money, but you could advertise out of state and see what you get. The reason for the quick timeline is because of where we are in the process. It's April. And so one of my concerns is to have the community feel like they've taken part. Exactly. If it's quick, I'm not sure no matter what we say, Nathan's going to feel like he's had enough input or enough time to think about it. So if you say you're meeting next week and you put that out somewhere, I don't know in the paper, will the community feel like they have had sufficient input? And I can tell you, because the whole board's been discussing it, that that's part of the issue. How will we assure community involvement? Do a quick, because we're in April, search and consider equity and diversity. And I think that's one of the reasons I feel strongly that we need to have a revisiting process next year to make sure that we have the right manager, whether that's through a full-on hiring process or through getting community consensus that, yeah, this is the right individual. Because I can see that already that, wow, you're meeting over a spring roll. Nobody's around over a spring break. Like, what are you guys doing? And it's not because we're trying to hide anything. It's just because we're the demands of the schedule. We're in that office by July 1. I have to say I'm disappointed that there's no compromise with Mike in that, basically, if we were hot, I think we'd need somebody to help us. But we'd have to hire for two searches. That's a lot of money. Well, or we could learn from the first search. It brings up the second ourselves. Yeah. I like that idea. The small one, we're in the side. There are also, I mean, there are professional search firms out there. And I've tried to find out information about them, and it was very hard. Very hard. I found some lists, but they didn't have websites, and it was just not easy to get out of them. It's kind of a word of mouth business, yeah. And a couple of them that you've found, actually, you've taken articles about them that we're not very familiar with. It's not actually, I mean, it was very hard to figure that out. That's right. So I would move, then, that we hire Mike for the agreed amount and some to assist us in conducting a search for a superintendent under a one-year or more contract and that this does not preclude a decision to enhance that search with other methods. But this sets the, this puts the core administrative piece in place, and that, yeah, I think that's the big thing I'd like to, there's probably more to it, but that's the motion I would, oh, and then I think that, I don't want to make this as part of the motion, so I'll just leave it at that. But I do think we need to make a decision in some recorded form about whether we have committed to revisiting this position shortly after it begins, but my motion does not include that. So hire Mike for the agreed amount to perform the contract that was proposed to assist us in searching for a superintendent for under a contract of at least one year. Do you have a second? Would it be? A second. Any discussion? Any further discussion? I think someone has already suggested. That's crazy. This is crazy. Any opposed? I'm certain that that second piece that I didn't propose may get lost in minutes or non-minutes for the future, so I hope that we can revisit at some point and make a decision, a concrete decision as a board, whether we definitely intend to revisit it in October or whatever, because this could easily get moved around otherwise. Well, if it's a one-year contract, we have to have a process in place in October to make a decision. That's done. I think you also have to be honest with the applicants. If you have to decide and say, we will do a search after a year, no matter if you walk on water or we won't, we just have to make that decision. Yeah, I think we have made that decision tonight, but I think we probably do have to make that decision and meet with Mike next week. Well, we didn't just decide whether it's going to be a one-year or a three-year contract. And so what my concern is that as we go through this process, I just want to be clear that we've got a six-week process. We already know that we're not making this as inclusive as we'd like, or we doubt we can. So if we move into a three-year contract with somebody, I think there's going to be a bit of a pushback from some of us and from the community. So we just have to be aware of that. Yeah, no, I think we're all aware of that. I haven't heard tonight or in other discussions anyone pushing for longer than a one-year contract. And this is a question of how we do the revisit, whether we just tell the person up front that, look, we're doing a hiring process in October. And if you allow us, you're willing to apply. And you're certainly going to have a leg up. Or whether we're going to take a hard look between non-octail murder. If we have any doubts, we're going to do another search. All right. So who will meet with Mike next week? We will meet as a board. And I've got some days from Mike. And I'll send out. I just have to go through emails and look at the times. It's Monday, Wednesday, and Thursday, I believe. Well, it should be Monday, Wednesday, and Thursday. I worked for him. Let me just do a quick poll of which days work best for folks. And we need a quorum. Not everyone needs to be here. I don't think people are traveling. People could call in to create that quorum. This would be an evening meeting? Evenings are preferable. I think we could do it at another time. If that worked, he seemed pretty flexible, particularly on Monday and Wednesday. But it was certainly open on evenings. Are there any of those days that, well, how about those two show fans? Who can do Monday? Evening. Evening. Evening. One, two, three, four, five, six. We've got six. That's a quorum. Who can do Wednesday? Like, when we say evening, what time are you thinking? Six. I think it's six or seven. I could do seven. OK. Do we get any for seven? Again, six. There's six. Thursday. Again, it's seven. Thursday. Yeah. What made you say Thursday? Thursday. All are quorums. He said all are quorum. OK, great. So I'll ask him which of those days works best, and we'll get something warned properly. And on the calendar. Jim, that's not funny. Ah. Jim, can I speak for one more question? I'm going to ask, just thinking about the consultants that have worked with this district this year from seeking strategies, and I bet any of them would be willing to consult with the consultants, which would, in turn, build back consultant's capability to serve the whole state. So it might be a nice way that non-filial could lead on equity to have a couple of folks work together. Yeah, and to all the people here, I mean, please feel free to weigh in with suggestions like those actively, because we are in a quick process. Things are going to be moving fast. So if you have great suggestions, send me an email. I think when the steering committee, the screening committee, gets more fully put in place, we might be able to have the ability to send things directly to Mike or to certain people at the committee. So definitely a way in. And also, please start thinking about good members to have on the screening committee. Members of the community, parents, for the people who are teachers here, I think about other teachers and staff members who you think would be good recommendations. And that meeting will be open and televised next week. Yes. One next week will be open, and we'll have to make sure it gets more. It will certainly be open. On the subject of an outreach for the screening committee and to the community, I'm just thinking that it is on the spring break, the board's going to be in during spring break to have that discussion. And I assume the board is not going to actually form that committee until next week. Is that the plan? I think we just do the, I think we have Mike and Mike. Right. I want to make it a committee. But is it possible that we could do some outreach now to community members, especially parents of school children who are able to use to say, if this is an interest that you have, we're not exactly sure what it's going to look like. We're not exactly sure how it's going to be done for. But this is the time to tell us. And you don't have to come to the meeting that we are, unfortunately, holding during the school It was the front porch, the front porch, of course, in a couple of days, and just an available email address or, you know, someone who's willing to collect all kinds of feedback about the process. So Mike did not discuss the how you would choose that. So I was liking what you said about just contacting us. So we had somebody's name. And then if you wanted them to write something or to appear or something before getting on the committee, you could tell them that when they came back Yeah, and think about, I think, alternate reach out. Because I think a common reach out is to some of the parents groups, which I think is great. But there are certain parents that have time for the parents groups or involved in that. And that doesn't necessarily go to everyone. And they are community members without children in the school. Yeah, fantastic. As part of the transition, can we talk quickly about the other two searches? Yes, please. Sure can. OK. So we have the curriculum director open. And we just learned yesterday or the day before the days are blending into each other that Chris Hennessey is also leaving at Union Elementary. Mary Lundin is from the staff heading the curriculum search. And what I'm saying is that there have been some steps that have been taken to move that along. There is already, I believe, a posting out there and candidates are applying. Is there a closed date, Mary? Yeah, so we posted the theory. Thank you, Pam. Thank you, Pam. I hear from the community that they can't hear you. Oh, OK. Well, I can project my voice, so I think they'll hear me. We posted two weeks ago, so we are collecting applications until Friday the 13th. But it is posted until filled next week's break. So I have sent out an email to all of the parent groups, just asking them to get the word out as far as people that might be interested from the parents and community. We have leadership representation. We will have a student. We're going to need two board members, so you can decide who that will be. Do you have a process for, if you should, have an onslaught of people that wish to be on your committee. Do you have a process for deciding? Just asking. No, I don't. OK. So I'm asking the parent groups to coordinate who the representatives would be. As far as the teachers, I've asked the union to work with teachers that are interested. Because, again, with the short time frame that we have, I just need other people to kind of help out with that. So we are getting, the good news is we're getting a lot of resumes for this position. And there are people who are doing this job in other schools that are applying. So that is the good news. And people know about Montpelier. They know all the good work that's happening in our district. People are interested in that. They want to be part of it. So I think it's going to be a good process. And I think that we will end up with a really good addition to the district. The timeline is the piece that's tricky, because some people have gotten extensions on signing their contracts. And so they emailed me and said, I can't go into late May or June. I only have so much time. So my goal is to, tomorrow, I'm going to put together just a memo to everybody to the different stakeholder groups and just say that the plan is for the leadership team to go through and screen all of the applicants. Now, this is a process that Brian has used for past leadership positions. So what we would be looking for is who has a license, who is currently an administrator, who has a background or knowledge in technology, the multi-levels of teaching experience. So do they have pre-K to four? Do they have five to eight? Do they have nine to 12? Just really looking at where are some areas of experience. One of the things that we'll look at is a literacy background. Because, again, the DMG report, and I don't know if people have heard about that, but it's really going to inform the way we build MTSS frameworks in our schools. So the DMG right now is something that our legislators are really interested in. And it's also being looked at as far as special ed finance, that bill, and school finance. So there's a lot of best practices in there. So we were kind of just looking at what are some of those recommendations. And it's around universal design for learning, literacy, math. And so those are some things that I'm thinking that would be important when we're screening the applicants. So anyway, the goal is to have the first round of interviews on April 30. And hopefully, we will have four candidates that will go through that process. And I would ask that the screening committee then narrow it down to two that would move on to the second interview. The second interview is going to be a little more involved, where we are going to give the candidates a prompt and really look at our school improvement plan and all of those pieces that are in there. So the universal design for learning, the math, the literacy work, all of that work because we want to keep it going. And then the cultural competence pieces around equity. So we are going to ask them to develop a presentation as if they are coming to district convocation the first day back. And your audience is the administrators and the teachers. And talk about how are we going to move this work forward? How are you going to do that as the new curriculum director? And I haven't worked out all the details on that question, but that's kind of the direction that we're going to go into that they really have to. We have to see them in that role, talking to us as their audience and talking about the work that's been done and how that work will continue. Because it's important and we don't want somebody coming in who's just going to throw it all out and say, here's my new agenda and this is what we're going to do. So I have a question for the board while you're still there. And that is the question of that job description. I've had a lot of concern about curriculum and technology being part of that job description. And if we're advertising for it, are we sure that's what we want? I had the same question, yeah. I mean, that's what we budgeted for. And we did not make a different decision during the budget process. But that was because we had a situation that was, as far as we knew, working. Can I make? Maybe Brian looks like he has something. I mean, again, given the timeline, given that it's out there, I would not recommend making substantive changes and then potentially have to hire somebody else. If you say, we think it's time to separate these positions back out again. The rationale for doing it five years ago was not just fortuitous because we had an interim curriculum director and a director of technology who retired. But it was thoughtful in that curriculum and technology are inextricably linked. For us, it's like another utility. It's just as important as hot water or electricity or heat. If you're interested in revisiting this, I would do it with the candidate that this search committee comes with. Brian, I would add, though, too, that to echo some of what Brian's saying and is to recognize that we also will have four technology experts as well as our tech integrationists. So the responsibilities for that particular position may only be at the really administrative level because that's all of the other folks that are working in that department. That's what I would say at this point. I see that position really being responsible for e-rate and managing and overseeing the technology plan, which has already been written. So it's really pulling that group together, looking at the plan, making the tweaks that are necessary, more of that high level stuff, whereas the interventionists who are at each building, they're the boots on the ground, the people that are able to coach the teachers and provide that level of support. I just think, and the board knows, I've had some displeasure with how the technology has progressed lately. And so I'm wondering if we're handling that in the best way possible. I don't want to waylai you, but I want to be honest to the applicant. So is it possible for the applicants to say something about, we're thinking about this part of the job? I don't know. I'm bringing it up now to say, where are we? To the rest of the board. We don't know what you're thinking. That's why I'm bringing it up. Yeah. And I think, Tina, to respond to that, depending on the district, there are some districts that do blend curriculum and technology. There are others that separate those two positions. So it might be that, and I can tell you, we have both right now in our applicant pool. We have people that are doing both, or have experience in both, and others that are more traditional curriculals. It's harder to find both. They're two different kinds of people. Yes. I will say, go ahead. I just want to say, I'm so far away from considering that concept that I think we have to be very careful that we don't send the administration off with a mixed message. I think the board's position right now is that there's no change. And we may have that conversation, but we could not possibly have that conversation in a timely manner that would influence this hiring. So this is where the board speaks as many voices, or the board speaks as one, and I think that we would need to have a deliberation before we could speak as one on this. Well, I mean, it's just that, is this a position that we could also hire on a one-year contract? With the conversation that we might, the reason, I understand what you're saying, but the reason, as Michelle said, we didn't consider it in the budget was we didn't consider that we were making a change. But now that we are, I would agree with what Steve At this point, I would feel disingenuous if Mary or other members of this committee had to send a different message to the people that have already applied. Oh, by the way, this is a one-year position contingent upon the board, continuing the position as it's currently listed. And I think in the same way that it could potentially dilute the superintendent's search until you made your decision here, it was not. I will be the one that suggested to Jim. I delegated this to Mary. At no point did I consider separating those, simply because, again, of the timeline. And I think if you were going to go in this direction, Mary would have to have some very difficult conversations right now and could potentially reduce the current applicant pool, which she has already indicated, is relatively strong. Well, if people would take back their applications, they saw that big of a change in the process. I think Steve's point is very well taken. At this point in the process, the board should be clear that there is no change for now. And unless the board wants to deliberate further, but I think that comes with some great risk. I want you to know, Mary, I didn't assume that you knew any of this. I appreciate what you've been doing. It's just that it's a discussion we didn't have. And I'm really sorry we didn't have it, having nothing to do with you. Yeah, and I think it's a product that thinks would mean very immediately. I think, too, just that conversation, and I know that you talked about just a strategic plan later down the row, that would be something that would be great as part of the strategic plan conversation. And maybe this conversation, I'm thinking, is OK given your explanation about the high level. But then I think as a board, I'm going to suggest that we rediscuss technology in the system as a whole so that it can work better. So maybe it's redoing the people we have and what they do and how they do it. I don't know, but it's worth the discussion, I would say. Yeah. So I'll finish quickly because I know you've got to move on. So the first round of interviews, we're planning for April 30th. The second would be Thursday, May 3rd. I think it's May 3rd, whatever that Thursday is. Then Friday, send the person who we want to recommend to Brian. So he would interview, and then you would see that person. I think you have the board meeting the following week. The 16th. So what I would ask you is if you would consider having a special board meeting if some of these people are moving along again so they can tell their districts who are going to be out looking for people in May to fill those slots. So it's like that. And everybody's kind of panicking. So just put that out there to you to consider. Can I make one more suggestion? I think it's very important that, you know, if you said two board members, I wonder if you could consideration to who those board members should be tonight. I think it's just given a curriculum element that really having board members look that we have a curriculum director that really reflects some of the community values and some of the forward-looking things that we're doing in this community and maybe helping to build the rest of this during community help with outreach to bully parents and other community members on. I think that's something we can do without interrupting the current search and I think probably directing it in a good way. I don't know if we're ready to think about who on the board would want to step up and do that. Mary, do you have, it's sometimes easier with folks if they have the times already scheduled for those? For the 30th, we're blacking out 8 to 330 just to give people some breaks in between candidates, give people time to go have some lunch. The second round, that Thursday, we're looking at the afternoon, so it would probably be from 12 to four. So it sounds like pretty much all day Monday the 30th afternoon on Thursday the third. Are there people that would be willing and able? I would also note that Mrs. Arnold is lurking in the wings and is going to kind of make a similar request as well. Right, and I just wanted to just throw in one more thing. So one of the things that I've been trying to do is just really think about representation from Roxbury and Montclair. Yes. So we do have a teacher from Roxbury that will be on the committee. Ben's gonna be reaching out to families there as one of our parent reps. So again, you know, to make this inclusive, Roxbury needs to be fully included in this. So we're trying to do that reach out. Great. Can we just have people, a lot of people respond to you if they're available? Yeah, we'll do it pretty quickly. And thank you, Mary. We know this is extra work on your plate and we much appreciate it. Great work. Mrs. Arnold, please return to your favorite place in the room right behind the microphone. I fly in just at the beginning of the process because I have the official word yesterday that I'm gonna facilitate the new principal at UES and I'm happy to do so. Brian and I touched base a little bit because the advertisement needs to go out. So that's step one that hasn't happened. I'm hoping that we'll go out this week. I think we can find some time. Yes, we can. I think I'm gonna skip the conference I'm supposed to be at tomorrow and do this instead. And so just thinking about those logistics. Next week's vacation. And then the following week is vacation for other members in the state of Vermont too. So there's almost like two weeks of vacation that we might be dealing with depending on who applies. But that gives us at least two weeks for people to generate applications. I mean, we probably will have them in the middle but I think it's like three weeks usually or something like that. But we'll at least be able hopefully to get some applications in. And thinking about what the timeframe might be for us. And a lot of things Mary was talking about the process pieces, the round one interview, the round two interview with a prompt as well but very different one. I need to work with Linda Volpry and Chris Hemsley at the elementary school too to talk about what are some of those initiatives. They want people to be able to continue to work or to lead in the future too to provide those prompts that fit that school. And I'm thinking like if we can begin interviewing people the second week of May, which is May 7th, that would be ambitious but I really think we need to strive for that. I am remaining really optimistic because I do believe people want to come to Montpelier, want to work in Montpelier because we do have a great school system and I do think it's gonna be similar that people may have to be asking for permission to be able to interview. So that will be a glitch which is just what happens at this time of the year. Similar to Mary reaching out to some of the other groups. It's a little bit different makeup of the committee. I don't really put only request from a board member if that would be awesome. So we would volunteer for that. Ben is going to work with me and we split up the leadership level so there's a couple of leadership members but working with Mary and a couple working with me. We're not all doing all of the committees. But again, looking for a couple of parents, community members, a couple of teachers, board member and instructional assistant. I think at a school level, it's important to have an admin assistant be a part of it, the assistant principal, as well as maybe one of the support folks from Guided Social Worker or Nurse Behavior Specialist, one of those folks. So ultimately the committee could end up having about 11 people on it, counting myself as the facilitator. So that's kind of where we're at. Where I'm at. Got a lot of work to do this week. I wish Chris had to see well. And I thank him every day for having me respond. But it will be great. We will find the right person. I think that's it. Because again, I'm just starting. Great. Yeah, likewise, Ben. Thank you for doing this. And we will similarly, I think one board member is fine for this search I've got. I would love to be on this search committee. Would you? I want to be on this one. Oh my. Yeah. No fighting. Whoa, whoa, whoa. I'll let you all work it out. Time to step away from the microphone. I'm leaving. I was going to say for the curriculum search committee, I don't want to put pressure on Ryan. At least it doesn't work. But having two would be great to have one Roxbury voice. If it doesn't work for either of you, understood, but I want to offer one of those slots to one of the two of you if you can do it. We'll talk about some scheduling. Yeah. I don't want to put Becky on the spot, but she has been a part of our facility search. Would you care to speak to it a little bit? I can. The committee includes myself and includes Grant Geisler from Admin and includes Brian, includes two parents and a teacher. And we, candidates were screened to meet certain criteria and we called in four candidates, interviewed them, spent almost an hour with each one of them. And with a unanimous consideration there, the four candidates to two and pulled the two final candidates back together again. And we use scenario testing with them as well, which is a really good exercise to use for second interviews. It actually gives you a chance not to just see what their qualifications are, but how their heads work. So, which is a really important consideration because we've got the playground coming on board. We've got the bond vote that's just happened. So we have a lot of moving parts and facilities right now. And was it just yesterday? I'm losing track of my days. It was Tuesday. It was. Recommended a final candidate to Brian and now we're checking references and going through due diligence and that part of it as well. And hopefully our chief candidate will accept. There will be either a candidate in consent agenda or the next MRPS meeting, which not the next one next week, but the next regular scheduled one for May 2nd. Is that in Roxbury? That will be in Roxbury, yes. Thank you very much. You can say it at the end, but you save me. That's right, May 2nd, we'll be in Roxbury. That's an exciting update, thank you so much. So may I ask a question? And that is not for Mary, because she's long in the process, but for Pam who's just begun and I don't know if it's written somewhere or a tradition, but I might suggest that the committee bring for the principal bring two candidates forward to the board and the board decides, which is done in lots of places. That was a tradition that we later found was illegal. So the board to clarify the board is responsible for hiring the superintendent and the superintendent is responsible for all of the other hires. Is that, I'm curious to ask if that's a law or is it policy governance procedure? It is a law. Okay. It is in statute. Yeah. I think the committee brings us one candidate. Correct, correct. Okay. Good, well thank everyone for that bit. Not a lot of work, but a lot of good work's being done. Jim, two things. One is how is the decision to be made, which board member, and I do mean Mono E. Mono, Tina or I, who will be on the, on any of these, who makes the decision about which board member goes on to these. And then the other is we've talked about hiring consultants to help us with diversity and inclusion. We haven't taken an action to require that. I just want to understand in each of these positions, these district-wide positions, what are we doing on taking an action to build the best practice around that, even on these short timelines, at least to consult as, like Zoe said, you could do something if we want, if we want to insist on that or require that, or what do we do? First question. I'd like to have the opportunity to thank Chris for saying more, but maybe we could squeeze, maybe we could squeeze both of you onto that, search committee and stop it there. I can promise that I will be well-behaved. I'm not sure about Steve. I can promise all that we'll keep each other in check. I think that might be a solution, unless that huge object is fine. On the second. I want to help you. Go ahead. My suggestion is that you're gonna have I can say, I'm not gonna come next week. We're gonna have a meeting. Well, I was there for a couple of times and I've been more than over here. I'll give you the meeting, but I'm, that folks could come with more specific proposal to the next week's meeting about the piece of an option so that the board would have something before that it could, it could sit. One suggestion is we've been working with CQ strategies, right, Brian? Yes. We have an existing relationship with Kathy Johnson. Kathy Johnson. Yeah. So if that, if she does consulting on that topic, maybe we could ask what that is. Kathy Johnson might like to be on the committee. She is a member of the community. So what I would suggest to you is that, you know, the meeting with a consultant will be an open meeting. Why don't we put on the agenda, why don't we come in and have some sort of well thought out and realistic motion about ensuring that we have diversity, equity and inclusion issues as part of this search. But I'm thinking the other two, the other searches. One of the problems is that we don't do those. Well, if we've got most of the candidate pool or the curriculum position relatively closed out by next week, there might be things we can do in the superintendent search or the principal search that we're able to let the game in. Like rubric design and the, and cultural competency understanding. I mean, certainly we can ask, we can make sure to do questions. We can do the rubric to make sure that certain biases are accounted for and hopefully eliminated. I mean, that person could work directly. We need to establish so we can. Right, that person could just be a resource to the administrator who's leading that also. I'm not trying to get in there and have a giant group process. What I'm saying is that we should at least, you know, if we're serious about building a model for the future, let's do the little bit we can do now, which is let's get the consultant in there to consult a little bit. Yeah, now let's do that. And let's have a concrete motion that speaks about the practical things that we expect of these processes that accounts for that. Anything else? We are running late. We should just, yeah. Okay, can we do these first readings quickly? No, I think people are spent. I think I would, could I just say the record? I'll, in terms of policy readings, we'll just repeat items eight and nine as written. And then a reminder that we'll have seven, a number to be adopted that are all available currently on our website under MRSD policies and they're listed under the in process tab on the page. Because we were so quick, there might be a change in nine, which Bridget talked about, and so we could get that in and it still could be worn. Okay, so we're gonna. It wouldn't change the agenda. No, but. So we're gonna do eight and nine on the second. I think we can easily kick the governance and forward plan to the second. Perfect, well, thank you very much. Sort of ran over, and thanks everyone for coming. Thank you. And motion to adjourn. Second? There's two. All those in favor? Aye. Aye.