 revisions to the agenda, 2.3.2 and 2.3.3, so we can touch briefly on goals 2 and 3 as well as goal 1. I'm not sure where to add this, so this would be like a discussion item or an action item, but I'd like to add a brief executive session for the purposes of discussing a contract issue, so is that 3.2.6 or probably, we'll probably do that at the end, but put it in the agenda 2.6. Can we discuss also that the issue of, you know, signing on to the court case, the SU, as a unit, I think we can discuss it, it's going to come up under 2.2.2 when we discuss the default and for sure we'll come up under that. Any other revisions to the agenda? Any public comments and correspondence? I do. Yeah, I'll put it on the floor. Okay. She asked about making sure we were going to appoint a proxy for VI Visbeth, but we also need, I think it was for the Vermont School Board's Association. And the forms are right there. We can only have one voting rep for the entire SU, so someone has to be approved. She just wanted to make sure it got on the agenda. Yeah, I forgot to. She was the ESBA rep last year. Okay. And then from Scott Thompson to the floor, sent it to me by Scott's. It's a, I have doubted that we would agree, so she asked that doubt be distributed. Any other public correspondence? Any executive committee comments? I think it might be worth mentioning the movie. I appreciate it getting information about the resilience movie and being able to attend that on Monday. I found it interesting and useful information. Yeah, I agree. I thought the film was great and the panel was awesome. And you know, there was a fair number of people there. Yeah, it was great. Actually, it was a really good turnout. We weren't sure what it was going to be. 65 people were there. And for anybody that didn't have a chance to see the film, maybe hasn't seen it. If you're looking for another opportunity on the door, as it says, at that Kellogg-Everett Library next week, they're showing it. I think it's Wednesday, it's either Monday or Wednesday. It's Priscilla who's there from the Department of Children, Department of EC, Department of Children and Families. They're hosting it there. We're having a similar idea panel, but I don't think it's empty, because that's her. Yeah, it might be there. She's working in this area. Sure. Would anyone like to move approval of the minutes of 8.15 and 9.5? So who? Second. Discussion? Page 2 of the packet, as it's the first page of the 8.15 minutes. It says, motion 2. Okay. Was made. Motion was made. I had one comment on the September 5th minutes. This is on page 7, just after the break. I just noted that there was a motion made, and then there was some amendments to the motion, and then the motion was passed, just kind of all spilling over on the page 8 as well. Normally we boldface motions and votes, so I'm about to see that just so that it's not kind of buried in the text, but easily found in there. Any other comments on the minutes? All those in favor? All right. 2.1, budget timeline. So I think that you should take a look at page 9. You'll see an SU budget timeline. We're in September 19th right now. I think the question I have for the board is we, last year, the Supervisor Union Board changed the assessment methodology so that we're doing, we're assessing for everything, including special education across the Supervisor Union. So about 63% of our budget is a special aid budget, of the total budget. We do a budget in October 17th, which is our next meeting. But if we do that, the service plan has to be wound up for the state on the 15th, and Laura and I were talking about a week and a half ago, and said, can we get from the service plan being done on the 15th into the budget on the 17th? We probably could bring it that day to the meeting, where you would have no time to look ahead of time with the special education costs in there. So we're just, I just want to be realistic about the mechanics of how this is done. I'm willing to do what the board would like. We've been past year's prior, and previous year's prior without the special education. We can do that too. I'm trying to just make all the timelines work. This is an operational thing, and it seems like why am I discussing this with the board? But I'd be willing to think about different board meetings if possible. Other board meetings. So you have a full picture when you first look at it. If you'd like to look at it in pieces. But your next board meeting is until November 21st, where you'd have a whole budget. So I think that's a little tight for you as a board. And then having, I'm looking at our traditional calendar on the 5th of December being the adoption by the SG Board. So I'm willing to do just about whatever you'd like, but I'd like to have this discussion about how this is going to service this for the executive committee and for the SG Board. The principals are in the budget building for the special ed service plans that are already starting to be meetings with Kelly, and the building actually one is done already of all the buildings. So they're in the midst of this, they know what's going on with the SG budget. So typically we would be making a recommendation on that budget on November 21st. Usually on November 21st you're saying this is where we want to go with it to go to the SG Board for the 5th. And this isn't that different from the previous year. It isn't that different. What I'm just trying to say to you, and another thing that puts in there is our HRA administrative costs. As I talked to you about in my report, we have a lot of fluctuation going on right now in the HRA administration and those costs because of what's happened with future planning, giving up the administration, what we've actually found that a cost to administer in-house versus the outside costs for that. So... What time do you think you would need? Hang on. This, you know, the next meeting. I mean, won't you get this special ed game? Once it's in there, I think it's, you know, that's why I'm saying we have to send it to the state on the 15th. So that's that Monday. We'll probably be done somewhere on the Friday to that weekend. If I remember how the service plan usually goes, it's usually that 10th to 15th. Everything's being sewn up. And then we put it in. That's what I'm saying. I can bring it to you on the 17th. I just can't guarantee you I can give it to you before the night of the 17th to look at it. So if I did that, realize you're getting something that's basically moving from one spreadsheet to another without really any thought or analysis of the overall. Which is fine. I don't mind doing that. I'm just trying to be really transparent. Other than the special ed before the meeting, was that bifurcation makes it more difficult? It makes it more difficult for Lori. And I'm really watching Lori's time right now. Lori's, our finance department, that's why I made the decision I told you on the report that we're hiring another personnel because we do our finances, so we're paying out over time, right? For our finance department right now. So I'll be really judicious with what tasks I give them. Would it be reasonable to look for a week later date for the executive committee meeting? I think that sounds like that's what we should do. Isn't there an... Here's how the SU board meeting, that next one is safe, but we could look at other dates. For me, we could look at other dates. That's fine. I'm not trying to think it through in my head like how it flows. The idea is generally that the executive committee tries to review the material so that if the agenda for the SU board needs to be crafted or structured in such a way, or if we have a recommendation to make or whatever it might be that we do that, right? Right, so we can still do that. We can do everything else and do a budget, a special hour budget meeting for all of you the next week. I wouldn't want to do it the same night as the carousel, but I want to do it. That might work as a conference call too. Is that... Yeah. Yeah, I could definitely give it all to you. Lori and I can be, we can, you know, we have a couple of people here open up to the public here and we have the conference calling capability. Do you have a certain number that you can visit from the minute or...? I think as far as that issue goes, it sounds like what I'm hearing is that we're not going to expect to have a schedule on the 7th. We could change our meeting around, but there's a lot of reasons we might want to have more meetings or change the time over meetings or something. So maybe we can circle back to this kind of at the end when we talk about future meeting times. Yeah. Is there anything else on there? That's my biggest piece. I'll tell you that the boards, and I'll be saying this to everybody next week, we're starting our budget process as we talked about last meeting. So, I mean, unless you've all changed your thought process, I mean, I can ask for a decision from all of you, but I don't see any way in from the board. So let's start our budget process that's the way we always have. So we're starting here at the end of this month. No lanes. Are you looking for some guidance, some sort of big picture? I'd like some big picture. I will tell you that we just found out that the health care costs are coming in at 11.8% increase. We're going into negotiation year where the CPI is going up. It's at least a percent and a half higher than what it's been in the past couple of negotiations. So that will drive the percentage increase of the negotiations. And we've had low negotiations because we have low CPI, I think. We've had about a percentage to a percent and a half above the landed negotiations from CPI. We're at 2.6%, and last year the CPI was at 2.8%. So, you know, we're, or two years ago, we were negotiating for that. So it's, those are just good factors to know what we're coming into. The CPI right now, I want to say is close to three. I haven't looked at it in a couple of months, but that's where it was mid-summer. Negotiations haven't really begun in the past year. They haven't even begun. So, you know, those are, that was, it's a principle, and I had that discussion here yesterday about budget process, and they said, what do you think? And I said, well, we're always asked pretty much for a level of service, so we're going to go for a level of service. But I'm going to tell you if my, you know, I have some crystal ball where I'd like it to go, but then I told them those two pieces about requiring the negotiations. Here's CPI, here's healthcare, and they all looked at it. That probably means cuts. I mean, level service seems like a logical 30-point. But you're going to get numbers that are in the fives to sixes. That's my estimation. That's without something. Percent. Percent. You know, without, that's just my, that's just intuition. That's nothing, there's no science or calculation behind that. That's just a feel. Yeah, well, it seems to be presented as a special ed, and that's likely to go up, right? Is there an indication that the driver of the healthcare is? Why? Is there an indication that it's with the driver of the healthcare is because I think, I thought I heard in the video that the Green Mountain Board only gave like a 4% of the conference on increase. To the hospital. To the hospital. Yeah. This is, I think this is, it's just utilization of, we're self-insured, and it's utilization of what we have, and that, the difference between the HRAs, right here out of VI, is if we funded HSAs, instead of HRAs, they feel we would have had lower increases. And that the HRAs and the HSAs that were negotiated were quite generous to the employees. So it hasn't really, it hasn't changed the utilization of healthcare. So it's been steady in terms of utilization over the time? I don't know that. I don't know that. I don't do, I don't get that deep into it. I listen to VI, we own part, we own as every school district does. I rely on those experts. Do we have any kind of sense of if we are forced to consolidate governance, what those expenses might be like? Well, I don't, but I can tell you from supervisory unions that have consolidated, that they had, that had the $150,000 grant, they used all that and some. There's numbers really, they would almost be irrelevant to the consolidation. I mean, I would think, I don't think you would say, I don't think you would say. He's not asking us to, he's asking us to, expenses. Expenses. Expenses, two consolidations. Two consolidations. One time expenses. One time expenses. One time expenses. One time expenses. Go for that process. I'm sorry, I'm sorry, I understood. We'll know by the time we adopt the budget, whether we're doing that or not, but it's something to consider. Yeah, I mean that is part of the rationale. We're looking at the core code right now, the finance department between software, changing coding systems because even though we changed the coding system already, AOE has changed it again. So it's still not locked. So software, and then the healthcare and all that, and the amount of overtime we've been paying. It was like, we need another finance person in here. We can do it at no cost to the budget. Because of how much we're paying? Because we're looking at savings right now and how much we're paying it over time and their work is there. We've worked so many hours. I'm not interested in anything more than a level service budget. I'd like to see anything more than that. Yeah, I'm not trying to do anything more than that. Because it won't be level funding. Well, I think we, I guess what I'm hearing is we, that's where everybody seems to be saying that's where we should start. I would agree. I mean it's, I'm trying to say anything less than that would be a pretty arbitrary at this point. So that's our guidance for today. That's okay. Kind of expected that guy. Yeah, yeah, right. Like I said, the principal kind of heard that guidance from me yesterday. Right, right. Did you say level service or level funding? Level service, level service, yeah. Okay, 2.1.1 is priorities. And I don't know if you will cover this or you wanted to speak to this? I just wanted, we did cover some of that as we were talking about the finance. With all the pieces we have to do, I want to be clear by adding this position to the finance I told you about the report, I'm not changing the bottom line of the budget. I'm able to do it within the budget where we see some savings and some from the set-aside for the software that we're not going to have to expend. Because we have to go to the state software solution. And we were planning in that to have a part to full-time person for a year. And total cost of 300,000. So this is part of what that person is going to be doing. Okay. You know we're really off-setting a lot of overtime, like you said. Right. Every year. I've been eating away at our sub-lunch almost a month in a month and all of them in two months. It'll be a tough time here about that. We can do it. Laurie and I figured out a way to do all this so we can meet all the bottom lines and make everything work. Money-wise... I was just thinking more in terms of the complexity of what's going on. Oh, well that's lost. That's lost. Yeah. It's driving us. Sorry, I'm not doing anything about that. Yeah. So I just wanted to mention and maybe this will come up again under 2.5 when we talk about the agenda for the SU meeting. In conversations with Bill as well as interacting with the central office staff and some of the principals and just thinking about like you know, this year, and no matter where the state board is going, you know, there's a certain kind of element of chaotic energy in the system this year, and there's a sense for me, and I think, you know, Bill has said this, that the staff is just flat out and really actually overextended, and so with that in mind, it's probably worth discussing with the SU board, I think, if you want to discuss it now again, but the extent to which the WCSU boards can try to really be cognizant of that and aware of it and, you know, trying to minimize it possible, you know, kind of random special requests, and you know, even maybe major agenda things that we, you know, in another year, we might think, well, we'd love to put this on the plate of our leadership team to be thinking about how to do this or that. We just have to think very judiciously, I think, about kind of the resources that we have in the system and kind of what they can really do. Yeah, and one of the things that I said to Matthew, if we get through a settled contract at the end of the town, of the school year, by June 30th, and we get through at 46th, that's a win for me. We get together, we come through together, all working together, and all that, that's a win. I'm not talking about where we land. That to me is the win. Anything else? I'm going to even put school monitoring on that. All this is, like, second tier of me, as your superintendent. Those are, that's how long we've run in the ship, like, keeping the kids learning. That's why I told the principals again yesterday, I said to them, guys, I need, I'm going to trust and I know you can do it. Keep your focus on the staff, the kids, and the parents. That's what I want you guys focusing on. So if I know that's taken care of, then we can work out of these other bigger issues. There are some very arbitrary things that you can hear about from the principals. Just don't, tell the board, don't bother us about this. So it's going to be, it's, it's, keep them, let them focus. Go ahead. I'll give you an example, something that I did in the last Doty meeting, which is that we were having a discussion about our capital fund and the money and where it came from and how it should be used. And I said, all right, well, I want to know, like, how would we spend that money, you know, and that just puts a whole, that it puts a slate of meetings and a whole bunch of discussions and a lot of work on Bill's and Matt's plates that they, I think, in retrospect, as I'm thinking, thinking about it, do not need right now. So that's, that's an example. So when we were talking about response to Matty, and that was pretty, I totally get the question. It's a really fair question and it's one that should be asked. And I said, Matt, that question you asked, just put on a slate of about two or three meetings for Matty Young and myself working with John Hemmelgard in a Black River design to estimate costs to come back. So now you just made about 10 to 15 hours with the work to answer that question. For building work that probably can't be done on the time when we were talking about it anyway. So I'm just saying, like, I'm pointing to myself and saying, like, it's so easy, you know, just to think, like, wow, we really should do this. And I guess I'm just voicing, seeing what that's doing and seeing what this central office is up against in the principles that, you know, it's kind of worth our, our thinking about and being very careful and thoughtful, I guess, about what we're doing. We should bring this message to our individual board. Yeah. I'm thinking, if we're in agreement about this, the executive board member on each local board would have to be kind of the watchdog of that to point that out when it comes up, not to say no, but to say, okay, what's this going to add conceivably, what's going to not get done now because we're going to do this instead, that kind of a discussion. But I mean, if we're in agreement, maybe it's kind of incumbent on us to not direct, to not say no or not say yes, but just say, well, I think just to point, I just, because I'm on my board, I just want to point out that we've already, we already know the central office is really tight this year. You know, Bill or Alicia, how much time you think this is going to take and let's consider what we're asking. Because like you say, you make, I don't want to say, you make an uninformed request, it's a valid request, and of course, the one's just alluding to the fact that, remember, times tight is only a limited product. At least that concerns me. There's a flip on that though, too. I mean, it was much like a capital fund. I mean, that's, I mean, essentially the schools, you know, as of, you know, were forced into consolidation. Those are, those are dollars that those towns put aside, and those go into the bigger fund. I may not come back to that community. So, you know, there was certainly the argument of a callus that said, I want to come 100,000 dollars that was put in, you know, why, you know, we might want to invest that in a building before we do that, you know. So it actually ends up in our building. So, yeah, that's, go ahead. This is the exact conversation that we're having. I'm sure this is why we kind of put it on the table. On the other hand, and I don't want to, I really don't want to talk about that issue right now, specifically. But what I will say is that, you know, I mean, I put out the request because I, I sort of agree with that point of view in a way, but no matter what we do, we can't do major projects to our building before school is over. And I'm looking at the money. It's a large campus. This is a whole, and my point, the larger point, and I don't want to, I don't want to discuss this. It's just more that, you know, I'd really sort of ask, and when I'm hearing some consensus about this at least, is that boards should just be aware of the resource constraints. And I can really be, you know, sort of taking that into consideration. I, you know, we can't, the Executive Committee and the SU Board can't tell the other boards what to do anyway. So it's, but it's just about being aware. And I think if there is some, I think we can do this by consensus is that we would ask the Executive Committee members to just bring this topic to your boards as part of the Executive Committee report, you know, and take care of some things. This is definitely an issue, and I know I get feedback on that from other citizens of my, something that kind of makes them angry, you know. It's not the money issue, not the time issue, right? It's the money issue, the way, you know, the fact that they chose to set that aside, you know, that was a strategic plan, and then it was alluded elsewhere because, and that's an issue. It's our, it's really not their fault that that, we're in this situation that we're in now, you know, it's not our fault either way, you know, but. I hear you, I'm just going to move this on to them. I'm really voiced, I mean, the point is really well taken. All right. 2.2, so this is, is that a window of priorities? Yeah, so yeah, it's pretty much, you know, and I'll let you, I'm going to be a probably a little more, I've, at times have been impressed in the past, and I'm going to be again to say, we can do that. I need some bags on what you want us to drop. I'll probably be that direct. Good, I'll make it. Yeah, thanks. Because of what's going to, I mean, without what, there aren't unlimited dollars. And, and it can't be coming to school. It's just it's taking services away from those three clients we're trying to serve. Students and. Well, I hear that feel, but I also, you know, I don't have a profit before you say. Yeah, concerns. But, my thought would be that's where priorities would re-enter. So we get a level services budget and it's, I'll be extreme, it's 10% increase. So we know, there's no way. That's to me, not where I come in and say, I want you to cut this isn't this. This is where I come in and say, these three things are the priorities. You can't touch those. Come back to me with a 5% budget. And that's not what I'm talking about, Steve. I'm not talking about that. What I'm talking about is, we've had in the past, sometimes the boards have asked for like three or four options. And we'd like to know how, you know, how can we do this money and that money? What would this new program? What is this new program cause? We just can't do that type of stuff. Because I just don't have the finance department. I mean, I can do stuff on the back of the envelope. I get pretty close myself. But it's just, those are the best places. If we get, I want that direct. I mean, I want that. No, I. That's not your advice. I'm sandwiched to that. Yeah. Okay. Thanks. So let's go to 2.2, which is a ATIC 46. And this is back to the timeline. The timeline. So does everyone have a copy of a letter from Paul? No, I brought extra copies printed out. Apologies. This is not mine. Oh, the, uh, the, uh, the, uh, the, uh, oh, thank you. Yeah. Thank you. It's very close. Yeah. Yeah, thanks. Was that a separate email? It was a separate email, but here I'll just handle. Okay, so let's talk about Twinfield I think first and then there's probably many different things we can touch on under the draft default argument item. So if there's enough data. The only update is today I realized once I had everyone respond to a poll is that the dates I proposed aren't going to work so we're probably another couple probably another I'm gonna look at after the 2nd of October I was trying to get together before then I was just saying to Stephen earlier when he got in here earlier it's like we get one from us or one from them so it's a scheduling yeah sure fair enough okay but I sent an email that I sent to Kari and Stephen and to Scott to Mark saying hey let's come to the meeting with a lot of the same data we looked at through a 706B process like come with it prepared like get it on the table and if he has it for doesn't have it last year but two years back that's fine so we'll have all that ahead of the meeting so it's not we're not spending a meeting what do we want to collect it can be what else don't we have here okay and there and you do you probably read David's article all the times are to say at the very as well I did not sorry sorry a little bit did I have to read yours no no okay so 2.2.2 draft before is that articles of agreement and I'm gonna suggest that there's at least three topics I can think of that could come under this item so one would be just a general review of the articles themselves and the attached or associated literature what's calling and then there is of course the debt which we talked about last time and then asked and now have an attorney's opinion about some of those issues and then there's the point that we also talked about last time and Rick has already raised which is I would kind of frame it as to what extent do the boards of WCSU intend to try to resist or contest different options that the state board might take in the next couple of months those I guess would be the three main topics I would see there may be others that people have you're talking more like full board agenda item is that what you're yeah I mean these are things yeah I mean some of these things are not really for us to decide but but I think we do want to review kind of what we got back from the attorney here figure out that should be on the agenda and maybe worth our time to kind of look at the the deep articles if people have had time to review them and have comments or insights or observations to share share about them in general or about potential challenges these kinds of things so so I don't have to answer your question Stephen but yeah it's about sort of what do we bring to the SU board and how do we bring it I would say the the legal response should be part of what goes out to the full board I think it's about providing as much information if we've got information what's provided to everybody right so yeah I reported what I just so I think it just goes in the packet yeah it's okay you know around it could just be rolled into your second discussion agenda around debt well let's talk about that first maybe that's yeah why not so yeah we received this response from the attorneys the attorney I should say you know there's anyone who doesn't support this question yeah it's not definitive in a lot of ways I think the my reason is the fallback that can't do it this is the audience that did do it and it's coming through into the that side in here is get them explicit um authorization from the legislature for the talents and we'll do something so just it didn't seem it didn't seem like there's a very clear you know defined way of doing not say that it shouldn't be tried but just not there's no I don't think there's a legal map of doing meaning there's definitely no legal map in here no we're doing that's very sure yeah right so it's kind of new like it's new territory yeah and then you know you have to have someone challenging it in order to get into the court just doesn't automatically go into the court and you can take different positions and and and you take a legal create a legal structure and someone challenges it you know it will there's those folks who are involved in it agree and move forward that way it will operate but you have to have someone to challenge because the court doesn't reach out and say oh that's interesting but then the newspaper I think you're going to just so you have to have a complaint prepping it right it was the one suggestion at the end to consider carving out these months earlier so I asked Paul for that back and I have an email from him saying it was more speculative than okay anything else okay um I can read you the email he sent it to me today I said because Scott asked me that Scott Thompson asked me that I said well for that I'm Scott I'm that Paul he can respond he responded to Scott myself so let me get you that email um you know if the basis of time is because I'm at least my favorite state is so much higher you know kind of same issue is with Berlin and the other folks it didn't seem like it was really that even among even those four towns it was still significant shift right so it struggled a lot I hadn't seen his response but the example he cited I didn't find relevant because in that district Huntington that didn't participate volunteer or elected not to participate yeah they weren't excluded where his suggestion was an exclusion true Huntington didn't want to join the district although in but I'll say one thing around that I think it's still worth our time talking about it but in my mind I don't I'm not sure I want to continue to discuss specific options that I feel like I've received some legal advice that it might be difficult or quite difficult but it does from in my mind it doesn't preclude us from continuing to work on that issue and creatively put good minds together to see what could be other things that could come up other possibilities that could be explored I think I think for many of the concerned people we want to exhaust every possible avenue around that topic and it's not to say that something would change but I think for me to do due diligence as a board member I would like to feel like every single possible scenario was explored and examined and you know so maybe these ones aren't the ones that are going to work let's keep putting our heads together and seeing if we can come up with something that would work that could fit in somewhere or even if it doesn't fit in that if it was presented to legislatures they'd be like that's a great idea and maybe we could get some traction on it but generally there's a way to balance that debt you know it's a whether you can allocate that and it really is as simple as looking over the longest debt period you know we do there's a snapshot point from the time you consolidate and you take a photograph of that time and then you or that's your start point and then the end point is the longest debt that is standing at that so any debt that's accrued beyond that beginning point is actually shared so it's out of this equation but you look at the projected debt or basically kind of the the dollars you're going to have to put into each of the schools over that in this case 17-year period where you've actually got that stand and you project that out based on what your buildings are looking like they're going to need over that time and you actually come up with this you know a series of five dollar ranges and it gives you a way of those can then be balanced in me one is larger than the other than there's going to be a transfer of assets to the schools that are you know have less in that period you know it's kind of you know and it's actually fair to everybody if you do that it's fair to East Montpelier I mean East Montpelier is carrying a lot of debt now but they also don't have as much in the capital expenditure side over the next 17 years because they have a new facility so they you know if they had to pay up something right now based on debt they would actually get hurt because other schools would then they're bigger the debt they've been incurring over that next 70 years would not be that they would be those expenses would be shared so that's only I mean that's the way you would balance this I mean you could actually come up with numbers that way there would have to be a couple contingencies in there and that was if a school was closed and all the debt from that closure year forward you would have then have to be compensated back to that town because they would no longer you know there that would no longer be a piece of their equation that you have to look at that aggregated debt through that 17 year period and so they would be a balancing if something got closed then that might only be for a six year period or something like that well my point is I think that discussion should still go forward even if it's a smaller group are you suggesting you know some group get to keep working on this I mean Chris and I as directed by the group did me I think it's fair to say subgroups in the logical way to figure out some stuff so there's a couple different I mean yeah we can't first of all this this should be discussed with the full SU board you know which includes the members of all the boards um and I think we can't really decide anything here tonight anyway I guess I would so one thing I would just suggest is that to this this group and if there's anybody else you know that's particularly invested in this topic and has a creative idea it'd be great if people came to the SU board meeting if they want to put an option like that on the table to something that's actually you know kind of written opera and digestible or presentable format because otherwise we're just kind of brainstorming like in the meeting and you know that's gonna maybe not get us very far so that's just one suggestion um the second the second question is kind of what we what we include in what we in the packet basically for this topic for the SU board so do people want to include scott's two page kind of options paper that sort of sparked this discussion and then we have this response from the attorney um drop the default the default articles obviously I have to be sure I think we might want to consider putting together a one page memo from the committee that kind of lays out all of these considerations twin field debt articles just to make sense of it I don't know it's gonna be one page but we can try to try to do that yeah what's this Scott just this is new you know this is in response to a question I think from kari is that right um we're gonna try to get together and hasn't been able to do that I guess yeah we you know this is this is basically this is scott's cheat sheet I guess I'm kind of like the the basic um characteristics of the debt issue let's say though I haven't had a chance to review it I have to confess so I don't know you know we just got tonight yeah yeah I looked it over quickly I have had chances to verify the numbers which there's a couple in there that I really wanted because I just I look at I'm not sure okay it's very I think the principal is in the right direction but I want to the table seems like a step forward and sort of boiling it down but Rick and I talked about what he was talking about and Rick I'd be glad to work with you on that I was actually just looking at my calendar when I have free next Monday or Tuesday it's tough for me right now and this week and next week because I'm down a guy and I'm covering his load and this is for me to gather okay so why don't you and I talk here we'll work it out but I think I actually think and other districts have done exactly what you're talking about to figure out the debt to merger piece that's how that's how Champlain Valley got through it and that's how Harvard got through it and what did it look like was a commitment they went to they went to a bond right away both districts did because they had buildings that were much different shape than we are now but they're buildings like that's how the Warren school got rebuilt that's how Wilson Central the Wilson school system schools were in pretty bad shape so they spent 35 million bond as soon as they came together to fix those schools because it was they could see the inequities and you know they didn't have to do any inequities in the in the facilities and the bond indebtedness and it were inequities both ways and they said now wait a minute we need to get everybody it is a two-sided right so yeah we've been right about this whole time yeah you got to look at both and you know I don't think you have to be from talking with Bridget Neese at Harwood and Elaine Pitney at CV at Champlain Valley their business managers worked on it but they didn't do elaborate they didn't do detailed inventory every building they used some allotments it wasn't that hard and it's time for allotments I've used before with you doing estimates so values and costs that maintain buildings I mean you don't need to get into the real detail accounting I think that's smart you know you're projecting you know because you might tend to see because I'm an asset management guy you know look at those but that's complex and you're still projecting right you know so there's going to be variability but at least to get seeing that ballpark there's probably a way you get a ballpark pretty cool yeah I think so that's why I said down for an hour I think we could give us some to look at it from both sides with just square foot estimates and like best to me sir so yeah I don't know I guess maybe Bill you and I can talk about if you have time to look at this we can talk about whether or not to put it in the package yeah I don't want to put it in like you know without having a chance to kind of review it I guess so I think we can work that out and then there's a question I think for the SU board on do we want to create a you know a small group to actually do a deeper dive on this topic and but I think again I guess I ask you any group that tries to do that work is going to have to ask questions why then this is in my priority area I mean this is why I said it's getting through act 46 smoothly right and negotiations smoothly so this is where I'm pretty like if you need the support okay we're going to ask yeah because we have one shot at this we yeah we got to get it so it's this is when I said what are my priorities those are my two priorities okay in the SU together as a whole all right that that is my where we land in organization systems all that fine we got to be together so we all own commonly half our students we own them all my estimation but in reality half the systems are unified it's really important that we're together for the benefit of when they're 712 but the 3k6 is so we're going to need a discussion and an action item that informing us about subcommittee or something like that okay has everyone read the draft default articles of agreement more or at least scan them I say if you've not studied them that's okay so I think everyone's aware of the I guess I personally found both the timeline and the sort of nature of how things are going to unfold actually a little bit surprising maybe I shouldn't know maybe that should have been obvious to me for three years now but whenever the last seeing it in print and seeing the actual every detail of it spelled out was meaning how accelerated it is yeah just the I guess you know I didn't have a good sense I think people who were maybe paying more attention had a little bit of a sense of this kind of hybrid model of board representation I didn't know that that was under serious consideration that's one what is the hybrid version of transitional that's the one where yeah so it's two members from each town that voted on collectively by the by a new union district I think it's called the town's nominate and that's right everybody collects I found that surprising I found that no I don't think that's something they don't because I don't know yeah you signed everyone's kind of petition but that's why I mean that yeah so you have to be written in 10 yeah did you actually take us down and then yeah the transitional board and the the fact there's basically a union district wide meeting public meeting that's to be held that has to deal with a laundry list of topics that have to be decided it so there's just a whole bunch of stuff in there that you know seems what's that all within 90 days all within 60 days well yeah the first meeting within 60 and then and all of that would happen even if November 30th at the latest is the date the board comes out with its plan all of that would have to be done before town meeting day on March 5th not because that's past the 90 day yeah that's what they're trying to aim for from reading it and having a couple conversations I've had yesterday we actually drew the time line out on this fall so the whole leadership team would end up July 1st 2019 for November 30th July 1st 2019 with everything and we put you know I gave you all in this packet a matrix that tried to line up the different timelines and someone said hey go can we just do this on a time one timeline across the wall to kind of see how all this works and interfaces and that was you know trying to take this and put it onto one timeline and you know when does when do those different pieces happen the timeline overview at the end of the draft articles is also really helpful in making sense of those key dates so I guess we don't all have copies of that but I actually think we should talk a little bit about the beginning of that because State Board is making its desire to issue this report in late October so let's say it's October 20th that then we have 60 days to organize a meeting an organizational meeting so and has to be worn 30 days in advance so we're talking December at the earliest but I don't even think that I think I mean some board member as advice that I mean I haven't heard maybe I've missed it but the board has come out saying they're trying to come out in October with everything but they if you look at their data of their meetings that are up on their scheduled meetings they have a scheduled meeting for November 28th so my the State Board it's on their on their calendar they have a scheduled meeting for November 28th okay I don't think that they're not obtuse to the different things the difficulties of scheduling in November December right so so I think you know as you look at that you count out from November 28th 90 days 90 days ends before town meeting too many days I forget exactly when I was but I was ahead of that here when I counted it out so you know and 60 days is in February and 30 days is you know December 28th so we might also say January 1st but we can't count on the other member we have to plan as it's the end of October if that's what they said they haven't I haven't heard anyone at the board come out and say that I've heard a member say that it's in it's in this memo it's the right at the top of the timeline overview the State Board has indicated its desire to issue it in late October those before Barry pushed their vote to November I mean I think that's why they wanted to hear you know our leaders because they need to wait until after okay all right we still don't know I mean it could be the day after Barry votes or it could be yeah you know right I mean the point is we have to be planning now right and I'm trying to think of worst case so worst case to me is November 30th everything every day we gain I think helps us could you explain why because I that's interesting to me to hear you say that so I think the sooner the transition board starts to do work the better so the longer better the longer our ramp here's what I'm worried about I'm worried for us I mean in the guidance in here it says we advise you that you get to a budget vote and that has to be with a new board not with the transition board and we advise you do that by May 1st I think you know the way this timeline set up to get to a budget vote and you have to warn the vote 30 days before so if you have a May 1st vote you got to be warning by April 1st well if you like people on town meeting day which is probably what it's going to be now I'm in theory it can be members of the transition board and the new board can be totally different people in my in Bill's reality I think and there's going to be a lot of crossover there so if there's more work that can be done on the budget work together to really understand the budget because there's going to be a lot of communication about what this budget is because there's going to be a lot of confusion on it the better we the sooner we work on that with boards the better that the better that's going to be and on the November you know once the ruling comes out the local boards don't have a jurisdiction over the new budget for FY 20 so I need a board whether it be transition because the transition is going to recommend one to the new board I just want to really want to specify for the sake of argument that we're assuming the state board you know mandates yeah yeah yeah that that's but I'm just so yeah yeah I just wanted to say it because you know we don't know but we assume or project the and I don't even know I mean to elect new school board members even on town meeting day seems ambitious because those ballots have to be printed there's an advance and have to be there's no procedure in here for that then you got to get petitions to actually even have candidates that's why so the sooner we can back this up that's why to me it's all right the better it is in my from my chair I can you know I'm not saying I'm the one to say that that's the way it should be but right right from my chair so should happen soon yeah rather than you'd rather have told her than November you got okay yeah yeah you didn't sound like who you saying oh no that's what I mean but yeah now if it happened in our five be much happier in October you know then November but it's just it is what it is and we'll deal with it so what happens if you don't meet the deadline what do you mean we have to you know meet deadlines I mean the timelines are just absolutely ridiculous I mean that's I mean I'm sure a lot of times probably won't so if we don't get to it I'm not sure about which that doesn't like I can say this for the budget the district and I don't know because you wouldn't have the same if there's a merged district you wouldn't have the same merged district but under when you have the same district going over a year and they don't have a budget they can operate on 95 percent of the previous year's budget until they get it past the budget so that would mean a lot of risks happening although you're on the same contracts doesn't matter I mean I had the budget but you just have the guts of one if you think now you have to put out every I've been through this before you have to put out risks okay and you lose your staff you lose that so that's budget and what else we you know with all of the just the mechanical setup on this process what what would I mean that obviously budgets in this pretty critical yeah something on time yeah everything else you know what about that you know the kind of the mechanical structure of this whole organization we then we're gonna have the budget yeah yeah I guess so and the budget's the end product of the mechanism being in place I don't know if we're bad enough to describe people that set out to put this together because I won't go that that's me and this is where they where they're smoking when they put that together that's a lot to do but very short period of time Bill can I ask a clarification just I'm sorry this is really dense but when you're talking about you would prefer in October rather than November what would you prefer I'd rather have a decision from the AOE of the state from our state or since they were not AOE thank you for correcting me Matthew from the state board okay I'd rather have that earlier than like yes so what I would suggest that in addition to forming a subgroup on debt and we also form a subgroup on this process this transition process so that we can start mapping should it be the same group or actually it should be different and it should probably involve at least a chair or two and a clerk or two people that are likely to be on the transitional board would be I'm doing not my thing will be will be yeah just a statue yeah how about a statue by Byron the other thing I'd say that we should do is just look at having boards kind of reassemble a 706 B study group because as I'm reading this we can develop our own articles of agreement in the last page it says you can fill up your own article screen but 90 days you have to have it all done in 90 days and if you don't so I think the standard default comes in is I'm reading that language I think translate I think that's the language you want the transition for the transition word does that so I think what you're saying is a 706 B group is in fact the transition word and they're the ones that that draft this that's the changes look in section two where it says if the committee's articles are not approved within the 98 period then the provisions in the state boards to fault articles of agreement included in the state one plan shall we try to the new district yes right the only the only entities that can amend the articles after the statewide plan is issued are the transitional board or the voters and there's limited articles that are in the at the end there they list the articles by which I think you can at some point I'm not sure if it's the transitional board or the new board I think it's a new board that can add additional articles but I'm not I'd have to go back and well they yeah I think they can some of them require a vote but you know section one says after the state board of education issues the statewide plan districts subject to merge shall have 90 days to form a committee with members appointed in the same manner and number as required for a study committee under 16 vsa chapter 11 and which shall draft articles of agreement for the new district during this period the committee shall hold at least one public hearing to consider and take comments on the draft articles of agreement now if they were going to say the transitional board was going to do that they wouldn't be talking about the senate and you know but where's that from is that on the page 20 23 it doesn't say seven or six feet it says a study committee and that's what I think that's what the transition did earlier on this in the document so the transition award or in the meeting for voters whether to amend articles deadline for vote but you know amending articles is different than drafting them drafting articles is creating this draft there's some of these articles cannot be changed right so as long as there's a default and you have the ability to amend something I think we can so that's that we don't get through part of the chart on this yeah I mean it's definitely not there are some things about this that are not crystal clear to me because it's not just dates and things like that so that would be my recommendation I'm not going to be here the next week but I would be willing to serve on this group okay are you a chair or a clerk so I'm going to be on transitional anyway to come into the meeting what I would like to what would I would what I would love to include with the packets that we're just being clear again yeah I think anything 40 not 46 49 just tell me what you need and I'd like to be there what I would love to include with the packet bill along with all this stuff is a list of the chairs and clerks from the six we have that I actually put that together so yes we can do that yep what's that here and for each one to your board there couldn't be a discussion about who will be clerks and this years and will there be changes the document said that it has to be the chair and the clerk as of July 1st 2018 I think they anticipated okay so the so now that we have our four-hour SU meeting set up basically the and I do want to come I want to come back to this when we sort of get to the actual agenda for setting the agenda for the SU board meeting which is that there's no way that that meeting can be managed in 90 minutes so what are we going to be suggesting about that more meetings a longer meeting and whatever it may be but I do want to touch on this issue of something that I don't think we've ever discussed maybe we discussed around the edges of it but it's kind of in the way that I think about it is what is the real appetite among the boards for investing time effort money in resisting our contesting decision by the state board there's a lot of factors I think that go into that question you know to what extent do people feel like contesting it would be is a matter of principle to what extent do people feel like contesting it would be successful or not you know what what if any trade-offs are we making by doing that is there sort of political consequences also so this it's a complicated question but it's one that I think that the our boards collectively have to grapple with at this point and I think that the best forum for us to do that as a group is is at the SU board so I would really like to put that that discussion explicitly on the SU board agenda for the 26 and especially because the request that's gone out to the district board chairs from this the group the name of which is I always forget about you know lawsuits that are being prepared and our boards interested are willing to sign on as plaintiffs the requested deadline for passing the information back to that group is September 28th so if any discussion by our board is going to happen on that particular request it's it's going to have to happen at the carousel meeting next week so it seems like we you know it's just our responsibility is to kind of discuss this as a group discuss so I don't know if there's any desire to get into that discussion tonight but I'm just saying like that's what I would propose it should be on the agenda and that's the way it should be you know framed and can you include some of that framing in them one pager yeah have a chance to think about that including the the fact that we've been we're being solicited to join the lawsuit but you know people need to think about this ahead of time I think you know just just to comment and we've been forced to compromise be on compromise and what we're doing I think we should do this as a statement you know we're not happy with what's happened and so you know this legislation very poorly executed very very damaging in many ways now I think we have an obligation to oppose that if we just let it happen that it's not very good that's not a good message to the people that are pushing this on the interests that have made it work you know I'm not convinced that even if this gets forward this battle isn't going to get really messy in three four years you know and the kind of consequences of this begin to hit and it's going to be that much more visible that there was opposition at the time you know and they won't be able to look back and just blame oh well we just this no one said anything I think this is an important I'm not refuting that it's important to have the discussion what's the point of the discussion what's the point of the discussion what are we looking to accomplish by having this discussion I mean that's a good question I think that I am interested in the question of whether the SU feels that resources time effort and money it should be spent you know so there would be a follow-on action item I don't know yeah I don't know I think it's an individual town board actually I think all the town boards that are voting on it individually is whether or not we're going to join I mean the issues could certainly weigh in but I think any individual board could want to sign on could I think that's true I think the individual boards act as they will yeah but I'm not sure I think before they were the Congress I wouldn't argue why but I think that yeah there's some right that's first of all I think there's some value to to having the conversation as a group just so that we kind of hear you know people voicing their opinion and kind of get a sense of what the just hearing ideas we may not think over you know the usual benefits of having a conversation but there's a second question for me I think in this role which is what does the SU the SU is its own entity so to what is the SU's opinion about its own resources like do we as a group have a sense of whether we want to invest those resources in an effort like that or not the SU board can't join can't be party to the lawsuit anyway so that's not really a question that's on the table for the SU board but there is a question of you know if district boards are going to be voting to join the lawsuit and there are costs associated with that or you know there's their request being made of the SU central office you know to provide spend time supporting you know the lawsuit and that's a question that that you know it's a responsibility of the SU board to at least be aware of I just want to ask that I'm the superintendent for the local districts and for the SU so I am the CEO for the local districts and the SU so just you know the local districts I really want to set make your own decision and but just you know it's in either way it affects because we've consolidated a lot of the management pieces in this office yeah that raises another sort of question that has been you know sort of chewing at me which is what if they what if there are differences of opinion and then we have different boards asking different things a bill to do or not to do certain things how do we manage through that process as well so yeah it's a naughty it's a naughty question you know and I'm not suggesting I know what the answer to it is but well I'm just trying to frame how it's used in the agenda so typically things that we do when we have a carousel meeting we use the full board meeting to share information or in this case maybe represent opinions so that across the board all board members from local boards get essentially hear the same thing can can can see clarity on similar questions so the intent of the discussion at the full board in that case would be to help inform the decisions that the local boards make in their carousel meeting to me that's that would be a purpose of doing this at the full board and I'm being mindful of what you're saying time wise so this is just me but I don't have a two-hour discussion to have a two-hour discussion and it doesn't result in anything happening and then go to our local boards and make decisions and we're going to spend if we're going to and I think it's worth allocating time before but I think it's there's a purpose so for example the purpose is this is on everyone's local agenda where you'll be making decisions tonight we want to have the time to hear comments from across this however we want to put it but the purpose of this is to help inform the decisions that will be made at the local boards so then there's no expectation that something's going to happen at the full board level or if something's going to happen at the full board that that's expressed and the reason we're having this discussion is because we're going to do this or this is the next step that we're going to do I think there were yeah I see what you're saying and I there certainly is one objective in my mind is to first of all make sure that all this information that's going to go out in the packet gets to every board member and that we you know I'm going to certainly really plead with people to read the packet carefully before they come to the meeting and I hope that all of you will follow up with your boards to do the same because this is just not a meeting that we can come to and try to be catching up like in the moment um but I guess Steve and I can and I guess I raise this to the group I don't know if my sense of this is accurate even though a certain course of action is is appropriate enough but it seems to me that we as an SU we we act collectively as a group and we also act separately as district boards both of both are true at the same time and it may be that as a collective we have an opinion about how if we should try to contest or resist what the state board may do and if if we should if we should to what extent we'd be willing to do that and there may be there may be a collective sentiment that differs from the sentiment that a particular district board might express um and I think that we we've really tried I think we've really tried our best to like ever have everyone be on the same page but I'm I'll just say I personally am concerned about the prospect of an amount of money I don't know potentially being spent in service to an initiative that I might not support um to time and effort of of staff and the system you know being directed towards um you know an effort that I think maybe has very little likelihood if any of success at the expense of that attention being paid on the management of the school system or the education of kids um and so I don't know I guess when I'm I don't know the answer I'm just saying in my mind the reason I want to bring it to the SU board as a question is that I think there is a question there um there is a question to be voted on by the SU board which is what is the SU board's opinion about whether we should be investing resources and time and effort into resisting this or not um and I'm not advocating one thing or another all I'm saying is if that's the purpose of it then we've we've got this we've set aside this is the agenda item and the reason we're having this discussion is we're going to we're going to ask for an a vote or a straw vote or an opinion but how would we want to word it we're having this group collectively because we want to know how we feel collectively and then in the carousels the local boards will decide how they're doing it I just in the initial discussions we were having earlier tonight it sounded like we're going to have this long meeting and people are going to you know it's like a forum and everyone gets up and people say what they think and we allocate two hours and then it's done and we go okay next item is 2.4 well then why are we spending two hours doing it yeah yeah yeah I get it so I guess on the on the debt question I would think that you know there's some amount of time it seems to me that's appropriate for airing what's in scott's document with the attorney set the reasons for forming a subcommittee and the end of that is voting to form the kind of charge right so for this I guess I would suggest again that there's some um you know as you rightly said I think there's a kind of informational and discussion responsibility here to review the draft default of articles of agreement talk about the timeline you know think about some of those and air some of those issues and and then get to charging that subcommittee which is what we've basically discussed here tonight and then I guess I'm proposing that there is a question to be put on the table I think the question is on the table and is the question is do the wcse boards intend to try to resist this the wcse board is one of the boards that is to answer that question one of the things we have to think about is the timing of this in what message that sends to the state board of education before they made a decision on our proposal yeah so whatever you know if we come to a consensus that tell you how we're going to fight this that sends one message but if we send another that says well we're really not willing to spend the resources to the deal to go up against this then it makes it easier for them to do something that's against what we've proposed yeah I'm not I'm not sure if I would feel as strongly I guess I I do feel like there's a certain sense of urgency just because the timeline is so compressed yeah I think that you know it may be it may be that by the time we'd have our next carousel meeting the statewide plan would already be out in a way you know but the the thing that really accelerated the the the feeling of needing to discuss it was this this message going out to the you know board chairs across the state that you know there's this you know class action lawsuit essentially being worked on and do your will your board sign on as plaintiffs and the deadline again that's been given to respond to that is two days after carousel meeting one of the things in it is our call that you know it should I mean I actually talked to David Kelly about it he thought it was going to be between a thousand and two thousand dollars he gets the expenses to be in for a town you know because it's mainly filing expenses and the lawyers who hold their bonds here at the time but it also is not like should the district be held harmless or you know then they were essentially out of the suit as well at that point they were not obligated you know to pursue that so I don't know that those are points that I kind of found interesting I I agree with Chris so heartedly I mean it it's kind of a big message there's a there I mean we've been played along this process and they're watching us they're watching to see if they're in for a fight or not and I agree that they are going to if it looks like there isn't going to be a fight where things are not going to look as good for us as if we kind of draw a line in the sand I don't know I I would like to see a board I would just like to see some unity of crime even if nothing else you know some kind of a letter you know from the unifying districts you know to it or the to this effect you know we've we've a lot of work into this and you've all seen how we've been railroaded down and funneled down and basically all that work has almost gone to nothing and you know that right well I think the discussion needs to be I don't think we're gonna get this is where the splits gonna start because I feel confident there are going to be boards that will not so it doesn't have to be it I understand but so when you're saying so it it it could be a value to have an SUY it it could just muddy up even more so maybe I'm thinking this quote I mean just just because concern is the political impression and you don't have to worry about slay better not have a vote at all there's going to be slay but I think also right here you saying I'm just trying to and again I'm really in searching here but I think you're right I mean it's likely that the district boards will vote differently on this question so the split will be apparent starting on September 26 assuming that board actually take it up on their agenda that night so would the SU board express any opinion on this issue is it material to the perception of reality of a split at that point or can the SU be can the SU board be a party cannot be part of the lawsuit no I think it is wrong I think the board should know going in whether a majority of the SU board feels one way or another I mean that's very relevant because you're making an active decision to go in a different direction yeah and the decision of any of any single board affects the whole and we are in relationship with one another like that's always that always can be true I mean well the circumstances that happen within an individual school the fact that in fact the home terms of resource allocation this is just a different variation of that that's true but I think a particularly significant one so if we're going to allocate time and have a discussion why are we having this and I'm not I'm not asking why for justification on why we should do it I'm asking why in the sense of what are we going to communicate what's what's what's how are we going to explain why we're having this discussion well maybe it's it's a description it's an information meeting for the board yeah I mean if anything and we and we I agree with you this shouldn't be a two-hour thing it needs to be capped and fairly brief and you know here's what it is you know we vote on this as individual boards how do people feel and try to get a brief taste on that thing the SU board is responsible for the oversight of significant resources and services in the school system the SU board has that responsibility it's not like theoretical you know it's a real concrete thing and you know I I guess you know I'm the chair I'm not trying to predetermine the outcome of discussion or even channel in a particular direction but it's true that besides being the chair I also have an opinion about it as you can as you can see and you know it seems to me that you know I'll just say for the record and I'll say it again at the meeting next week if if it's appropriate but you know I think the so far everything that I've seen from our own attorney from you know lawsuits that have already been filed and struck down by judges you know the ruling is that the state has the clear jurisdiction to do what it wants to do and so it seems to me that you know any attempt to file a lawsuit to stop that seems at best very very unlikely to succeed and to be a distraction and at worst frivolous and so you know since it's our job to you know oversee the resources of the SU I think the SU board has a responsibility to weigh in on whether it thinks SU resources should be spent on an effort like that or not would you deny it would be doing that you would be able to re-enact all the resources from the SU well I mean and then but I think then we just you know there's a you know I guess I'm agreeing with what you're saying in a way that there's an inherent kind of conflict or I don't know what that what a better word is there's a that there's a kind of there's a strange impasse almost at that point I have no idea how to resolve it it doesn't sort of change that doesn't change sort of the underlying responsibility of addressing the question for me I think it helps inform the local board votes later on that night too so I see it as having a good purpose so some a question of some kind like that is what I would be hoping to get to that discussion somebody else would have to make a motion but that was my thinking about bringing it to the SU board so okay to me I my whole no no I get it you're just what's the what's the resolution of the conversation well I'm not sure any come with your own motion anybody can make anybody can make a motion yeah yeah yeah anybody can make a motion you know that's that's up to each individual just a point of order for that meeting you should decide whether you want a strong vote of all 32 or you want the action board meeting members you don't need necessarily decide that tonight but you know because you've got 18 that are voting members right if you want everyone to weigh in and you've done that before so I'm sure I think you would too I would too Chris all right this is a straw the straw vote it's not an official vote of the SU board because there's only 18 there and we want everyone to vote here they are and what and what if some boards only have their three voting reps there for me I have resolution on what's the agenda you have resolution on the question I'm comfortable shutting up okay are there any other issues specific to act 46 that people or the default request of agreement that people want to bring up before we okay I do oh almost made it no time oh well let's come back to that okay under 245 yeah yeah I agree that's an issue we have to discuss though yeah okay board goals so goal one board governance operations there was some discussion in August at the meeting I didn't attend about possibly you know trying to address a particular system of governance maybe at every meeting September October November before you know we were theoretically to report out to the SU board on our thinking at that point so some folks have that have read I know the at least part of the policy governance booklet that Bill had available I had asked Stephen and Kari if they might be willing to speak to that tonight there's two other systems that we've named one is appreciative inquiry and the other one is they have taken down all the stuff off their web and if you want to pay for them to come in and train you well but this is no gill is one of the leading researchers in governance he's out of Toronto Canada the University of Toronto I think and up to the book just came two days ago but there's a lot of good there's a couple other resource there's couple other governance systems that he talks about in here that would be ones I put on that list to want to look at okay that aren't initially American but are the results oriented simply that's getting my much traction in Canada right now and Canada as I said before the Commonwealth countries especially Australia Canada and England are very much some of leading research in the world on governance so we have a little bit less than an hour in the agenda for this meeting so I don't know if in 10 minutes maybe in five we can get the briefest of overviews of your thoughts on policy governance and then maybe we get to have a few minutes talking about how we find out it can be brief okay you go she ends in means policy governance the boards are concerned with the ends this is what we want to have happen these are the results we want to see within the parameters we've said and legalities of what's cloud administration go do this boards don't get involved with the how boards get involved with the result and where the or what we want to have happen happen and that's where boards for me that's what I took out of policy governance we spend our time boards say this is what we this is it'll make stuff up you know we want the the standard math scores to improve by 10 percent how are you going to show us that okay thank you very much in six months we want those results shared with us and that's it we don't get involved with how that's done or who does what or how it's allocated within administrators do that and the staff does that and they give us a report and this is what you want this is your expectations this is where we stand so in my summary that's the basic thing there's there were some other highlights one of them unified voice so dissension is expressed in the decision making process and once a decision is made the board is unified on that's what the policy is and support it and there's no there's no factions that are saying it's really important in that at least what was shared or presented that's an important thing um trying to think there were two or three important but anyway my summary is hands and beans boards are concerned with the answer and Cara you're the board that the co-op uses policy right so um you know i've been using the system for close to 15 years now i've learned a lot about it it's um it's really kind of become the model in the food co-op world for a variety of reasons and i guess it's gained some traction in in the schools as well and i think one of the reasons at least for the co-ops is that it brings sense to all the different things that we're trying to accomplish you know it was possible in the old days to for board meetings to just be sprawling covering all these different things in a pretty fairly chaotic way because there's so many values of play so many different things that people want to try to address and the policy governance helps to organize that and and um so so i've actually i have a slideshow that i put together on the policy governance side china and flor asked me to present last fall and it didn't come together but when you brought this up i went right to the slide about what are some of the advantages and it's not a it's not a holy grail it's not a silver bullet there's there's definitely relies on people to to make it work but um some of the advantages the first one was clarity of roles and steven had it's what it's very clear what the board is in charge of and it's very clear what the management is in charge of and it's not like you can't talk about the crossover but it's just not our job to to manage the system so that's that's really helpful it's also really useful in getting clear on what expectations are so the board can be as specific as it wants to be or as general as it wants to be about what its expectations are for its both itself and for the management and that's really helpful in getting that discipline of writing down what your expectations are really deliberating and writing down is super helpful i can say being you know in this e-roll e-roll you're not left doubting or wondering what am i supposed to be doing here um related to that um boards don't have to be experts like i've always been forthcoming i don't really know that much about what it takes to educate children but i think i can be effective on these boards because it's a different role and we hire experts to administer the system as long as we're clear about what we think the values of the community are and what the ends are then we can we can do a good job and there's a bunch of other things but i think the main thing that it boils down to me is it's it's a system that's that is systematic meaning you can cover everything that you think is important in a in a organized way you know over the course of a year say it's comprehensive it covers all the topics and in the end it does a pretty good job i think of supporting accountability so making sure that the management is accountable to the boards and then in turn the boards have the information to be accountable to the community and looked out here's what we're doing on your behalf and i think that our current system does some of that pretty well but i i long felt we could do a much better job with that whether it's the policy governance or not i i feel like we're not clear enough about what our expectations are and in return we don't get the information that we need to to truly hold the system accountable and be accountable to the communities so there's there are drawbacks there are things that don't don't work as well or couldn't possibly work if you don't do a good job i think that this chapter two that built sometimes today is was really great it's really helpful it does us good a job of summarizing policy governance is a lot of other things i've read but it shows some other governance systems yeah i want to look at that result and it shows differences i'm fine i hadn't heard about that till i read the book and the big nugget that i if you haven't read it is it's his conclusion i don't know how replicable this is but his conclusion was it matters less what system you use yeah then you pay attention to the system you're using yeah i mean i actually highlighted that that quote it was really cool because he was talking about these big studies he's done and he said this is generally consistent with the conclusions of recent study on policy governance model is that the particular approach to governance generally matters less than the fact that the board is was paying attention serious serious attention to its governance practices and with a view to self improvement and one thing i'll say about policy governance is it kind of forces you to reflect and really wrestle with what do you think the priorities are and what do you think the expectations ought to be so what are the disadvantages of policy governance well um it it tends to one of the criticism that puts a lot of uh responsibility and authority and the CEO's role and the board and i think this is true in general but i think the the board is really relies on the CEO to get information and through reports and otherwise uh so people are some people are uncomfortable with that i think that's kind of the reality of a bigger system like this anyway um it's something to be aware of it also is only as good as the board makes it or the board really has to drive it and and and then demand um good results and and information back um and if you just go with the boilerplate you don't really deal with it um in the way it's meant to be then you're only going to get out when you put in there was something in that article too that people sometimes find it confusing but it didn't say why and it confused i thought because policy governance would go out of the governance another quote that was really good that really impacted me because i like i said i want to investigate this other governance hasn't heard um and i thought it was because of this quote that i was like i think this might be a place to look for washington central um determination of approach to governance that is right for a particular organization clearly requires more than a selection from a menu of available alternatives it requires creative application of practical knowledge and the basic understanding of how various concepts of governance fit in their particular organization with all the work i'm doing on climate and culture and my doctoral work that just really wrong true to me and that's why the results based um governance system was one for me to kind of look at say huh that's more of a partnership between the ceo and the board it's not a layered system as just with policy governance like everything comes through where it's more of that it was that idea of partnership and working together um and that there are some and it talks about where that results base is more of a um is more you have subcommittees like you have a finance committee and you have some of the subcommittees like we have here not necessarily do the work of management but you're working together to kind of solve some problems and that makes a certain sense of like that we were responsible for communicating the budget right the budget past communities so our partners in that and and his summary for this this chapter was immediate size to larger nonprofits remember he talked about the studies he's done the average size is three million dollars per day that we only have one organization that's smaller than that that's dirty um there's tradition there are three choices traditional governance approach which we're in results based approach or policy governance he talks about the other parts that he talked about were for smaller organizations because usually the board is doing work i think we've all served at wards i have or you know i was i was of the fund raising committee and the trip you know i was the treasurer and i was the one doing the box for the board so we've we've gone 12 minutes already um and uh so i guess i think this review and discussion actually is pretty timely given that you know there's possible upheaval on boards and it probably be useful to you know i have some options for thinking around sort of what is a system that we like to use so i'm interested in kind of trying to keep doing this even though time is very very short uh what i would like to suggest is are there two people who are willing to perhaps investigate this results based model of governance that's featured in the article and try to figure out if there's more literature on that or if there's some concise summary of it and bring that to the next executive committee meeting so that we actually have this article right here that's from how gill about this seems to be his piece so i download it i do it with like 20 minutes service to my literature tools is this a go book uh this is a little different this is from him himself what it's about results based and gill has three or four books about results based in that area no it's not okay um he talks about different governance he's doing a lot of that so i need to do some more work we can get more of these books copies okay i'll think of order one yeah and get on the kindle really fast so if you have a kindle that you can get it or not yeah so i i guess part of my objective is to get everybody in the executive committee engaged to some degree in this um you know i know carrie steven and i maybe other people also wrote the policy governance thing i don't know carrie and i have some experience working with it so i'm just thinking if there's i guess that leaves another three people i'd be willing to do it too thank you just run up okay so the christ the christ is christ is christ are you fine if i just send you the yeah all right go to go to yeah and i just i wanted to touch on this uh because real quick yeah because we talked about this at the retreat and the district boards by and large have had some entertaining conversations about this as well student guarantees targets you know these kinds of things so right and then school quality committee i think means tomorrow yeah we haven't met since the retreat i haven't met for a few months but um so we're meeting tomorrow we will have something for you in the packet i expect um for next week um our we don't have a new monitor report so basically we have the data from last year both this time last year with the student monitoring report and then in the spring we had some individual school data so what i expect is that we are going to share with you our findings from that it's nothing nothing earthshattering you probably can pick them up yourself um but we will also anticipate have a recommendation or two for you to consider as a um a uh a goal um that we would have a month to consider and then maybe adopt at the october just be given the timing of things that we didn't feel like or we could really wait until october only get the next monitor report to come up with a goal if the goal is going to have some kind of place in the budget or the plan for next year we need to move more quickly so i you know we'll see how that goes we've also i also think that we're going to talk about the retreat and talk about you know where to be aligned with those best practices what what more information do we need and so that'll be somehow part of this but i'm not sure exactly yet so what was the um goal or recommended goal getting the top back guarantee was not i'm not sure yet um we haven't discussed that at all because we had a very high discussion ever only about i'm guessing it'll have to do with setting some kind of um goal for improvement of math and or literacy scores we've talked mostly about math because that's where seems like the biggest concern okay so i guess the larger question is not to spend a lot of time on this but do we have time we can put set aside on the su board agenda to discuss this um bill has said it's not one of his top two priorities although i know it's a priority it's a priority so i would suggest again i won't be there next week but if the memos in the packet people get a chance to look at that and then further any clarifying questions we'll come back to it in october when we're asking to actually have a vote we're still anticipating having a monitoring report we are we're working on that we've got the whole bad whole timeline still going and i don't want to go that's a priority for me just in the operations um and we're putting together i'm going to be you know i'll be talking after this but the way the teachers are creating goals that i aggregate all the way up to the su so basically sorry i think then we're putting it in the packet we're asking people to read it and then it's is there any feedback or questions for the school all right great and then goal number three um you know the district boards theoretically are supposed to be talking about sort of what community engagement board level community engagement means to them or how they would define it and what the purpose of it is i know we talked about that at dodie i don't know if the other district boards have a chance to talk about that yes it sounds like some of them did at least um so again the question is how much of a priority is that to want to make time to discuss it at the su board level any opinions well so i'll weigh in on our discussion and bill if i'm not over nine percent accurate so if you but um we had a fairly lengthy discussion about it and i don't think we reached any kind of resolution so i don't know if we're in a position yet to say this is what east one pillar thinks around engagement and it went around the similar kind of things is it about creating interest within a community to be groundswell to do things is it we want feedback from the community on things that where the board is interested in do we want people at board meetings do we want separate events so there were a lot of things discussed but i don't think we defined what we meant by community engagement i would say this i wouldn't say it's just by east one pillar i would say this from every board watching the conversation the howl is an easy conversation to get attracted if we do this we do that we do this every board sees the importance of community engagement variation boards could say why it was it was you know there was there were attempts at it but it wasn't like it was coalescent and i think that'll take a little bit and i that's that's normal for developing your purpose so that's that's what this that's why i'm asking the why question because when you clearly know your purpose then doing the howl and the what is really easy but sometimes you get caught in the weeds without that purpose so i think the i think the boards i think it's intuitively in there it's just going to take some time for that to come out and i think that's a natural process as a group whether it's five people or 32 people talking about that and i think that's a good thing because i think they're different we get too caught in the how are we going to do it instead of the why so if we know the why and our purpose and we say so what's most effective and i've heard a lot of you know starting with from selling things you know selling what the schools are doing as an active promoter to we want feedback and we want to be you know and all that in between you know we want to know what the community wants and i think they're all good reasons i haven't heard of bad reasons but it's just that kind of what's the common you know the look for each board and then where's it come from that it's i think it's just like what we went through for the student learning outcomes when you're trying to develop that mission or that purpose it takes those conversations i think it's really hard to narrow down to one any one sort of thing if you if you're forced to narrow it down then you're going to zoom out and say something like to do a better job as a school system well it might be for simple simple to say to communicate and that means both listening and explaining or educating you know something like that i'm making it up so my words cannot be the best but yeah i guess i'm inclined to keep this soft as you board agenda just because it's so full already i don't know what would we discuss but you know i guess it would be great if every executive committee member could bring back to the next executive committee meeting some specific statement about you know what they think the purpose of board level community engagement is or which means this needs to be on the agenda for next week's week oh yeah board meeting that's i suppose that's true yeah that's like your discretion but i guess that's good well that'll be i'm gonna tell you the real honesty about making these yeah it's gonna be the chris christ i talked about this a little bit last week it's literally gonna be a 24-hour time turn around from here till tomorrow night because packets have to go up friday yeah like chris is ready to go and right i'm gonna be saying email tonight before i leave her to the chair to the chair sam guys i mean i guess what i'm saying and it's up to the group but i'd love for that to happen but i think if something has to be sacrificed on an agenda i think this one you know probably seems not like one of the top three priorities sure well it's not requiring action so it's a discussion and item and i would say put it on the ask it to go on the agendas and if we're busy it'll be tabled right oh i know we talked we talked about it briefly at our board meeting and they were kind of well we're going to talk about that more in september you know at a later meeting i'm with you i i actually think that's the discussion we all have it's not essentially not all that complex it's it's deceptive though because it seems seems pretty not it seems simple but when you start talking about it suddenly you know we're elected members by our community to represent them and and so we have to have enough i mean the idea with community engagement is that we have to have enough feedback make sure we're just engaging right and you know bringing that you know that community will and knowledge into the you know into the decisions we make for their schools we that maybe it isn't that simple but i'm a deer in the cow's board steam words of conrad smith they're different types of representation of an elected official and how they work with their community i was thinking about today i think about years yeah that was one of my yeah okay uh let's go to 2.4 this is special education hiring process this came up in the spring a discussion about the role of the executive committee in the hiring process we have tabled it ever since basically because we didn't have everyone here at any of the meetings intervening so is there appetite to discuss it tonight don't everybody talk about it and it doesn't sound like it what was the purpose of it i i am only uh i'm only one is a democratic body i'm one person the ideal outcome from my personal perspective would be that we would someday make a recommendation to the su board that they make explicit that um the executive committee and su board are going to be informed when hires are made but that the authority and responsibility for making those hires belongs to the superintendent so that would be my personal um hope but uh but again i'm i'm one person so who's that authority now stench story stench story it sits with the su board does because your the special education are hired by the su by the su and in your bylaws you've given the bylaws say that all all what the bylaws say you're operating differently and i support how you're operating differently but your bylaws say that all items for operation of the su go to the executive committee except for the hiring of a superintendent and the adoption of the budget in a baggage table okay discuss that further than later all right table that till october gives us something for 5.0 future items yeah that's right okay so the agenda what do we got we've got um here's what we have so far uh we have budget and as we discussed tonight budget timeline and priorities constraints for act 46 we have the debt and all the associated stuff that's going to go into the packet and with the recommendation that a subcommittee be established to address that particular issue we also have the draft articles of agreement and the timeline and you know all that stuff with the recommendation that the committee be established to take a hard look at that and you know maybe come back to the su board with some recommendations we also have an update on twin field we'll go into that as well and then finally we have you know does the su board have an opinion about whether to invest resources in resisting um what they call it that's the different things there we have a report from the school start time committee we asked them to come back to us uh we reported this meeting um the start time committee did meet and had something to report so that's on the agenda uh we have the the policy committee charge we asked the policy committee to come back to us with a charge they have they they're doing that um we have probably a uh a brief discussion item on the school quality committee and I guess we'll you know call goal two I guess yeah you'll figure out how to get that on here but it's uh like you will not have goal three on the agenda that's my yeah okay is there anything I'm forgetting I think I didn't hear you say was under act 46 we'd been talking along the first thing would be review the draft articles yes I don't know for view of what it was but a summary of the new articles of agreement is what we have on our draft and then I have an associated action item which is to create the subcommittee so I assume there's some there's a wide range for discussion in there probably but people may have different things they want to bring up I don't know but I have an idea that may be bad and maybe unworkable and I'm not going to be around to help with it but there's so many details there's so many details with between the debt and the draft articles doesn't make any sense to have an optional open session q and a session prior to the meeting for a half hour if we could get bills available that Scott's there and just for people who want to come and ask a bunch of questions that may not be appropriate for the full board I think the only issue is that if we get a quorum then we're when the meeting is in session at that point right yeah is that a problem they mean if we agree that no action is going to be taken during that time it's it's it's more education it's just a lot there's no discussion it's just informational well that would be discussion because that's a tool I think the question there's just going to be so many questions so I think I think there's a but not thinking about open meeting on right this second but I think there's a way to say it's almost walking people through the document and see if you'd like to come and be walk walk through the document I would almost put it 45 minutes to an hour ahead time I'm willing to do that and basically it's almost like a read and this is what it'd be great to have Scott there or someone else there with me because I think it's other voices because we do okay as we just saw tonight we can also hear and read it and we're gonna have different interpretations of what it says and I think that's good to say you know hey this is how I view it doesn't mean it is the way to view it it's the way I read it reduce the confusion a little bit yeah so I'm willing to do that and then take you know clarifying questions I think we've even worn it as a not thinking about warning open me lot educational session open for board members to come and read together the act of their articles the draft articles of agreement and I'm also thinking that the debt stuff too so if we're including scots or the during his letter people probably have questions about what does it mean yeah I'm happy to we can warn them as two separate things we can warn them so that you know there's public what people show up and if they don't we just keep keep going we keep rolling and I mean yeah I'm ideally a little bit there too of us yeah I mean I I try to set aside time a little bit each week just to read more and more talk to colleagues who are in the same place and say what do you guys and people are free up to ask a question they might not ask but the su can't uh I sort of phrase that as like you know this question of whether the su board wants to invest in contesting the state well I I I don't know what to so this is maybe a question for the group I was not a recipient of the email from as the chair of the su board I'm not a recipient of the email from the group that's preparing the class action suit because the su board has no capacity to be a party to that so it's only the district board to receive that communication um so because I didn't receive that communication as the su board I didn't I haven't like forwarded with anybody or you know sort of thought about putting it on the agenda as a specific discussion I think but you know if people wanted to be on there we can we'd have to circulate it and and to come up you know what I'm saying and the su board can't vote to to join them I got it no I don't get that I just do the idea of having that discussed in a communal forum rather than just in the board I think there's value in that a little bit but like you said I wouldn't want that to get I also wouldn't want that to get out of control you know I have to be uh time-wise because I could do it but if it uh everybody else feels right I'm gonna bring it in here yeah I don't know to be simple as I'm thinking to be not always simple um something along the lines of if the board of education mandated mandated merger you could either do it in the positive or negative what's the willingness to accept to accept and implement the major merger or the board of education mandated merger would we oppose that mandated merger or something like that yeah I don't know I mean I we do oppose the merger in principle I think the the question is to what lengths are we willing to go um to to contest you know so that may be a different a differing outcome the board of education mandates a merger are we willing to pursue legal action to resist that merger or fight that merger or oppose that merger I guess although legal action will only be one of I'm just gonna say how about all the potential options there's something like that because legal action is only one of so many legislatures still for me if you say all possible then you say nothing so I I encourage people to like get some thoughts or wording of motions they may want to bring um but the question is you know do we want the lawsuit that's been put on the table specifically to be part of the conversation with the support next week you know I think it's gonna come up because it's in the uh it's a bigger argument so but it's out there yeah it's out there bigger bigger right so to if we're going to discuss it it's gonna come up might as well address it directly so that's to go out of the package I haven't seen it I get no idea what it is so what it says back I don't think there's has it been filed no I know this they can't they can't file it until actual an actual arm is uh you know sort of an issue or something so but my I don't know this for sure I know there's a state board meeting on October 2nd or something and my guess with the September 28th deadline is that they're trying to figure out how many plaintiffs can sign on by that date so that they can have it well communicate it to the state board and and how they have it this is just total speculation in my part but that's uh that's my guess I think a do not destroy there something on those lines was by a whole to legislate that's right that was hot that was that was hot that was hot yeah yeah yeah yeah which they can do anyway yeah you know I lost it I was just saying I don't think I can't remember from the document because it's been a couple weeks since I read it but I know the hold is in that document in detail and then it outlines possible lines of argument that would be that would form like the backbone of a lawsuit but it's not like the suit itself no it's just the sort of the causes that they might pursue to yeah so I guess we can it can go on and unless you can be made there and it's okay with me if I support it I'll vote for it I mean I think it's a it's probably you know a good way just to make sure that every board member is aware of it and it's out there and so I mean some people have probably forwarded some people maybe have not so again this issue of time um we have 90 minutes currently scheduled for this meeting from 5 30 to 7 which is sort of our standard you know procedures so if this is our agenda um I don't see any way of completing it in in 90 minutes so there's three things we can do about that we can either um start earlier go later or we can schedule another meeting to discuss some of us carousel or another SU board meeting whether it's a carousel meeting or we can limit discussion we can definitely try to limit discussion yeah I mean we'd have to I'd want to look a little bit you know like sort of how much time I think we could give each thing that's also I think even if we expand the meeting to two hours or whatever it is we're still gonna have to limit discussion so yeah so I don't know if um and I know not all those district board chairs are here you know I my first instinct is to try to schedule the SU board meeting for 5 30 to 7 30 and the district board started 7 30 but I know that that's not necessarily a popular you know sort of way to approach it but we could try to start at 5 some people will be able to make it because of their work schedules you know I think expand is fine the least um all the bad options like having a two-hour meeting um just because if the local boards don't finish with it they can get together and you're not impacting them right assembling the group is a whole more difficult than schedule was yeah I think 5 30 to 7 30 if we can get through act 46 in an hour and a half and there's three major items field is a pretty small item right each each of those kids about a half an hour and then you have a half an hour left for everything else on the agenda that seems pretty reasonable I think you have to be open to if we're just not getting through this we're going to have to commit to another meeting right or you just identify if there are parties that are going to participate how many there are 30 people want to say something and right we're limited to 30 seconds right and there's another which is which is public participation which we can't anticipate and we have to give time to that too if it if people show up to the meeting so well that's where I say if we set up 30 minutes we've been 30 minutes right right and if there's a hundred people who want to talk they've got 10 seconds each if there's three people I understand yeah so I will do I will do my what I would if there are no objections we'll warn the meeting for 5 30 to 7 30 with appreciation and apologies to the district boards and to the leadership team but I think that we really could use the extra time and I will do my very best to be strict about timekeeping we're supposed to assign a timekeeper actually so maybe I'll do that actually at the meeting and would appreciate the support of everyone here in trying to actually make those time limits stick what's that someone you know someone okay I think I'm set there and the the committee has asked me I guess to draft a one-pager summary you're not going to be there you should I will do my best I mean I I'm not even sure sitting here how I would summarize all that stuff but I will I would take a stab at it and send something out yeah so okay we need to uh do some other things we need to approve uh self-funded dental insurance rates yes so this is the one piece of budget piece that we can actually bring you should try to bring that in that in previous years we brought the plus spending but that's part of the hra program we don't we don't have all the administrative costs yet so um this self-funded dental is um um we've been able to keep the rates flat from last year to this year from this year to next to FY 20 so things cost won't change um we're going to use a little bit of fund balance to do that but there's plenty of fund balance in the fund it's recommended that we always have 50 percent of our plans available we have roll over that so um and I forgot to tell you but there's a way to a national conference this week some of the things that she's not even talking about for a while so she didn't have it over all this last week we were looking at it and uh we should we should be fine with keeping the rates same to all the to take care of her dental program so it's doing really well so why is the the rates are the same so why is it going to cost more more people just a little bit more not participation or a few a few or more claims have happened to us uh this year than last we've been anticipating that so um the you know you see the employee claims flat from one year projected right now from the projected to this year you'll see we went to 112 to 212 from the two actual budget year the actual 2019 um we're just we're we're being a little conservative okay um but dental is pretty inexpensive for us to have to provide is there a specific language for uh we just want you to approve the rates for f y 20 for a self-funded dental for yourself i make that motion thank you so can i ask a question go ahead oh because her her verbiage was to set the c y 19 dental rates it should be f y f y 2020 this or don't f y 20 that's a takeoff okay any discussion uh all those invaders please say hi we need to approve the board orders would make a motion to approve the board orders in the amount of 506 851 dollars and 42 cents any discussion all those in favor please say hi okay uh appointing board representative slash proxy for v high invisibility we have these two colorful forms here yep and i would like to just add to the agenda because florid said this to steven and i there's also a representative for bsba right steven and i read that correctly on the floor she's going to be at the meeting for the bsba she's volunteering but i think she should be erupt for bsba i don't think those superintendents should be that if there's going to be a board member please are you saying the bsba so florid is already going to be she's already actually meetings yes for the for bsba those are v high invisibility organizations right but for vsba and she can be fine me she wants to be the v i invisibility i can work with her on that but if the board so chooses but for v sba i would recommend that florid is she's already on the board she's going to be there she can represent washington central variables and i think a board member should represent for the superintendents associate for that sorry for the school board association a board member should represent for the school board association yeah i'm just confused do we need to make a motion to that effect yes there can only be one voting representative for the entire issue for the school board now was not on this action item right floor reminded steven and i today but i thought she already represents it like our now she represents central vermont i see she's on the school board association board i say for washington central supervisor union has one vote i see hat for anything that voted on it the vermont school board association annual meeting okay so we have to point someone to be that person to vote all excuse me have one yes one step one yeah okay and then change last year who typically have we nominated or appointed so last year yeah my understanding is the east montpellier board supported florid doing it and it never formally reached the su board because no one thought to do it because it was new i see so in previous years in previous years this the boards have appointed me to when we especially got into the consolidation of the health care plans so she really wanted to be mindful that it was an issue decision yeah because it has to be this year not a decision i'm sorry i had i moved on actually to the behind so bill the super attendance usually has always been the one that we've appointed on the path to all three no behind visibit not the sba so i move that we point for the as as the su representative for the school board association second all in favor all right okay okay and i need to be a point bill kimble has the su representative slash proxy for vi and visibit second all in favor okay great reports to the board we mentioned it earlier steven mentioned it um resilience i thought was was great to see how people were out there i really want to i'd like to get in minutes to recognize kelly bushey she really spearheaded this to bring this uh she had support from others but did a tremendous job of bringing resilience and putting together that great uh discussion panel that was there monday night um i found a couple of things on twitter and on facebook yesterday just really thanking them um it was a great discussion we and the support that we you know it was unexpected but seen from those panelists on the work we're doing and work they do in other districts and saying what we're headed was just giving you feel really good about what we're doing you want to say we're we're doing the work they see so yeah so kelly kelly deserves she leads that work and she deserves all the praise any questions sorry no no i'm just i would take any questions from what i wrote i talked about some of these pieces i'm really excited that keith mcmarron's going to be joining us i think that's not going to be a real win-win um i'd like to write a piece of telephone number uh let me just ask are there any questions from the committee members about any of the other reports the directors report the financial report of the school quality school start time okay um in that case uh i will i will i will move that uh the executive committee uh enter executive session for the purposes of discussing um an issue related to this in front of his contract second all right