 Yes, I'll call this meeting to order at 632 Monday, November 9th regular meeting of the Rochester Stockbridge Unified District. We just announced that Jamie is quite sick and will not be joining us tonight. He's in the midst of getting tested for both strep and COVID, obviously, because the symptoms could be the way let's he said he was sorry to say it, but he was hoping it was strep. But we wish him well and hope he will be able to join us soon and be back soon. We also have tonight just Dean Kavakis first meeting as board as a board member from Stockbridge. And we'll talk a little bit more about that at board comment adjustments to the agenda. I have one at 7.4. I would like to talk about into discussion. I would like to talk about Merger agreement review. We'll add that in a 7.4. Any other adjustments to the agenda? Just sending a child off. That's all. There being none. Let's move on to timekeeper. Amy, would you be willing to be our timekeeper again? Good. I've sort of gone through. I see consent agenda five minutes. Board comment. We'll give it 10 to 15. I don't know if we'll need that much. I've been noticing as I keep track of sections that we're tending to run over on almost everything. So I figured let's be realistic and give a little more time. So I'm going to give 10 to 15 for board comment. Reports to the board 25. Obviously, we won't be hearing from the superintendent, but we have his report. We'll hear from the principal as a business manager. And then Carl, am I correct that you could lead us through the policy committee? Is that correct? That's a thumbs up. It is. Sorry. Yeah, with your background, it's a little hard to see the thumbs up. So maybe in writing in front of your face will work like that. Good. I'm going to give you maybe about, let's say 10 minutes for principals, 10 minutes for business manager and 10 minutes for policy. And if we use last great, but I think that seems a little reasonable. Discussion items, the budget, I'd say 15 to 20. And please, is anyone to jump in if you feel these are times are not reasonable. The board statement on current state of sale of high school building. We have actually two things to cover in there. I'm going to say 20 minutes on that and then the Rochester High School Building report. I'm going to say another 15 on that. And then the agreement on the merger. 10 to 15 action items. I'm not sure I'm a little confused. I'm sorry, Jamie's not here because I think we're going to have to take action. In 7, 7, 2, and 7, 3, before we can actually do some of those things we want to do there. So I think our actions actually got to be moved up to there. I don't know that there's any new hires unless we hear about that. And then obviously let's leave a good healthy amount of time. Let's say 20 minutes to for public comment. I didn't notice how many we had on. Let me just see. Quickly see 1, 2, 3. Right now we've got 3. So I think I think 20 minutes sounds. Oops, sorry, not going away. 20 minutes sounds about right. As I say, this may be longer than we need. Then we have executive session returns of session. I'm not sure if we'll need the negotiations or not. We'll see about that. Okay. The second one. All right, moving on to consent agenda. We have 2 regular minutes, 4.1 approved minutes of Tuesday, October 6, 2020 regular. 4.2 approved the minutes of Monday, October 19, 2020 special. And we have no minutes from that yet. Or did you post? Jenny, did you post that today? They just got distributed today. That's what I just thought I saw that email. Yes, correct. And then there was no, I'm not sure why it's still in there, but there was no November 3rd meeting. Right. Yeah, that was the election. That's right. There is no minutes. So there's no meeting there. So I think we can. We can't, we don't need to approve them because they don't exist. So we'll just, I'll entertain a motion to approve the minutes. Bonnie, you had one correction. Was that, was that to do with the minutes? You sent me September 1. What's that? You're like on here twice. Yeah. Sorry. Bonnie was on here twice. She must have logged in. Oh, so when she unclicked her mic, it was giving us back. Okay. I know, but that's to September minutes. So I think we're okay. Let's go ahead. I'll, I'll attend a motion to approve the minutes of October 6th, 2020 and approve the minutes of October 19th, 2020. So move by Carl a second, please. Amy, thank you. Amy seconded all in favor signify by saying I for this, I'll take a thumbs up in the face, but I need to see Jenny. Well, Jenny, I'll need an eye from you. And just Dean, your first vote. Justine. Yes, I'm, I'm here. Okay. Great. Excellent. Thank you. Thumbs up, please. If you so approved. Excellent. We have approved this consent agenda. All right, we're now into board comment. Amy, would you like to start? I know you have. Sure. Yeah, I have a couple of comments. First, I want to just say thank you to all of our, our administration and our teachers and staff for all the hard work that they have done to get, keep our school going and get it up and running and keep it going. You guys are doing an excellent job. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. At our last meeting, we reviewed the community survey. And took some time to, to take a look at it a little more in depth on. I did. I did feel that the survey reinforced a lot of what I had already thought. But I am very concerned about the percentage of people who are doing the survey. And I think that is a huge part of the survey. And I think that's a 9% that agree or start strongly agree with the idea of unmerging. So that was one of my really big concerns takeaways. You know, we had merged together. Cause the state created act 46. Which mandates school mergers. Because of the threat of loss of state funding. So we had to, we had to, we had to, we had to, we had to, we had to, we had to, we had to, we had to, we had to, we had to, we had to, we had to keep our local schools. To be able to keep them. And we have successfully done that. We've kept the tax rate actually lower than what was projected in our, in our articles of agreement in our articles agreement. We've projected that FY 20 tax. Rate with the tax incentives would be $1.72. We've been very successful with that. We have found efficiencies and we've created relationships across our, our schools. So I am concerned with this percentage of the community that does not support this merger. And I would like to really know a little bit more why. Um, and you know, my initial feeling is that, that there's community members that don't support the continued merger because maybe they feel that there's an unbalanced financial burden on one town or the other. Or they feel that both school campuses should look identical with space and programming. One piece of our articles of agreement states that the new district must support and promote the ongoing identities of both schools so that we are individuals and we, we support each, each, each individual identities. Um, So we, you know, we have supported the, each community's values and each campus will, will look a little bit different, but the district will always support the students and provide access to access to as much program as possible. I feel that the possible feeling of an unbalanced financial burden is something that we need to address and evaluate and see if there is any basis to, to that public feeling. Now, maybe I'm completely off with my interpretation of, of some of these feelings. And so there I go back to my question. What, what is it that the community, that a portion of the community does not support about the merger? And I think this maybe ties into our later discussion that you put on the agenda, Ethan. So thank you. Thank you. Okay. So then. Uh, segueing into another comment, kind of different. Yes. Um, is that I was wondering if the board would be at all interested in entertaining the possibility of renting or leasing out space in the high school building until a change of ownership occurs. So I'm not asking for any other groups like Rosta who have equipment, they may be looking to store and division Rochester who is looking to lease a space for a maker space. I have no details. There's nothing that has been discussed in depth with, with these groups or any other groups. I'm simply asking. Uh, if, Uh, yeah, I'm not asking for us to go into an agreement at this time because I'm just wondering if the board is open to this possibility. Thank you. And you're muted. Thank you. Uh, Carl and Jenny, if you would like to speak to, uh, the survey. Or have other boards on it. Carl. Oh, Jenny, go ahead. Jenny, go ahead. Um, I think, um, I definitely agree with Amy. I'm not sure what's the best way to, um, you know, other than these meetings to kind of get input like that. But I think that would be, um, you know, I kind of have the same feelings of what potentially might be some of those reasons, but instead of us assuming what those reasons are, I think that would be good to somehow, um, get that sort of information. Um, I think this, the second one, I think that's worse. Um, talking about, I don't know how that would work in terms of, you know, logistically and liability wise, but I think it's certainly something. Um, something that we can talk about. Um, and then sort of unrelated to those, I just wanted to give a shout out to, to Bonnie. I listened in. I wasn't at the actual zoom meeting, but I listened into, um, the meeting you gave about the math, um, kind of getting parents involved and just kind of, um, kind of reinforced, um, reinforcing, um, you know, math learning. And I thought it was a great presentation. I'm not sure. Um, I don't think I had actually posted it anywhere, but I'm not sure what the attendance was, but I thought that was, um, was a great thing to do to kind of get parents thinking about it. I know I forget what it was at the time, but there was one thing that, um, kind of sparked my interest of a question, you know, to ask myself about, you know, helping my child who's doing virtual learning. So, um, I thought it was helpful. I just wanted to say I thought that was a great thing that you guys did. Thanks, Jenny. And Carl, by the way, and, uh, Ethan, by the way, I'm back for some reason. I couldn't get in, but Ray worked his magic. I see you now. Great. Thank you. Carl, uh, do you have a comment or responses to the. Um, yeah, I think. You know, I, I certainly think the, the, the percentage that Amy is referencing is, is. You know, disturbing. Um, I think that, you know, it's important that we don't, um, we don't try to assume why people think what they think. And we, we need to, you know, we, we instead need to, uh, uh, you know, find a way to get that input, um, directly from them. Um, I often feel like my track record is guessing what people are thinking or what they want is, is kind of poor. So I prefer, you know, actual data. Um, I, I, I, and I'm remembering that this is what I thought one of the things we were going to be covering. If we ever did have, uh, um, community meetings when we're talking about mediated meetings or just group group meetings, I think, you know, having that, that, that conversation about, uh, you know, where this feeling of imbalance comes from and all, all that and where this, this, this disappointment in the results, the merger comes from, um, I think would be a valuable conversation. Uh, to have. Good. Thank you, Carl. Um, just Dean, do you have any comments? Obviously, I don't know if you've seen the survey, um, uh, or not. Um, but if you had comments on it, what would you like to say? Yes, I reviewed the, um, what was available in the most recent meetings for the results of the survey. And I think it would be really helpful. Um, to do what Carl was just suggesting about, uh, the mediated situation in a community meeting. I think, um, from the conversations and communications I've had with the Stockbridge residents, I feel a lot of it is a lack of voice. I think it would be a nice opportunity for them to have a forum and hash it all out and, um, kind of go over the, um, the parts, the sections, um, of the agreement that might be vague or confusing. And it might help, um, the board understand where folks might not have understood fully what they were voting for or even responding to the survey about. So I think that would be really helpful to have, um, some sort of organized meeting that I, and I would be very interested in being part of that. Thank you. Excellent. Thank you. Um, my comments, uh, uh, always the optimist, um, uh, what I took from the survey is, um, that people want the schools in their communities. And that has been my goal from the first day I got on the school board and why I decided to step up for chairman is that I wanted work as hard as possible to keep both of these schools going and vibrant and active and also to have a voice in keeping them going as opposed to sending my child, putting them on a bus and sending them to some school where I only have the input of the parent and not as a school board member. Um, so I'm very encouraged by that, seeing that people want those schools in their community. But I do think we're, we're starting to ask the right questions and I'm hoping that this merger discussion, um, merger agreement discussion, and I meant thinking we may actually make it a little broader in terms of what it talks about. Could be a very useful tool. Um, the other thing I want to do is just take a moment to, uh, thank Keith for his short tenure on the board, but also really useful. Um, we had some great conversations and you'll see we'll be working with some of his, um, uh, uh, an article he posted about our intentions with a high school building and I'm really glad that he's staying involved and was talking with me just this afternoon, but I want to thank him for his time. Much appreciated. Um, and the other thing I want to say is, uh, I really do, we're going to have, um, I, I want to hear opposing voices. I think it's really useful. Amy framed what she was interested in in the form of a question. And I think that's really useful to ask questions that then in board comment, we can hear from people and they can answer, give us their answer anyway. And I think that's very useful, but I think it's very important, um, that we hear the different voices and we really, you know, we're going to, we're going to, we're going to, we're going to talk to the board members, seek out and talk to people in our communities. So we get those voices and really feel like we're representing our communities. Okay. Good. Thank you. There being no other board comment. We will now move on to reports to the board. Um, obviously we'll skip over six one. I don't know if that, that will be included in the notes. I'm not sure of the procedure. Yeah. Um, yeah. Um, yes, because it's part of the articles and documents. Correct. It's part of the package that we've received. So, um, be part of what Frey raised God on his, his invitation. So anybody. Okay. Um, to, were there any questions that we want to go on the record about in terms of Jamie's report? Anybody. Jenny. Oh, there it is. Thank you, right. Okay. Have you. Yeah. If we haven't looked, do you want to take a moment? Let's just take a moment to look over. I know Jamie is doing a good job of. Getting many of our reports out. Early enough so that we can look at them before and just Dean, that's just one thing. To think about in terms of taking a look at these reports that come out. Before the meeting so that we're prepared. It's one of his, um, Jamie's, uh, Attack tactics for keeping meetings moving. And more efficient. Any comments? Uh, no, I think, uh, I think his report is, is, is clean. Um, And we used to, we used to, uh, uh, Sometimes actually take a motion to, to attack, you know, accept the report and attach it to the minutes. Um, But I don't feel that that's, you know, you know, necessary. I think. I mean, it's included with a packet, so it's already distributed. I don't think we needed to do anything. Okay. I think I don't have any questions. Thank you. Good. Jenny. I don't have any questions or comments. Great. Thank you. Amy. No, I'm good. Thank you. And just Dean. The only comment I have. I did read this earlier and it's just tremendous to think about being a teacher right now and going through all of that in that report and trying to adjust to outdoor learning and implementing these things. It's just really amazing to me. And I just wanted to say that out loud because it's impressive. Good. Thank you. Very good. Let's move on to the principal's reports. Bonnie want to go first. Or who's, who's up? I don't think there's anything. I don't think there's anything. Super. Just a general update, but. Nothing that really jumped out as we should. Be flying for people. We continue to work on our literacy coaching and literacy support on both campuses as well as. Bonnie has been doing quite a bit. And she's been working with us for a long time, but we're already in construction. With our teachers on some in service days. And we'll continue to do so. There was one bullet point. Have any discussion underneath? I was wondering if there's a reason for that or if there should be something there. Actually, we, it's sometimes we kind of. to find anything to put under that one we sort of put the major activities under other bullet points. That's a good question Justine. Usually there's there's something under each bullet point but this month there is not under that one. I mean they do kind of overlap so I can see where that might be hard. Yeah there's a couple that kind of overlap pretty pretty significantly. I do have a question I noticed that it says all of our HVAC I don't know if she's schooled down just a little bit more on the that the proposals to efficiency in Vermont have been approved does that include the additional one with the preschool that we were concerned about? The HVAC grant is not going to pay for that one but Jamie authorized that we go ahead because it's essential that we have fresh air in that classroom also. The way that the HVAC grant was written it is it only works on projects that benefit the entire school building and the preschool in Rochester because it was an addition it's kind of like its own little little building there sitting on the end. Okay because I was in a budget meeting with a webinar and they'd said that efficiency Vermont has an additional four million dollars that they can use towards these projects. Originally it was 13 million and they are they are authorized to for another four so if it was a financing thing I wanted to let you guys know that they have increased that limit. Right and they were encouraging folks who had had projects turned down that sort of fit the whole building so I think that's where that money will go. Okay. Our fingers are still crossed that the units arrive in time to do the work in December. There is a timeline on the funds and we continue to be told that we're by by the contractor and the engineer that we're still on track for doing the work at Rochester which is the bulk of the work left to do over the December break. Right in this meeting Brad James stated that if it can't be done for no fault of our own like the supply wasn't there it can be extended. Yeah I think they realized that Amy when so many schools receive funding to do similar projects as you can imagine there was this wave of requests for equipment that just washed out over the the contractors and the manufacturers so I had heard at the end of last week that they were going to extend that. I haven't seen it in writing but I've heard they were going to extend that that funding timeline. Well I as well heard it from Brad James that as long as you have like an invoice that says the work is going to happen and just because from no as he said no no fault to your own which we all know supply is just not the way it was before. Right but unfortunately at this point we're still being told that that we are on timeline to meet that original deadline so hopefully that's where we'll end up. Great thank you. You're welcome. Any further questions before I have a couple for the principals? One of Bonnie I just wanted to talk and I think Lindy you and I mentioned this we talked about tents and the idea it was sort of good to get a dry run of what's like with snow on them and that Lindy came up with a they they Stockbridge came up with a good way to get room of tents we found that a roof weight worked pretty well. I'm going to continue putting the ends on the tents so a little bit more enclosed and also snow won't blow but I think the prime principle right now is we're looking to try and get to the Christmas break and then that might be pushing our luck going any farther than that after the tents. So I actually had a teacher come up with new idea this afternoon that idea of just using any outdoor space that's in the sun when it's gorgeous like this because the tent with all the sides on it sometimes keeps the cold in instead of cold out so we were trying to find ways to be flexible to still be outside but not necessarily be confined to the tent. I just wanted to share that out with people that wheels are turning. Yeah no no I totally support that and I think you know again I want to reiterate this promise that we made that this was how we were bringing these kids back was to get them outside. I think there are lots of good ways at the Stockbridge whether it's putting a tarp on the backdrop to stop wind so you're just behind the backdrop you know and the wind's coming from another direction. I think that's the thing to be out of the wind when the cold is is helpful where you can be. But certainly I'm open to more discussions and I know that Donna's working on some possibilities of other structures as well with Greg Ryan. So I and there's also some ideas that came out about using the soccer goals pushing them together and making slightly more solid structures. So I'm game I'm certainly game but let's I think I think we're we'd be very lucky to make it to the Christmas break with the tents we have now. But let's you know I'm certainly there to support you whatever you whatever you need. Thank you. Thank you. Bonnie just one other thing because I know we're going to get questions about this. Could you talk about the ad that was placed today for the the person looking at the high school building. For the for the one hour position. Yes please explain. Sure. The consultant that Jamie brought you remember back in September he mentioned he was going to bring someone to walk through the high school to try and help him get a better handle on the condition of the high school and that individual and I went back and just to check the minutes to make sure that Jamie had mentioned it and in our September first minutes he mentions where that person recommended that someone walk through the building each day as it gets colder so that we don't have a you know pipe in some obscure closet that sits in runs water for you know two or three days until someone walks in and he also recommended that we install sensors in the building so when the temperature drops below X a call goes out and someone knows that we've got a heat issue in the building so that is the position that is in the that was in the paper we advertised it from like November to March and that's the whole goal of the position I mean the building is empty no one's going in and out of it except the small part where the washer and dryer is on a daily basis and he did not think it was wise that we not have someone performing this daily walk through I mean we I'm sorry go ahead Ethan yeah no I was just going to follow up and and and this president custodial staff is is not able to do this with the additional with the additional COVID cleaning I really looked closely at that schedule to see if there was an hour during the day that she wasn't already doing something and and there just simply wasn't that's what I because Jamie asked me the same question as we move forward to this position would it be possible to have the you know the custodian who's there now do that and I just felt that if with the additional cleaning and other sorts of expectations we have on on that position right now that it just wasn't feasible or something else would have to go I guess I should never say never because you can always do it but it's just a matter of balancing out what you're going to you know what you're not going to do and it probably I imagine it's confidential to talk about a dollar amount for this yes okay thank you I mean we could at some point but not not right now yep okay thank you you're welcome any further questions for our principals good thank you let's move on to our business manager please hello Tara hi everyone hello so I sent my report and Amy stole my thunder on my updates we found out late Thursday night that as Amy expressed that the state has authorized additional funds to Efficiency Vermont so we are working with our districts and with our representative at Efficiency Vermont to find out if any of our buildings can get additional funds based on the original submissions and work scopes that were submitted so we are working closely and monitoring that other than that the auditors are continuing to get through our FY28 audit they're physically scheduled they've been doing everything remotely at this point they're physically scheduled to be in our buildings next week so hopefully that will go smoothly and then lastly just a reminder if you did not get your W for in to me for your board stipend please do so as soon as possible anybody who had theirs in was paid October 30th the next round will be this week and then there wouldn't be another one until December that's all I've got for you for the time being any questions you're muted Ethan Tara I sent I sent you my W2 did you get it yes Ethan very good thank you further questions I know we'll have more when we get to the budget section um any questions on the business managers report Jenny nothing okay justine nothing Carl I'm good thank you Terry Amy no thank you I think we're all set thank you very much Tara I'm so used to being an underling I'm muting myself all the time uh Carl would you please lead us through the policy committee policies that will be warned for adoption at the 12 one 2020 meeting I assume that's our meeting correct yes um so we have what let's see three seven uh different policies um most of them are uh recommended policies that uh um you know the the Vermont school board association puts forward and then we we consider and uh modify um the first one is the board superintendent uh relationship um it talks about the idea that the board uh establishes and governs through policies um and that the superintendent is the actual CEO if if you were of the uh of the district that you know it kind of clarifies again that the the school board is more like a board of directors and the the superintendent is is the CEO um that's a 24 uh b22 is a policy about uh public uh complaints about personnel Carl can I just ask you one question about a 24 please sure does it distinguish and I I just uh I I'll be honest I haven't read this clearly but I know you know it better than I do does it distinguish between the board relationship to the individual board in the board relationship to Jamie and the full board relationship to Jamie and what that how that is different I I'm not sure I understand your question you mean like the difference of the stock bridge the the the R side boards relationship to Jamie and the SU boards relationship to Jamie uh no the um WRVSU you know the full all the full boards when we have a full board meeting our executive board meeting right how that is different in the relationship between those between us and Jamie right but is it just talk about boards in general right um the idea the the idea is that the um it the the policy is more in general and it applies since he he does work for us but he also works for for the the SU as a whole and I want to say oh I can't remember it was there there was a an act about five or six years ago that brought together they consolidated a lot of the powers under the SU and that was one of the things that was established that the the the superintendent works for the SU board directly um of which the Rochester Stock Bridge board is a member so we could not unilaterally hire our own superintendent for example um but in general the policy is more stating that we're kind of a we we kind of have an arms arms link relationship with the SU with the superintendent rather that we can evaluate him annually but we really can't and we can certainly advise him and give him thoughts but we cannot necessarily um second guess his individual decisions either the SU board or our board the idea is again it establishes that relationship of us as kind of a board of directors that hires a person and then gives them the authority to to do the work without us being able to uh you know lean over his shoulder and and uh micromanage exactly that's that's that's the word i'm looking for thank you right and does this put us more towards um governance poll um shoot normal policy governance model it doesn't talk about ends and means really just what it what it tries to clarify is the is the more arms link relationship between the day-to-day operational decisions of the superintendent and the board itself okay thank you um please carry on next uh there's a policy about public public complaints about personnel which is a fairly it's a fairly straightforward policy it basically says that um the uh uh decision tree goes from the the the the building principle to the superintendent to the board um which is why in previous board meetings we've had conversations about how the board needs to stay neutral because at at the uh the the the appeal to the board step that's at the bottom of what Ray is displaying now um at uh you know if a board member had been directly conversing or getting involved in the details of a decision they would probably have to recuse themselves from being part of a board appeal because they've already been involved in the situation that the policy kind of talks about the progression of of of the way complaints about personnel goes and the fact that the board is is the uh a final arbiter of over the superintendent's decision and you know part of that therefore is as board members we have to stay neutral because obviously if we've already weighed in um into the into the complaint earlier we can't we can't obviously be an impartial uh judge if we get to the appeal to the board level um another word before we're going to be a uh uh language that that we've modified uh you and the next policy be b34 records retention this is really a boilerplate policy that just basically says that we're going to follow the laws about retaining about what we need to keep and how long we need to keep it um uh it's it came out because they modified I think some of the uh a schedule of public record so we had to everyone had to modify their policy so this is really this is really a very boilerplate uh uh pass and and and move on uh legislation the net or a policy rather next we have d1 which is proficiency based graduation this policy has been slightly edited um we had passed this policy in 2018 um if you scroll down to the bottom you can see that the policy committee has just edited the language a little bit um so again this is not this is not a substantive change this is just blessing some edits can you um the policy I'm sorry go ahead can you just uh can you sort of give us an overview of what the changes were in this do you remember um or maybe no no that's fine to reopen it I think um I think the uh the um using it it's it's discussing the alternative pathways as an option and uh the the the some of Jamie's language around uh expanding that proficiency takes place uh could can take place in an attitude in um activities aren't directly that aren't direct classrooms so someone for example um could demonstrate some proficiencies around um if for example they did uh extracurricular skiing or they they had uh they they they participated in in in some sort of equine program or whatever um we've expanded I believe the language was expanded to allow um you know the the the phrase at the bottom of the third from the last paragraph where it says um about uh um proficiency learning that takes place outside the school school day or classroom um and you know provided that proficiency achieved is it occurs under supervision so I think it allows I think what part of what the changes were were to allow a broader broader access to to achieving a proficiency going back more to a personalized learning plan kind of education model does that uh jive with uh what you think yep Lindy is nodding her head yes so I remembered properly good work yeah it's also called flexible pathways or community-based learning those are all interchangeable terms that are used as a way to meet the requirements that don't necessarily mean that a kiddo needs to sit um in front of a teacher all day long to prove their learning that they can go out into the community and learn it other ways I think some pretty cool uh ways for that to happen especially at the high school level but as kids start to get to that end of elementary middle school level there's those opportunities as well thank you um so we we have a policy f28 which is about uh a disposition of assets um and this is uh it talks about um how to get rid of things um uh how to you know that there are you know the effort is to restore maximum value from uh uh you know the disposition of assets defines uh what um no remaining no remaining value means in terms of uh uh disposing of things as well as uh the differences in things that we need to dispose of that was purchased with federal funds so again pretty much of a bookkeeping uh keep Tara keep Tara honest honor and honor her toes kind of policy um which the next policy is the same thing uh it's a uh uh investment policy um to govern how the the the school member district funds are invested um basically uh the it's a fairly simple and clean policy and it's it's you know we we invest things that ensure preservation of the principle um we we uh reasonably diversify so that we're uh not taking uh any kind of unreasonable risks with being just all in one sector deciding that we're just going to buy um you know uh just buy bonds or or just buy uh a certificate of deposit um and then trying to achieve the highest rate of return possible for our taxpayers um the last policy is uh a policy that uh does have some a little more meat than the last two policies is about budgeting um the key part uh I think that we need to be looking at is so the superintendent it talks first about how the superintendent develops our calendar and we're going to have um you know a regular you'll get preliminary notes on this date you'll get this kind of information on this date um uh to to really kind of formalize the the budget building calendar and but the important part for the board is that and I think we pretty much uh hit this on uh with with especially with the book it book that you put together for us last year Ethan the nine points under presentation these cover the things that the that uh uh the budget uh presentation needs needs to uh go over um the one thing I thought that we hadn't really I mean we in my might have been um something that I didn't really emphasize in my management letter last year but the point number three about emphasizing cost savings taken by the board um that's not been something we've really really uh uh uh you know pounded into really discussed enough um we do talk about budget priorities linked to student achievement and we do talk about um you know our prior year performance in terms of student student achievement and performance um but this is the one that I think that really the board um if we think that there's a uh a bullet item uh or something else that needs to be added to an additional point to this if uh there's something else that we think a budget a budget presentation to cover to be uh an effective tool to communicate to our communities this is where if we think that there's something that's that's missing in here we need to pass that up to the budget committee and and get get that uh change made so that rather than us passing the our side version that has our bullet point 10 um hopefully the policy committee would instead look at our bullet point 10 and say yep that's a good idea let's add that uh to everyone else's policies as well. Do you have anything off the top of your head on that? Um I think this is I I I think this is is is pretty good the only piece that you know and I would think we would want to do it for ourselves but I don't think she'd necessarily be in the policy is one of the things that we've done is is in the past as we've talked about um cost of of tuitioning all students versus cost of operating school um you know perhaps perhaps maintaining and putting that calculation into into the booklet um would be helpful I think that uh is that in there is that in there right now as a recommendation? Uh it is not it is not in the in the in the in the in the policy recommendations but I don't think it applies necessarily to to all the schools I think it's something that we would want to maintain and just I mean we can put in other things ourselves we don't have to but these are the these are the points that really have to be in there like I really think that pie chart you did of breaking down um where our budget funds went in terms of how much went to personnel how much went to tuition how much went to the SU you know that's not a required um that's not a required uh part of the the budget presentation but I think we should still keep doing that because I think that was a really clear and clean graphic that lets us know where all those tax dollars uh go go to yes uh Carl where do we go to find these policies um they are on the wrv uh su.org site under the school board tab under there's two policy uh menu items one is warned policies and and the other is adopted policies these are all in the warned policy category thank you any other questions any other questions for Carl or comments Jenny nope I think Amy's was the only one that I was thinking of okay justine justine are you still there yep no no questions okay good cool and Amy was I under time or did I ramble on no you did good job no you did good we're at at 14 I was just over on that website though and I don't see under warned policies um uh like this this budgeting one what was f30 oh yeah never mind it it said copy of there's another word there there's not a consisting naming structure to them okay that's why I was searching and it didn't find I didn't find what I searched for so I got it now thank you no worries could you just repeat the link so that others can find that too if they're curious sure it's wrvsu.org it's our su website uh at the top there's a uh a uh staff tab or I'm sorry a school boards tab when you pull down about the fifth or sixth items is right below master agreements is warned policies and adopted policies and these are all under the warned policies because they have not yet been adopted and you will need a google some sort of google read to be able to do this correct they're they're they're google box um is the policy committee essentially done with these and just waiting for public comment and then they'll be come back to us in December and we will yes move them all okay okay so barring unless of course some some other board comes back with significant changes then we would have to review them again and it'd be pushed out to january is that correct correct okay good right or what would happen is what's happened in the past is uh like Sharon elementary adopts their version we adopt our version the rest of the su adopts the generic version and then the policy committee gets back together and tries to uh and tries them to resolve the differences and fold them together usually the differences are resolved by our language getting added like the last one i can think of was was that it was we had one version Sharon elementary had a different version and the rest of the su had a third version we added our language and Sharon elementary's language and then everyone adopted that policy that that covered all the bases oh good good i think we're i think we've covered this thank you carl all right we're into section seven discussion items the budget second draft 2122 budget second draft okay so since this is a new way of of of doing this walk us through it please it's rey can you put it up on the screen i emailed it to you around five 15 ish and i'm just pulling it up too thank you so i'm going to just start off at the top and then i'm going to turn it over to bonny lindy so i made one adjustment to the student support budget that we reviewed at the last board meeting and that was we had a movement filed for the guidance counselor so i've just added that into the increase under that section and could you just explain to me what the student support is versus the general education student support is the positions in your school that are in support of your students so it's your principals your admin and man administrative assistance intervention guidance nurses your regular ed para educators and your substitutes and then your general education as you'll see on the chart as we go down it it's regular education so that's your core teachers your k123456 teachers then it's your music art pe library media so that's the breakdown between the two student support and general education sections thank you you bet so i think the big thing to note is we're really keeping our staffing under the general education line items the same you know anticipate any changes especially since we started you know there's several shared positions this year including our school counselor our music teacher our art teacher are all shared across our two campuses which is part of the reason you see some of those savings it's also because it's split out and terra correct me if i'm wrong in this but this is what we talked about this afternoon um it's also because it's split out a little differently that difference of down almost five almost six percent is really because some of those people are pulled out and now put in that student services um or student support category normally interventionists work in regular education line item so that's part of the reason you see a little bit of a difference there yeah that is your primary driver on that change when we run over the staff list it was just breaking them out into different categories in this budgeting process and what why is that done this time and not before because your interventionists are considered general regular elementary educators so when we report that information to the agency of education it's all reported under the same function code so when you look at your report that would be function code 1100 and that's the general elementary general education function code so because we were supporting it out between or separating it out between support and regular education it just i had to break the people out differently so that helps so how come the student support doesn't increase by more than um how come it doesn't increase by more than the 2.86 well i would have if if the general education if most of the decrease is because you're moving some people to a different place it seems like you're moving to them to student support but that student support is going up by only 2.86 percent a lot of that is also um health insurance where you had some people budgeted that they were going to be enrolled in a certain plan and then when enrollment actually happened they weren't so some of those savings that we realized in the earlier drafts had a lot to do with health enrollment and at least one of the positions is a less veteran uh less veteran person in the position than was there uh two years ago carl i keep seeing your hand pop up you have a question i do um do these numbers do these numbers reflect the uh teacher contract settlement the 3.6 whatever it is that our cost went up it represents an increased carl but your contracts in that negotiation are not ratified okay um so yeah we i i'm not sure we don't need so we're going to i guess i'm confused as to why that's so can you explain the logic for that behind me or explain the logic and increase carl yes so i think the point is carl until it's ratified and this is why it's a draft like once it's ratified we'll be able to go and put in the actual increase um and right now it's just a rough average right tara correct it's not that official we are using a placeholder as a whole rather than increasing each individual salary for the negotiated agreement once it's ratified what's the percentage increase the placeholder that you put in it's usually been three percent but i don't want to speak for tara that's about the ballpark yes okay sorry i didn't hear the number yeah three percent is three percent so a point five percent increase in salary um is that goes toward the uh sorry 745 745 719 i'm just help me help me to figure out what i want to apply point five two so we get some accurate idea of what yep um if you're doing placeholders why not estimate with a little higher placeholder so we get a more accurate because we're just a draft and we have time and it's like the average what we practiced under impact so the positions that that goes up and tara stop me if i'm talking too much and you have the right answer and i'm putting out wrong information but those interventionist positions guidance so any currently what we're waiting to be ratified is um the master agreement for professionals that doesn't include our support staff what that does include is our regular our general classroom teachers which is that regular education line and our music teacher our art teacher pe library and media specialist our school counselor or guidance nurse follows under that as well as interventionist so so am i right that i mean is it as simple as looking at the 740 745 719 and multiplying that by point five or is that way way too simple i'm going to defer the that is not how the formula works i'm sure i'm sure way way more complicated yeah i was going to say be careful about about that ethan yeah no no i'm just i'm i just like to be able to look at it um and and have our voters be able to look at it you know because the point the point five it's a significant amount of money um and i think we need to we need to be looking at a budget especially if we're looking at a placeholder draft i think we need to be looking at a budget that has that uh you know least ballpark closer closer number well does the the um the proposed amount doesn't that already have the three percent uh increased in it was a three percent the budget numbers that i used for salaries has an increased percentage based on projections built in it also changes fte's for positions that we have discussed may potentially change so it is not as easy as saying joe makes x i increase his salary by y you now get c right okay and also on that same item is all the benefits too so like what you're seeing is salary benefit benefits so that's health insurance that's spike at what's retirement that's that's quite a few things is then i guess the question is is there some way um without going through the laborious process of you know figuring out for each contract in each each employee is there some way to get a sense of what that point five could mean for our budget while we're in the draft stage i think that when we get to the next section of budgeting where you see the full budget it'll be very similar to what you've seen in the past this is what the increase is under this line item okay so what the purpose of it is today and what we're discussing in the draft that kind of detail we are not releasing at this point in the budgeting process okay good thank you that's good to hear that's good to hear that clarifies i think the other thing ethan it'll bring focus to the budget is when the con once the kind of contract is actually ratified by everyone then uh then carer can go to work with real numbers right and i have to do two years of salary changes because the contract it's this current fiscal year plus next fiscal year so every person will have to be looked at individually once the contract is ratified and the new salary schedule is released and agreed upon by the union and the supervisor union um i go carl i think that i think that it's important in the main that we have we have an agreement in place that that you know we have there there is no restriction on communicating the the the the overall raise amount that's been agreed to and i think that you know knowing that you know and yeah i agree we don't we can we can apply more of a of a general broad strokes to to this but as you pointed out we budgeted uh we budgeted a three percent increase for the current year we're in so we are going to be point six percent in deficit thereabouts because some of our teachers maybe you know if they're off step or or some of the details of the contract may may affect that differently but we we we agreed to pay more this year in salary than we budgeted for this year and i think it's really important that next year's budget doesn't make that we don't go forward with those those same kinds of of of um suppositions because we have you know we have as as as a a negotiating committee voted for a particular raise and as a matter of fact i am legally bound as the person that that the board member that's on that negotiating committee to to represent that that uh negotiation in good faith i can't i can't i cannot uh unless the labor board and i want to have some conversations i cannot say oh well let's you know it's even though we said it's three point six it's really we we can still work with we i i think we need to be transparent and we need to be putting in you know the information that that that reflects the the agreement that the SU negotiating committee came to and voted on and approved with the negotiation negotiation committee of the NEA the NEA team yeah no i don't i completely agree with what you're saying and that'll absolutely the next steps we take it's just for the purposes of this draft with it not being ratified you operate on that three percent it's also why our spending in general one of the many reasons has been extremely tight this year to make sure things like that are accounted for when we had to build a budget when we didn't know what the increase was going to be in salaries so i think we all hear what you're saying we just need the formal step of it being ratified to accurately um so we're prepared and yes carl i'm well aware of what needs to happen and when i have a finalized salary schedule that will happen so then just let me let me play the fool here because uh you know these these numbers all you know are are chicken for me what what should we be taking away from this draft budget here aside from the shift of where interventionists were i believe i mean what else should we be taking in that is useful to us as far as how we're going to staff our buildings uh our current proposal with this budget that this draft i'm going to say draft i'm not going to say budget i'm going to say draft in front of you is to stay the same at this time with the exception of we talked how we were going to shift interventions interventionists last meeting i'm sure that that also covers math as well as literacy got you close that gap so um we're really looking for the feedback that and correct me bonnie and tariff i'm wrong the feedback that shows that we plan on keeping our staffing pretty much the same um bonnie and i had one idea around the music position and the idea she has an outdoor ed degree as well so tapping into that resource especially if covid 19 restrictions don't change when we come to school next year and you can't necessarily have band and uh chorus but instead we could use that resource and build up that program within our schools our campuses as well but just try to get creative within the talents we have within our buildings great so status essentially status quo yeah and this would be this would be one other takeaway i would suggest and i i know it's not going to be perhaps what folks want to hear but we're just a tad early because so much of what goes into this budget is salary and benefits one of it so we're just a tad early of being able to have any big takeaways that are numerical certainly what lindy said is an important one we're looking at pretty much status quo in the staffing but in terms of being able to say we just need a little bit more time for that we're working with real numbers around what is the bulk of our budget which is salary and benefits that's true okay now that that's what someone like me who's really looking at this needs is you know is like a good question and then i'll answer saying yes good i hear that so ethan another thing that's important to to focus on is we also have an open enrollment period that's happening right now so staff has the opportunity to change their benefits effective january one so for that prime example where i said we budgeted for someone to be potentially on a family plan and when enrollment actually happened perhaps they only wanted a single plan or an employee plus spouse plan so that is also one of the next factors that we'll take into account when we're building the next draft series of budgets is what was actual enrollment effective in january that will impact your budget for next year so the way to think of this is sort of like a narrowing of the pretty you know we go from broad strokes and we get a little more at this time we're going from the the basic up so we didn't take your budget that you had last year and just increased it jamie's way of budgeting when he came to our supervisor union was we are starting from ground zero and we are building budgets from that point so that's why you're seeing this in the student support section and then you're seeing it in the general education section because the charge that was given to all building administrators throughout the supervisory union including my office and including special education was you need to establish what you need for staffing and then we build the budget from there rather than doing it from we had a four million dollar budget this year we're just going to increase it two percent so we literally went to ground zero and are building up from that point so everybody knows what's in the budget we're making sure we have the necessities to run the programs that we need to provide students with the best educational opportunities that they can get and be fiscally responsible to our communities oh this is good thank you i i know we have i remember hearing that before several times uh it's just whenever i look at these numbers so i don't sort of glaze over it's good to hear that again just the reminder of how we're working this and how it's different so that and and and that just it just helps those of us who are not the numbers people um figure out what what we're doing at this stage and i i think the other thing Ethan in terms of communication is people always need to feel comfortable asking us questions we work with the strap so many times that you know we sort of know it somewhat inside out and then we assume that everyone else has that same level of understanding and that's just not the case so i i would always encourage people to ask questions around the budget it gives us an opportunity to better explain it and better articulate what it is we're trying to accomplish because the budget really is is just a it's really a a philosophy statement it's this is what we value in our schools that's why you're seeing these items in our budget it makes it makes me realize and i appreciate this lindy our body talking about the music position um i would really like a policy statement from this board about outdoor ed that you can then implement because i think it's hugely important to us and certainly i've been talking a lot about it with with um staff some of the staff and also people in the communities but i i think at the next meeting i would like to put that on our agenda that we we really make a statement about how important that is to us and what we want to go forward with that yeah i've heard budgets described as the implementation of your policy yep we can have all the policies you want but if you don't then take it to the budget stage then you have you have no tools with which to implement what you're saying you value good great are there any other um yes i i just had one takeaway from the vsba um budgeting a webinar i went to that i kind of wanted to convey to to tear well to everybody i guess um and one of their big things was that um this year there's a bunch of covid related costs that are that were not budgeted for um that are um able to we're able to use um cares funds and other grants and other monies for but there's it's uncertain going into the budget season that we're in right now for f y 22 if there's going to be any funds for these extra additional covid expenses which we know we are probably going to have um and uh one thing that was stated is that maybe we should be talking to our legislators um about uh making covid related costs exempt from the threshold the excess spending threshold and um that they said that that can really be done easily in the business office because they're doing that anyway separating out covid costs versus regular budgeted expenses on so i wanted to put that out to people that that could be might be a beneficial thing for us to do is to talk to our legislators about that because these are going to be ongoing costs that that we are you know there are um so thank you good thank you i have one um question in fact i think it was bonnie that was talking about the the math interventionalist um in the spreadsheet it says that will it looks like that something that will be provided by the su it says the su will include a 1.0 math interventionist um how much of that 1.0 would is that i'm assuming that's not just for us what portion of um of our school district would that fte equate to that is our goal jenny is that if we get our title funds as anticipated as we're working through these budgets is for the supervisory union to attempt to get a 1.0 math intervention is covered for rochester stock bridge through title funds okay thank you that would be great good further further comments just dean do you have any questions no questions right now okay all right in that case we will move on to 7.2 board statement the current sale of the high school building um this is uh well let's just go ahead i'm just going to go ahead the way i i sort of planned this um uh we have sort of two statements that i feel we have to do in in order to make to get everything done right here um i feel before we relieve an information we have we have a lot of information that we're going to release to the public um and we need to vote on it because it's all been can um discussed in executive session so we need to approve that but i think taking keith's lead um in our last meeting that we have not made a statement of intent about what we want to do with the high school building i feel it's important to do that first to talk about the statement first um that keith has written and we can you know revise it as is needed um because the dis the information that is released includes that same statement and i think we need to make the statement formally before we release um all the information that has that statement um so let's get uh bray if you could put um the statement up from uh from keith ethan uh my apologies this is the shorter of the two let me see um um it's the one in quotes in bold in quotes yep yep yes yes the short of the two things i sent you yes thank you um i'll read it through and i think the best way to do this is to move it and discuss it and then we can amend it uh this is very small for me to read let me see if i can do here uh the school board for the rsud has made the decision to offer the former rochester high school building to the town of rochester select board as outlined under the articles in the merger document we will request the rochester select board respond within 90 days from the receipt of this offer as to their intent to purchase the building and property should they decline to enter into this contact within contract within 90 days timeline the board will then proceed with offer of the sale of property to a potential third party in accordance with the merger document and the guidelines of the vermont b o e uh is that b o e bureau of education during this process we wanted to take the necessary steps to prepare the property for potential sale avoiding any additional delays this decision has not come easily the board is clearly heard from the both communities who realize that if this merger is going to succeed this is a mandatory mandatory first step in realizing our goals having made this decision the board has authorized funds to be allocated to further this process will also be instructing our attorneys to proceed with preparing the required documents under our direction to move this process forward as outlined above we appreciate your patience and hope you realize that the board has heard your voice and is willing to act on your wishes i would entertain a motion to move the statement to be accepted by the board i would like to know where the 90 days came from uh that was his idea was something he mentioned at the last meeting um uh no actually do we know that before we approve this i think we need to know whether that something that's reasonable okay well we can also um we can have the statement we can improve what part of the statement we can be i mean it sounds reasonable to me um but i think we need to move it before we discuss it i did say that i moved the that i moved the uh argument article but we have a second on this statement a second okay justine okay good so now we're open for discussion and can rework it as needed be um uh uh i read the 90 days i thought it sounded pretty reasonable uh to me um the uh i mean it seems it seems a little long to me i didn't know if we could trim it down to a little bit more boilerplate but i thought for me the the really salient points were the 90 days that it makes our intention clear it's basically covering steps we some steps that we have already taken um and it's just making them public that we are doing this which is what keith was bringing to us that we had not said before um other discussion uh let me let me go around and just see um uh jenny why don't we start with you because you had a quick reaction to it yeah i guess that's just the biggest thing i mean has it um i mean to me it sounds reasonable but i don't know um you know i think it seems like there should be instead of just calling out a random number that we need to have some sort of timeline this takes x weeks and then this can get done um just i mean to me it seems reasonable but i i don't know uh let's ask uh whether whether it is or not david does that sound like a reasonable expectation within 90 days that we could have some of our subdivision questions answered and uh be in a position to get a yes or no i don't know okay uh it it's possible but uh again the question is what is the property going to be that they are purchasing and that's while we're close to having an initial discussion on that point uh we're not quite there yet so the question is if we want to go forward with um uh a 90 days um in the statement or if we want to make an amendment to remove that part so that it's basically covering our intent i would like to make uh uh um whatever you would do to remove the amendment amendment i'd like to make an amendment to remove the 90 days uh and to for it to read that the um school board of for the rsud has made the decision to offer the former rochester high school building to the town of roches after select board has outlined under the articles agreement in the merger document and ended there for that first paragraph okay so and so we will cut out the third party and also the timeline do we um do we want to put anything in there uh well i guess we have to amendments on the floor so we need to um uh second it second the amendment and then move forward and so we can discuss the amendment can i have a second i second the agreement for the amendment because i don't i think that we can't just good well i remember that we don't know where it came from yep now we now we can now we can now we can discuss and then we'll vote on that amendment so uh any further discussion on removing 90 days and the third party lines of the first paragraph of this agreement um i have carl i have some some thoughts on that um i am not you know 90 days just sounds like like like a pretty boilerplate number the the important thing from my point of view is that what we where a number would come from whether it's 90 whether it's 120 whether it's 60 would be from an understanding of should the should the select board um in whatever that finite timeline is choose not to uh choose not to purchase the building we we as a board have time to turn around and dispose of that building without having it uh appear as a as a budgetary line item in the uh uh 21 22 budget so you know to my mind has that approval of the amendment excuse me it sounds like you're approving of the amendment that it's better for us i am i am i am not approving of the idea of removing a number of removing a date certain i think a date is important to trigger the board's next steps what i'm what i'm interested in in understanding and i don't know if uh this is something that tarot can answer or that um we can you know we can put in language that says we will determine a deadline but to my mind the key idea of about 90 days or 60 days or 120 days is that whatever that window is we have time should the town of rochester choose to refuse the building we have time to dispose of the building without you know and have it off our balance sheet for the 21 22 school year so i am not generally in favor of just making it vague and removing any sort of any sort of deadline what i'd like us to do is determine a deadline and even putting language it says uh if we can't determine that deadline tonight language into the agreement that says uh that we will advise you know we will advise the deadline um by december 1st or whatever some sort of language like that to allow us to to to put the deadline in once we know what it is but i think the key thing about a deadline is that we have a deadline to get rid of the building so that regardless of whether the town takes it or we sell it to a nursing home or someone else um it's not on our books in the 21 22 school year think thinking about this again so it says 90 days from the receipt of this offer um so i think the point that we're that we're offering it to the point that the town accepts it i think it's fine but i think um i think kind of a bigger question is when are we offering this up when is our offer sorry say that last part again jenny i couldn't quite so the text says within 90 days from the receipt of this offer um so i think from the time that we give the offer to the town and 90 days of them accepting it i think that's fine i think the bigger question is um kind of the starting point of that 90 days is us offering this to the town and i think that's a whole other question well are we offering this to the town well i think that's why kieth you know asked for this is that we had not actually made this statement that we're doing this and maybe that's what we want to come out of with tonight is just a a simple statement of intent and maybe without that many details um just to get that done so we know we're we're going ahead with that and then we come up with a a deadline later but as i said the amendment on the floor currently is to remove 30 days with no nothing substituted yet and to remove the third party so i guess rethinking it i guess i'm kind of changing my mind here in terms of i think it's okay to include a day since that timeline starts of the receipt of the off of the which would be which would be i i as far as i consider maybe david could um chime in here but it sounds like when we approve this this article but just approving this article that doesn't mean that tomorrow we're going to bring it to the town right yeah i i'm okay with the deadline from the date we make an offer to the town but we're not at a point where we're ready to make that offer yet then i would think we would wait until we are ready to make an offer and know what the time frame a realistic time frame would be to complete an offer but we have made i i mean i believe we have made we need to state that we've made the decision well we're talking about the amendment so it's really the discussion right now is all about whether we move the 90 days and the and the third party i don't seem any so nobody seems to have a problem with removing the third party it's really about the 90 days yeah i don't think we we're at the point that we can we can put that type of language into a document on with so many unknown where we are in our process of figuring out boundary lines and waste water permits and and all that i just don't feel that we are at the point that we can put a time frame on it okay um i i think we might uh justine i just want to get do you have any input on this yeah i was just wondering if the language could be um adjusted is such that the 90 day framework is in there but it includes that the board will revisit it at a certain point if the offer is not been accepted by this many days just to put a time frame in there i do know the public there's been public concern about whether it's being delayed and how efficient the process is going how long it's taking i think it's important to keep a timeline in there if we're making this statement but maybe we can include something else that allows us to make an addendum to this statement or revisit it or something add that language in well we certainly have gotten i mean jenny's now talking that she's of some time um justine seems to be in favor of some time but we have we just need to know yes or no to this amendment to remove those two items we can come back and add other things in this is a process we can you know we can change this as we need to that's how we that's why i like to work on the document as we're discussing it so the intent of this document is just for public this isn't to bring to the select board is that correct well that's a good question i mean what is the intent of this document we have not said publicly that we are we intend to do this that we are moving forward we have actually taken quite a few actions as we'll see from releasing this next document to do this but i think it's it's making a clear statement that this is what we're doing so that nobody has any question about that and removing these items these two the 90 days and the third party you know gets it down to a basic statement of intent and maybe that is enough for now we can revisit this at our next meeting i think that would that would be a pro vote again you know to accept the amendment as as suggested by amy i think that seems reasonable it just puts a statement out there and we can come back to something like this we can revisit this at our next meeting or as we move forward with where we are in the process and i think the next document will kind of show and give us a little bit more indication of where we are in the process and if it is something that's feasible within 90 days okay i i think we're ready to vote on the amendment as any unless there's further discussion are we planning to release a document a second document in the near future and if so yes that's the next thing we're talking what do you think the timeline would be i mean if we're going to be releasing something today and then releasing something else in two days you know should we well condense it to one i understood that the document we're releasing the next document we're going to vote on would be released tonight and be part of our discussion tonight so why do we need to sass maybe we just need to hold off on this i'm i'm saying that i the way i looked at it was that we needed this statement because the next document includes this statement which we haven't we've just voting to release it from executive session information from executive session we're not making the statement this is making the statement and that's why maybe the simpler the better does that clear jenny i think so i mean i had comments on the second document which i'm not sure if they've been addressed so i'm not sure um i'm fine with releasing two then all right so ray's given it to us um i i'd say let's let's let's try vote on this on this amendment to remove these two lines and see how we go and i'll call you out one at a time just to make sure we're clear uh carol yes or no to the amendment to take out a no okay amy yes or no to the amendment yes jenny yes or no to the amendment i'm changing from yes back to no because of where the timeline starts okay justine yes or no to the amendment i'm changing from no to yes i think that it's best to be simple at first as long as we make sure to revisit the timeline as soon as possible all right um i'm going to say yes to the amendment to keep this simple so that makes it three to three to two um we're going to uh accept the amendment as as suggested so it now reads the school board for the rochester stockbridge unified district made the decision to offer the former rochester high school building to the town of rochester select board has outlined under the articles of the merger document we request the rochester select board respond ray can you scroll down yeah um we request oh no that's gone now sorry yeah uh during this process we undertake necessary steps to repair the property potential sale avoiding any additional delays this decision has come easily board is clearly heard from both communities and we realize this mergers if this merger is going to succeed this is a mandatory first step in realizing our goals having made uh having made this decision the board will authorize have authorized funds to be allocated further this process we also be instructing our attorneys to proceed with preparing the required documents under our direction to move this process forward as outlined above we appreciate your patience and hope you realize that the board has heard your voice and is willing to act on your wishes so now we're in back in discussion of this document and then a yes or no vote on this document is there any further discussion on the i guess to make another amendment you could okay i guess i'd like to um this decision is not cut won't stop moving please thank you this uh decision i'd like to take that entire paragraph out that this is a mandatory step um to continue the six uh the success of our merger i think that boils back down to my uh comment in uh board comment of um we can assume that that might be one of the reasons but we really don't know um and i don't think that we should be good don't discuss it yet um we've got an amendment on the floor um as it could be seconded can i go okay i make a motion to an amendment to remove uh this paragraph uh discussing the of um merger and the first step starting with this decision is there a second i second just in seconds is there any discussion um yeah i'm so we've we've we've taken out a deadline so we've taken out any any any kind of action steps that are that are part of this document so well no we we we we we're not we're just saying we're we're we're offering the building yes that is an action we're not we're not making a hard action action statement um you may feel that it's it's a stronger action statement than i feel um but it feels like we're kind of making it more into a political at a position statement and i feel that um you know the the the decision has not come come come easily and we have clearly heard heard from from communities um you know certainly the the the the the the word mandatory uh could be could be called into question um we're mandatory for a first step um but i i think that i i i think that we you know if we're saying that this is going to be not a not not so much of an action i do more of a political statement i think keeping some of those some of that political language in there i think that we have clearly heard from both communities and i think that that taking that out makes the makes the document more wishy-washy good um jenny comment on this remember yeah i agree with carlin i agree with um you know the mandatory i think that's something that could be taken out okay well i know right now we're just we have to deal with what words on the table on the table is would i amend my uh amend the amendment amendment um to uh keep in that the decision has not come easy and the board has clearly heard from both communities but just to remove the um uh mandatory first steps um as and i'm not sure how i would you would rewrite that sentence but but i do understand um where carl and jenny are coming from and how about we say we realize that if this merger is to succeed this is a step in realizing our goals i would support that because that's the amendment to the amendment so that we'll yeah we're getting a little complicated and we probably don't have to be quite this um um you know um i'm being very town meeting moderator about this amendment and i know that we have a little looser rules here so let's let's accept that this amendment is to change this paragraph to say read this this decision has not come easily the board has clearly heard from both communities and we realize that if this merger is going to succeed this is an important step in realizing our goals yes isn't an important step thank you ray good okay um let's let's get this put in um i think we're ready to vote on this all in favor oh yeah jenny i'm sorry no i want to go for it was that one thing uh bonnie yes if you just look at your second paragraph i'm not so sure that it that it makes sense right now given what you've taken out of the first it says during this process i don't think we've mentioned the process i don't know if that's important but as i'm reading it it suddenly well look yeah we go up to the top please yeah he's there i think you can just start with we will undertake the necessary steps to prepare the property for a potential sale avoiding any additional delays i'm just saying let's just make that i agree i'm being really stickler here and i think we can just make these changes yeah i would yeah there we go i think it reads better yep good thank you isn't that another amendment can we please resolve the important step of amendment before we start altering another paragraph and do this yes thank you thank you carl are you right you're right we got to stay with what we're focused on that is the one advantage of being um sticking by things can we go down please uh right okay uh this this decision is not come easily the board has clearly heard from both communities and we realize that this merger is going to succeed this is an important step in realizing our goals um i would accept let's vote on that change please unless there's further comment on that change can we add a comma after communities yep good um all in favor of this amendment signify by saying i bye bye bye carl says i great thank you okay um so this is the document we have now do we need me to read it again or do we feel um we can still add some sort of timeline that was something that clearly i didn't feel terribly comfortable having the tiebreaker vote on that um and clearly went we might need a little more discussion about the idea of some sort of deadline on this to give it a little as carl you're saying give it a little more teeth well well i really feel we have additional documents that we're going to be releasing tonight that are going to really put more uh perspective okay um is that is that feel all right to you carl or do you how do you want um yeah let's let's now now that we've resolved that that second amendment let's look at you know bonnie brought up the point of during this process do we think that phrase is is superfluous and do we want to just have the sentence be we will undertake or do we want to do are we okay with the during this process uh beginning the sentence i'm okay with it i mean we are talking about offering uh the building and and yeah the process and there's still a process it is a process yeah i i i feel fine with that the line i can live with that david you have something to say i would like to make a recommendation about a change to a latter part of the statement uh down towards the bottom where it talks about authorizing attorney instructing our attorneys i would propose adding our attorneys and consultants is everyone fine with that little edit there carl thumbs up thumbs up yeah good okay good and consultants okay good is there further discussion on this statement i'll call the question call the question um i'll call uh roll call vote um amy uh yes to this statement yes you know uh carl yes you know yes uh just dean yes you know yes jenny yes you know the statement yes uh ethan says yes good all right that's unanimous the board has now issued this statement we can now move on to the second item um david just clarify for me so um ray don't post it quite yet till we tell you um so this is information that has been given to us uh in confidence that we are now putting out to the public so i understand we probably need to vote to release it in order to let it go out correct before we can actually even show it on the screen and then we can talk about it and maybe amend it uh jenny said she has some corrections i don't know what process the board has followed in this regard in the past i i don't think it hurts to vote to release it indeed i shared it uh with staff and board members uh as a draft for discussion with the ultimate intent that it be publicly released so uh it does not contain uh particularly confidential information or anything that uh would would harm or embarrass or any such thing for board members or the community okay i will entertain a motion uh what are we going to call this um ethan yeah in the past in the past and we've had um information that were that that that that either was generated as a result of an executive session or um came out of an executive session we have had a motion to release that information to the public so this is this is definitely the appropriate way to do that and i move that we released and and i think it's important that we keep in the motion the word draft yep i remove i i i move i remove i move that we release the uh draft recommendations uh from our attorney for public consumption do we have a second second okay so moved by carl seconded by amy is there any discussion of releasing this public there being none i will uh call roll again uh carl hi amy hi justine hi jenny we're just saying i to releasing the document yes that's all we're saying yeah i too and then we can i have several several comments yep uh we uh are you okay with releasing it and then we get to those comments and make some edits and get some information um i guess so yeah i understand your hesitation um there is i mean there's another motion i've want to move before us and it was my big decision about when to do that well we're in the middle of a vote so i guess we got to finish that you can do you want to abstain jenny sure you want to go to do this or do you need discussion i'll abstain just thinking i don't want to put you i don't know if others have seen my comments but i'm fine going through that i actually looked i looked at the document you sent back and i didn't see them i just saw the document so i wasn't sure it's in track changes if you open it in word oh i didn't open it i don't think you could see them if you open them on your phone that's it i just i didn't open that's why i didn't see them i'm sorry i didn't get a chance to respond um not quite sure carl how do what's your what's your advice carl on this um i don't know her comments her comments appear to me they're just as author but um you know she's she's she's gone through them they they range from grammatical to uh you know being content oriented points i think uh i i don't see a reason why we can't just we we can't just bang through them in in public into executive session jenny are are you okay with that yeah that's good i don't know i don't know right if there's somehow that if we could see them on the screen with track changes turned on if that might be easier i'm not sure well let's finish this vote then i think if the jenny that elays your if that elays your concern uh how will you vote yeah i say i am fine going through them good okay then i i say yes too and why don't you put them up on public document and post it and i'm going to just take a moment and go to the bathroom and i'll be right back what do i need to do tell ray what you need you may have to send your i'll i'll email it to ray right ray it's it's the the the the one that ends with jda comments in a in a parenthetical at the end of the title is the one that i can open up in google docs and i can see a bunch of author comments at the side of i don't know if that's something uh that you see no not yet can someone forward uh jenny's document to me uh i have yet to see it i saw jenny's comments from last week but i haven't seen it right now and i just shared it with you ray what is your email address um david i can't seem to find it it's d r u g h f i r m firm us is steve p is in paul f is in frank so d ru at firm spf dot com um i would just entertain that while this process is happening if anybody else needs to take a break it's not a bad idea take a moment i definitely see a lot there jenny um that's great um i am hoping that this is a um kind of either a working document or or trying you know just the first of many many documents and information to be distributed on you know a lot of your questions are stuff that we need to discuss and and and hear about um how do we want to go through this now that we've released it do we want to go through it item by item um it is i'm i'm conscious of time um it may also give our our community some time to we do have one more well two more things i don't think the um seven three should take long um i don't hope so in the agreement merger review um and then action items basically we're taking those action items so this is before public comment this is really sort of our last action i'm just wondering how you want to go forward with this or in general sorry jenny could you say that again you're referring to me or in general i'm asking everybody um if we want to just put this out there and let the public look at it and get their comments or do we want to go through it item by item i believe there's some information that is up to the minute in this well i wonder if we could release this and then follow it up with some of jenny's thoughts and comments and questions and i mean like i said i was hoping that we would have something to get out and then it would be um either it would be an evolving document or or um we would just have more to come ethan i think it'd be it might be appropriate to have jenny go through and pick out the content oriented comments versus the grammatical or stylistic comments and and get response on that i know ray's not ray's not showing the comments for the side but some of her comments are are you know grammatical and other ones relate to uh clarifying content um i've i've got them on my screen oh here we go um yeah i think it might be the way that it shows up on a screen i think it might be hard to go through everything it's kind of hard to see the comments next to the text the way that it shows up on the screen so i can see one thing that we we need to clarify with david and that is the 60 percent that it is it's 60 percent of the um actual subdivision not the whole transfer are you ready for me to answer that i i the problem is i don't have jenny's document still so i can't see any of her comments or what's going on but uh the consultant i just emailed it to you hopefully you got it yeah i'm not yet but that's okay i'm gonna do it on the fly uh so the mark bannon's uh preparation for the wastewater permitting and concept planning is approximately 60 complete we are know what we are not 60 of the way through the process i just got it coming in jenny thank you uh so that's only 60 percent of the wastewater stuff we still need to dig some test pits due to the uh age of the high school's wastewater system so uh you know once we do that we can get to a 75 stage which is uh having the concept plan and preparing uh to get some applications together but we can't make a further movement on the wastewater stuff without an excavator and that's one thing that i wanted to get out of tonight's board meeting was authorization to proceed with that work because it is a little bit extra uh the reason why we have to do that is because state of vermont wastewater permitting requires that a replacement area be identified for the wastewater system at the high school high school system predates current uh state wastewater rules uh is my understanding so there was never one identified in the 1960s or so when the building was first constructed so do you want me to go through big picture comments or how do you want to do this ethan yes i think that's a good idea jenny well jenny before you get started too i think it's important to note that these questions came from the town of rochester and their liaison these are general questions that were asked a few months ago that uh we've already responded to but we've also boiled it down a little to make it a little bit easier so these are not uh it's not our work product it's uh that led to the questions but it isn't a kind of a second purpose of this document it sounds like it's to be a public document because it's indeed i mean right now they're they're geared towards the town but the public might be interested in different things that the town is interested in well i think following amy's comment that this is the first of many and perhaps every meeting from now on we will be releasing something like this um that as we get questions we can clarify the information we release does that sound reasonable okay so it's more of a i'm just trying to get clarity of what the intent is it's more of a a working document that will be a status update as we go through yeah we go ahead amy well i was feeling that it would be a good way to kind of get everybody up to speed as to um what has been done and some of the questions that we have been looking at and um of course there's more that are going to need to be dealt with and and yeah a working document that we can update and and add to and uh have additional additional information just to be able to be as get stuff out to the public as best possible um so i think one big thing if this is kind of if the purpose of this is to be kind of a running status of where things are we don't say where things are we don't say what's been done except for one half of a sentence where we talk about initial work for the subdivision is 60 complete like what you know we don't say what that is people might not know what bannon has done already and i think there needs to be a whole section on that are you taking notes david well again it was something to get out to the public to to give any indication of where we are because the public has not had any indication at all of what we have done so far and where we come and we're in oh i totally agree i'm just saying that if that's what we're answering we don't answer that question i hear you i think i think jenny's comments are great i think that uh eventually they will all be answered and addressed uh i don't think that that was the detail that jenny has is is uh talking about in general in her comments go beyond what we thought the intent of this document was as an initial uh entree to the community to answer some initial questions uh i think jenny might want a different document than what we prepared here and if that's the case then this is not the right setting to to do a more detailed uh drafting and describing the whole process uh it would be better if i if it was laid out and discussed maybe at the next meeting and instead we talk about the initial entree to the community here and then we can fill in some of the details later on because the jenny's comments are go a little far in the weeds i think uh than what would at least this was originally drafted for well i think we're i think we're figuring out what exactly we wanted and i don't know and i think that's why we have to put this out and and react to it and we'll get public reaction in a short time from it as well and but but i i think this is exactly right jenny i'm sorry we didn't get your responses in a more timely way to to work them into it but oh i just got the document yesterday no no i understand i don't blame you i'm just saying the whole process but this is it is a process this is the beginning of a much more full public disclosure of this of what we're doing in in in transferring and going forward with this transfer process to the town so we're learning a lot tonight we're learning a lot about what we want and about what kind of information we want to include and we will continue with that update are there further comments on this then as a public document going out or can we move to what was my main point at the high school building discussion which is the next one anybody need to talk about this some more this release carl um no other than to to remind you we need to actually vote well we did vote to release the document that's true i guess we did before we had discussion yeah yeah well then it was sort of like well now it's out here what do we want to do um and i think we've discussed we've realized that we realized that we want a different form uh that we want some more information going out there um and i think we've we've heard that um just dean do you have any comments on this no i think it's a good beginning and i i think it's helpful for the community to see even if it's a working document and it it does sort of open up the forum a little more for questions and i think it could be really helpful i i like the fact that we're letting uh we'll be watching yeah carl i i'm sorry justine uh uh just suddenly made the thought that i wanted to say pop into my head um what we what we should probably quickly quickly decide ethan is is how to this working document uh you know the public should respond and that you know i would think would be sending emails to you or to to the board and that knowing that those questions would not be answered until the next morning board meeting or conversation so that everyone everyone has the clear expectation that as we put the working document forward we're not going to be you know engaging in a in a in a we appreciate people's comments and things they want clarified but we're we're not going to be responding until our next board meeting i think that's very fair because obviously also we're trying i'd like to you know within the time constraints of public comment you know whatever we we give you know whatever people have to say we will record those statements but this is a process of getting information from david getting information from us to to put it out there and it's not something that can happen necessarily quickly so what exactly are we doing with this document i mean i just got yesterday and i have a lot of comments and it doesn't seem to really matter no it very much matters the public gets to see it before no i before it's something that we should be releasing i voted yes because i wanted to talk about it not because i want to release it for every single person to see well i mean it's it's it's it's out there it is not what you would like as a document you would like more detail but it's our first effort at this and so i would say that we would do us a next a next version that has more details addressing your questions which we could release between meetings or we could release at the next meeting that's really what the board's intent is or what the board's wishes does that does that make sense this is a first step because it is oh absolutely i just feel like i really didn't i guess i didn't understand what i was saying yes to when i agreed to release the document well i mean we're in a public meeting and so it was it's made public as soon as it's it's been put up here that's what we're saying oh i understand that yeah um so i do think people are able to see the comments on the screen like it is so we don't really aren't really going over anything well we can we can take the time to go over point by point david just said that's gonna take you know it's gonna take time to get the details that you want if that's what you want to do right now well i'm not saying that it needs to be the way i want it but i think that no i think you're absolutely right i think i think we need your details i'm i've been looking at your comments we need that kind of detail going out there um to make this much clearer document um i mean it is a work it is a working document so i'm you know obviously i don't i'm not trying to hide anything but i just think that we definitely need to change some things well then david can you take her comments and come back to the board with a draft that includes responses to them can i respond to her comments uh happily uh i think one of the issues here is that some board members were looking for an introductory document to get out to the public and uh maybe uh others want something much more detailed and much more specific that reads like a roadmap to the transaction uh they're two very very different things uh the latter taking a lot of work i mean i we would probably be here for two hours if i went through and answered all of jenny's questions even just speaking i'm happy to i know the answers for the most part but i i think the better step is to decide whether you know it is for me to take jenny's comments under advisement and prepare a written response for the board's nova uh december meeting or its next meeting if it would like to schedule a special one in the meantime or i guess another kind of independent question is i mean these are just my comments and you know others may disagree i mean i guess we should talk about what level of detail we want to include well i don't think we need two separate documents i think that's ridiculous well no i i mean that gets to a little bit of what i'm i want to talk about in the next article which is about um how we go forward talking about the building and and um well you know very much opening this up so that it can be an ongoing thing and maybe this is a document that we post on our web page um you know that we keep updating it if if we agree to go more public with how our discussions are going to go um this is the first step and i think your comments are absolutely heard and important but i do think in the interest of time tonight we will not go through them step by step oh absolutely yeah i don't expect to go through them all tonight no but i think i think you've given david the the outline for how to go forward and that that is what i i and i would hear from everyone um amy justine carl is that what you would like is a more thorough document that answers jenny's questions justine i think um while i'm in support of this document being out into the public i think a more thorough document would be helpful and i think it's also helpful for the public to see the process so i think this is all a good idea good carl um i i agree with justine i think that you know getting jenny's questions answered i think that as you know i have you know i i i read the document um when when jenny talked about her comment section so i read it looking at her comments and i i i agree with a lot of her questions and i probably will have some of my own and i will probably forward those on to david as well and i would encourage oh you know the other board member did to do the same sort of thing so that it does become i mean if it's going to be a working document it needs to it needs to change it needs to evolve and needs to grow amy um i agree i think it is important to have as much detail as possible but i do also want something that is uh for the public to be able to consume and sometimes if something is so detailed um it could be difficult um a very large document so i don't know if there is a um you know like a first page bullet points of you know here's the highlighted steps that are going to happen and then you will find your detailed information later on and you know uh in in the document i think that's a good suggestion executive summaries are always really helpful in in in long documents like this people can just read the one page or they can read the whole thing if they want well i think the goal of this document was an executive summary absolutely not to not to provide a hundred step list on how this transaction is going to occur and so the way it reads right now is very broad for that reason clear you did you did what we asked for so i don't want to make a i think you did what we asked for and now we have responded to that and we're giving you further instructions so um feel good about that i think it's a great first step i'm very glad it's out there we obviously and i'm sure the republic is going to have questions too um but i think yeah now we know how to go forward and that's exactly the purpose of bringing a document like this out good um i would like to move on then if we can to seven three um and for me this is uh there's one question that we didn't answer uh uh the last meeting remember it was two meetings ago um and that is um whether uh whether we should have our building meetings in the public session and a basic statement that i would like to go with is that we will discuss the high school transfer in public session unless executive session is absolutely necessary now that may be too vague but that is the statement i would like to go forward with um and uh again like we've been doing tonight i'd like to move that statement and then discuss it and see how we go with it can you repeat that again if i write it down that that uh high school that uh the rsud discussions of the building trend high school building transfer take place in public session unless executive session is absolutely necessary i'll entertain a motion let's just get this in discussion david say anybody want to move it if not that's fine we can do something else i make that motion of what you just said jenny is there a second second amy seconds okay now we're in discussion and david well i think it's important to recognize that a big part of the discussion about the property transfer needs to be between two entities that being the school district and the town and that meetings uh should need to occur uh where their views are offered on some specifics that are more appropriate uh not in public session i'm just going to throw that out there the board has its prerogatives and can have public discussions but there are certain details that are more appropriately discussed between the principals and consultants uh representing and lawyers frankly representing each party further i am fully against this motion um vermont public vermont public meeting law requires that only under very specific circumstances can we go into into into a executive session to discuss private matters i think david is very much on point and i think that it's been misconstrued that the board is trying to hide we have to have a legitimate reason to go into public session otherwise we do all our business in public and i don't think we need to to reaffirm that we're following the laws sorry so by following the laws we should be staying in executive session for these discussions in other words you're against this motion is that true sorry i'm i'm trying to unmute myself and turning my camera off i think i think the motion's redundant i think that the board has always had a commitment to do as much of its business in accordance with vermont with vermont public meeting laws and do as as much of its business in public as as it possibly can i don't believe that we've you know at least under my interpretation that we've gone into public set into a executive session rather to to hot things i think we've gone in there for perfectly legitimate reasons and i mean i suppose we can have i mean if you want to have the motion just to reaffirm that we're following the law we can but i i i think it's kind of silly i i i raise it because i have never seen any definition it seems like everything we've talked about has been it's been considered it needed to be in executive session and i don't see that that's been serving us at all because a lot of the stuff we've been talking about is you know uh details about who's the surveyor and and that we're doing it and a lot of evidence that somebody could actually that we're actually doing make take taking some action and i think it's been clear it's it's been obscured to the point where even the party we're interested in transferring to the select board has been confused about our intention which is why really the whole point of this meeting is to clarify some of these steps so i just as i say i i think we need to we need to keep stuff in the open most of the stuff that david told us you know without releasing any details but in a lot of some of the last executive sessions seemed to me like stuff that was perfectly fine to talk about in public so i'm just trying to find i'm trying to find a dividing line i think that we got into i think that we got into details that probably could have been discussed into public but i think that it was kind of um not staying on task to what was an executive session i think that there are things and i would refer to others in terms of what needs to be an executive session and what doesn't need to be an executive session because i don't know exactly the rules on that but i think the intentions have been well it's just that we've um i guess um drifted into other questions or conversations that may have been in public let me get to other people before i talk again amy amy do you have any comment on this hope she may be putting some in a bit justine i have not been present for the executive session so i cannot speak to whether or not that information should be public but i obviously support following the laws i think it's helpful to reiterate the fact that the board is following the law and have that in the minute so people are reminded that the board isn't hiding things in executive session um great um short of amy then here's what i would like and maybe david you can give us this can we make some differentiation of what needs to be in executive session and what can be public i think that we've completed a certain percentage of a survey or um you know or wastewater certainly seems to me to be in public session and be useful for public you know for public consumption i guess i need i'm looking for some rules because right now i see none i see that we're putting everything in executive session and that is not helping us i think i think ethan you're creating a false dichotomy i think that it's not a question of executive session versus open session instead some parts of this process cannot should not occur in public because it's too unwieldy uh but i don't know what those are that's what i'm saying and i would like to not i would not like to do that for fear of releasing some some confidential info client information okay but i i ask you to understand that a real estate purchase and lease options are allowed or allowed reasons to go into executive sessions for a reason there may come a time when the school board and the select board need to sit down to hash out uh and negotiate some things and just like labor negotiations that best occurs in executive session uh sure status updates and summaries on progress are one thing but the details and specifics of negotiations and uh things that we may know about the details of the property uh is uh it is more appropriate uh at least to to be an executive session and we can provide periodic updates on the progress but uh i would advise the board not to negotiate this transaction uh in public patty uh we'll invite you in to make a comment and here to identify yourself patty just so we know so anybody who doesn't know who you who you are pat harvey select board can you hear me i can hear you yes um from my understanding the open meeting lock uh gives you the right to have an executive session for real estate transactions so as not to erode the transaction in other words if there were uh multiple buyers you don't want to be discussing in public what someone offered versus another buyer that is the reason why you go into executive session for real estate transactions um if we're retaining the transaction so that it's uh the town of rochester and the so the school board for the dollar which was already public knowledge that would be fine to be discussed publicly but with your intent to go out on the open market and put the property for sale to uh the general public that probably wants to retain all of the discussions into an executive session um if the decision was made that you know this is the way we're going to go with the town of rochester yeah it should be public but if you're going to be bringing in other buyers it definitely should stay in executive good any firmer amy have you had a chance to talk about this so we're still talking about my my motion which has been moved about keeping a public session um i'm perfectly happy to have it voted down by the way i wanted this discussion i i think it's in uh has been an important destruction um i you know i do agree with carl that it kind of um maybe we just need to reaffirm that we are following the law uh with the with executive session um and that we maybe get some clarity from david on on some of these you know um the questions that you have about um you know what is what is some of these topics that that really are um the executive session topic we i'm not really expressing myself very well here let me let me try and suggest something is that i think one of the problems for me is we come out of executive session and we often have very little to say and i think within that executive session i think we need to make decisions about okay is this releasable is this not releasable and then immediately after the executive session we release details of the wastewater or something like that that we feel is not confidential information and i think if we do it in that moment then the people public has some sense of what we're dealing with in the executive session in which case yes we don't need my motion we just need to be a little bit more um savvy in how we release information does that solve your problem carl um yes it does you know i think it's i i think you know david makes good points there's reasons that you can go into executive session to discuss a real estate transaction i think patty yet you know echoed them that you know it'd be a different you know as much as we all hope that the town of roger is going to is going to take the building for a dollar and it's going to be a community resource for for years to come that is not a decision that has yet been made and until then the board has has a duty to protect some of the details in in light of the fact that the building may still end up on the open market okay um justine do you have any further comment and then jenny no no further comment sorry good jenny do you have anything further to say um no i don't have anything else i agree with ethan and what carl just said okay well then let's um because we've moved it and put it up there um let's uh let's put it to a vote all in favor of my statement of keeping everything in the public statement unless in the public session unless absolutely necessary to go into executive session um uh carl how do you vote yes or no i abstain uh justine how do you vote i vote no uh amy how do you vote no jenny how do you vote no and i'm also i'm going to vote no um so uh but i really with the emphatic um lesson that when we come out of an executive session talking about this we come out with a list of items that can be released to the public good okay i believe patty uh amy you want to introduce patty patty sorry is it patty or pat i'm i'm not sure sometimes either one okay fine thank you um amy could you just uh you want to introduce or pat do you always had a statement from the select board i do um we had a select board meeting earlier this evening and um we did have some discussion during our select board meeting that uh public so anybody could watch that on our government's released and i do have a statement to make and i'm going to read it as it was uh designated in our meeting as much as the school board awaits a decision from the town of rochester to acquire the high school building the select board of rochester is looking to the current school board to make the commitment of remaining in the current district setup and not pursuing unmerging this is a statement that we are looking for guidance from the school board um so that we know they're all going in the same direction together um we we know that there were some changes in well a new school board member welcome aboard and and some changes in how the school board is formed and who does what and so now i think we've got everything settled in um we understand that one thing that didn't seem to be mentioned all this evening was we were interrupted by covid um so when we were just getting uh some steam going on all of this i'm very happy that the school board took some time off to figure out how to get our students back into those buildings and get them educated and you did a wonderful job um so maybe things have settled down now we're getting back to it that's how i view what what is what has transpired let's say in the last 12 months um so up as long as things proceed normally um we've gone back to things that are said in in public and on social media and rumors off the streets i guess is what i'd call them and um we would just like to hear directly from the board and i represent the select board in this saying are we committed to going forward with continuing with the merger after the five-year period um if the if the rumors on the street and social media wasn't uh raging with the word unmerged so much we would never be asking this question but here we are in this position and we would like the school board and you don't have to answer tonight to give us give us your thoughts on how you think that we're going to proceed and with that blessing if if you were to give us that blessing we're more than happy to grab your hands and we'll all walk down the yellow brick road together on this that's our statement very good we want to respond now or do we want to hold on to this car and when does the public get to speak this is public comment time it's coming up we have one more item and then it's public comment okay good thank you um patty uh i spent a lot of my hours and a lot of my hairline on uh working uh towards uh bringing that merger together um as i'm sure you're aware uh you know the public can can uh warn a question for the annual for the annual meeting um with a certain percentage of the vote so that's something that that neither Stockbrook select board Rochester select board or the r-side school board you know can have any anything uh uh to say about it but barring barring that kind of populist uh a sort of sort of movement you know i can tell you that personally i think that this you know that that's solving this this problem and working our way through is really the the the best outcome for the the the children um from three to eighteen in our accounts so i can tell you that the the the reorganization of this board um you know was was not at least in my mind does not change you know my position at least personally uh on the importance of the merger and making the the merger work it is not pretty it is not optimal it's not i think you know i i really think just like in in in in Stockbridge there's people that that still wish we had our own school i'm sure there's people in Randolph that wish they still had a viable high school because there are there's so much history in that building and in that community around that but the reality of of our current student count in our population is that you know at least personally i can tell you that i think the merger should work and i will will support going forward with with with uh working working to solve the problems of our two communities together for whatever that's worth good further comment amy jenny amy jenny just i definitely support you know the merger and i hope that it both towns can work through our differences i think all of our all of our really should be about which we don't seem to talk much about any yeah my comment really goes back to my initial board comment this this meeting is that um i do support this merger um but i do understand that there is um a lot of loud voices and that do not support this merger there's as i was noting in the survey is 39 percent strongly agree or or agree that this merger should dissolve and i'd like to know why and um now i'm concerned that this is a little bit of a stumbling block so i i think we need to work through this and i think we need to we need to know what the problems are and uh but i am committed to this merger justine um i i'm absolutely committed to the merger i do think there is work to be done before we can provide or i can provide a true response to that you know the select board statement i think the the high school building is a weight on that decision and i think that um there's a lot more unpacking to do with regards to what amy mentioned at the beginning and and why certain members of the public would vote in that way so um personally i'm in support of the merger i think that as a board we are working toward figuring out ways to make it work but i think there's a lot of work to be done to to decide whether that's going to happen beyond the the time limit um i'll just finish up that yes i support the merger as again as i said earlier it's why i'm here it's why i'm on the board uh it's why i stepped up to be chairman um is to make this work is to hear all parties and try and find common ground um i and and moving forward with that i don't think yeah we um we don't have a clear answer i mean the board as you've just heard patty is for the merger and is for supporting the merger um you know how much you are swayed by the public is is your call um we hear them we hear their concerns i'm i'm sure we're about to hear their concerns um and um and and we will respond and we will keep working with them obviously this thing i'm bringing up next has to do with that and hopefully we'll get some hearing from there but uh the board position is clear we are going forward with the merger and to make it work okay thank you very much i mean i can't ask for anything more than that so with the board's support um we are we are ready to go to the next level um the document that started with my email um your second document of tonight that's perfect bring it on uh that was just an initial framework of things that brainstormed out of my mind about oh my god what are we going to do about this i have another email with the select board that has even more points in it so so you guys got off actually a little bit easy um so um i think that the select board is throwing its support through this and we did say that publicly this evening and i am saying it to the board so yes let's uh let's join forces we can do about going forward thank you very much thank you very much for being here tonight yep all right i don't want to take a lot of time oh yeah athon before before i sign off uh one housekeeping item there is this issue of doing test pits at the high school in my opinion that needs to happen it's mandatory in order to move forward and proceed with permitting it's an extra cost and approximately four hundred dollars is what i've been told above the original estimate so i i just need some support from the board to to move forward with that um we have a motion to uh is this an increase in the amount we're doing uh it's for mark bannon's estimate going up to uh from i think it was 2,800 to about uh well somewhere in the range of 3,000 not very far okay maybe 3,200 okay how do we want to call do you have a i move we uh we authorize uh increasing the allowable spending for the mark bannon consultancy agency to uh 3,300 dollars uh do i have a second on that uh just hold hold one second before you vote let me just let me just make sure i got the numbers right otherwise i would accept a friendly amendment to say to increase the estimate to uh by four hundred dollars let me just hold on sorry no worries i think it's your way to go about it loading uh it would be going from 3250 to uh 3650 uh i amend my i amend my motion to uh change it to uh read the allowable fees for the mark bannon consultancy agency to increase by four hundred dollars thank you carl so second second all in favor signify by saying hi hi hi thank you all very much uh we'll be in touch have a good night thank you you're welcome good um i don't want to thank you david uh basically it's this idea of going over um it's something i'll bring as an action item it's just a thought and probably should have been in board comment but i think the idea of sitting down with the merger agreement and a committee of community members and some board members not too big this i talked to dean about the principle of this and she said this would be fine um uh committee members and board members she said not to make it too big um to sit down and look and unhash through and talk through the merger agreement and and now that we have more time to look at it and see what the sticking points are see what the confusions are and i would just like to get sort of a yay nay to come back with a proposal for a committee for our december meeting um and that can be handled quickly unless there's more discussion justine do you have a thought on this yay good carl do you have a thought on this um sure i worry about i worry about uh uh you know where we'll be with the budget and you know i i don't want to to set us up for another marathon meeting but i i agree that it needs to be talked about yes um by the way this would be something that would be ongoing it's you know committee meetings there's lots to figure out and of course nothing could be changed without communities both communities voting on it that was adine was very clear on so this is not a quick process it is but it is something looking toward the uh five-year sort of appraisal of where we are amy i think it's a good idea for just that it helps get everybody a little more familiar with with that articles of agreement and it just begins the process of that um evaluation oh jenny yeah i think it sounds good great okay good i will go forward and sort of put together a proper proposal for our december meeting all right let's get into uh public comment now what have i got here i've got a bunch of phone numbers let me work down the list it's going to be some video participants first and i will try and keep my uh when you announce first thing i want to say is that this is the comment time we may not have an answer for you to your question i would rather say we've taken your question in then make up an answer on the spot of something i don't know certainly any of the questions we've talked about a lot of issues tonight and uh we will take notes on all your questions but we may not have answers for all of them tonight i will go through all the numbers the people on the video and the numbers and then we'll go back if anybody has an extra comment after that and i will start with joanne do you have a comment for us tonight and i will give you plenty of time just in case it takes time to unmute joanne are you there yep i see you unmuted can't hear you though are you talking right now sorry yeah not can you hear me now oh yes now i can yes and now i can hear you okay so i have a few questions i want to say well played rochester that was really interesting so um one no external rental because i'm sure we would have to fix up the building in order to rent it to um if you could please post every document from tonight including jenny's final one that would be great um someplace where everybody can see it um i feel bad the statement the earlier statement lost all its teeth and um what are we talking about for expense on this subdivision that seems to be the big secret good settle no no i'm not i don't mean it that way sorry no judgment go ahead those are very good um expense for subdivision i mean is that really what this whole thing is about they don't they want to make sure we stay merged so we share the expense i mean seriously is that seems i mean is that it no okay so why does it matter if we merge or unmerge uh because i believe that the only way to keep schools in both our communities is to be merged that um there's much evidence pointing to the fact that either of us go independent our schools will not be supported by the state actually i've read opposite of that lately but okay well i'd be curious to see that i'll share that with you yeah please do um that's certainly the information we're going on but i one of the things i want to be always calling into question is assumptions all of us any of us make i appreciate that yeah that we follow it up by fact and information yep so patty um is that i mean is it the expense sharing or what what's why is there the caveat that we can't unmerge there's no there's no concern over expense the concern is that the school board and the town go through the expense and if we unmerge we get our entire campus back and we did all this for nothing true okay it's the beginning and the end of the reasoning behind this um you know there's there's no secret agenda behind any of it oh i understand there's a lot of time and energy besides the as you can see from tonight's meeting there's a lot of time and energy being put into this and if it's for not it would be a great waste of time and resources that could be you know placed somewhere else especially by the school board absolutely i understand that that's um i saw the words bond in some of jenny's writing as it was like scrolling by are we talking about bonding some of this expense i believe those are the existing bonds okay the existing that 350 yes okay and were those bonds have we figured out were those connected were those and were those attached to the high school building i don't know the answer to that yet okay but i believe there has been some investigation of that so we can um we can get that document yeah there is some information about that that in the document and that will be posted tomorrow or yeah it's part it's it talks about two different bonds and one of the bonds was for the elementary building um and the i forget what the bond was for and then the second bond was for combined for the elementary and the high school building okay okay thank you very much i appreciate it thank you thank you joanne uh karen rubin if you have a comment please um i do i actually have a couple of questions so i'll go slowly a thing so you can write them down yep the current custodian for the rochester school campus um is that a single fte position for 40 hours a week um and the other question i had in regards to that was the additional position that has been brought um put out in the newspapers for the seven day a week person was that factored into the budget and if so what line item was that factored into as far as an expense for that additional personnel my other question is the math interventionist i understand from earlier that that is a 1.0 fte is that being shared equally between the two campuses stockbridge and ronchester how is that position being divvied out um in regards to the campus and then and i apologize because i'm multitasking two meetings at once so i missed a little bit of what um patty was saying but can you just reiterate what she said in regards to the merger status of the agreement between the school board and ronchester of the purchase of the building was that even after the five-year term has expired um and i apologize for missing that again i'm have one meeting in one year and another meeting in another i'm not sure i'm understanding your question um it's i'm not sure because patty basically said that they were is it what she just said to joanne or what she said earlier what she said earlier ronchester select board would no agree to the purchase of the building providing there is no uh dissolving of the merger i i don't know if i heard that correctly yes that was whatever was their concern and as she just said to joanne the idea that um you know there's a lot of energy going into this and if suddenly we were a single campus because they were separated merged and we had to deal with our own stuff then suddenly um you know it's quite possibly might need to school back again and it would all be for naught so i think that's that was the reason she just gave that it was important for them to know that we were committed to uh moving forward with the merger but no disillusion of the merger indefinitely so after the five years that was originally agreed upon is up to revisit that decision that five-year mark is off the table um that's still part of the agreement i'm just saying uh she wanted to know what the board's intent was whether the board was fully behind the merger and and patty could correct me if i'm misstating this for you um it had nothing to do as far as i know with the five-year well and we're not on merging for the first five years so that that's a mute point nothing nothing can be done until five-year period is over but we are halfway through it uh approaching three years into it so you know we see that end of that five-year period and and that that is what we were talking about at the end we can't put anything before that so obviously i was talking about at the end of the five-year period get relocked into so the select board's position is that we would extend past the five-year period if you agree to purchase the building uh i think we would agree from what we said today is that we would agree to keep the merger whether you know regardless of how the building goes to the town or somewhere else it's about the merger and we believe in the merger okay i i don't think that actually answered my question but in the meantime if you want to take um the other two questions that i asked and maybe address those um is it possible bonnie are you still on yes i am uh did you get those uh is the custodian of one fta 40 hours uh we have one full-time custodian and we have one point five custodian and um the the one hour a day position for the high school was is not included in the budget but we have reduced by a half time custodial position so the anticipation is that there's funds from that position to cover the the one hour a day high school position and bonnie i think to clarify if i reduced you mean someone retired and that would post the budget correct and karen so that position is still in the budget so there are funds available from that person correct so you currently have a full-time fte and you have in the budget for a point five fte but that point five fte is currently not a filled position no we have let me say i didn't say that very clearly let me say that again very clearly let me say that again we have a full-time position and a half-time position now um those two positions are filled there was another half-time position that when the person retired uh we did not fill but the funds from that position are still in the budget because the retirement took place uh too late to make that change okay and then go ahead the seven days position so that that's where the funds are coming from right and then the math interventionist is that split between the two campuses so currently we have a makeup of um several literacy interventionists uh one on the stockbridge campus and two they're not full-time but two people um on the rochester campus and uh we will be reconfiguring that is the best word i'm going to use right now caron and we just don't know in what ways so each building has a math interventionist that'll meet the kids needs depending on where we're at with our data which as you and i chatted about is not very impressive in the math category yeah we definitely need help in the math category that's for sure so the proposed position that was referred to earlier with the draft budget that's not an additional math per intervention list that's using one of our current ones yes are we picking up an additional math interventionist because we definitely need that as much support for the students as possible right so it's adding on because some of the current interventionists that we have are not full-time and switching their job description and okay and and the expectation of that 1.0 fte for the math intervention list is to split equally among the two campuses i think i think that's the goal i uh what do you think how would you word it bonnie well i think we'd probably look i don't think probably i think we'd look at who are our youngsters that aren't um meeting the standard meeting the proficiency and try and divide the position up in a way that looks that basis is a basis it on youngsters versus you know half here and half there okay thank you ladies thank you ethan thank you karen um next is katharine shankman i think she just stepped away from her computer i'm here i'm here but i i don't have any questions thank you thank you katharine uh next i'm going to go down to phone numbers um this first number is and i think it's right star six to unmute and star six to mute again and the first number is area code 443 last two digits 15 and please identify yourself and and what town you're from again area code 443 last two digits 15 if you have a comment okay i'll move on 802 um 02 the last two digits star six to unmute please identify yourself in your town if you have a comment okay i'll move on 802 uh last two digits three eight star six to unmute hey ethan it's keith uh keith hi keith how you doing good good um you know i have a few comments um i guess the first comment that i'd like to made i was extremely disheartened by the comment made by the rochester select board basically saying um if we don't agree to stay in this merger they're not interested in purchasing the building i was hoping that the school board would have taken a different approach and basically said well if those are the terms we can't make that commitment and we'll just sell the the building to an outside party because i really feel that that was uh quite distasteful um the other thing that i'd like to mention is that i know that um in the beginning of the meeting it was said that i think the number was 39 percent of the people are not pleased with the with the merger and would be willing to dissolve it um when i looked at the survey that i have which may be dated um i saw the number was 36 percent but the other number that needs to be addressed also in that survey is 26 of the people where i believe classified as neutral which you know kind of equates to a um undecided so you know that number of 36 39 whatever it is is probably greater than than it's represented in that survey so i i think you need to dive into those numbers with a little more detail than just taking the 36 or 39 percent other comments where i appreciate corals position looking at the budget i think he was dead on when he said well we already know salaries are going up 3.6 percent why are we sticking to 3 percent because we know other related costs are also going to be higher and those numbers should be reflected and should be considered seriously in terms of what the budget the ultimate budget would be so i'm not sure why oh well we took three percent and that's what we're going to stick to and it's a draft you know it just doesn't make any sense to me um so you know the other thing is i know that the wording that i had provided was watered down and that's fine that's that's the decision the board needs to make but by taking out some of that language it doesn't change anything i mean there's no timeline so we can drag on forever it just doesn't make any sense where are we going with this um so you know i i think you know as far as i'm concerned as an individual uh tonight's meeting was extremely disappointing and it short of uh to me indicates that you know Rochester gets what Rochester wants and well that may not be very popular to say out loud um i think it needs to be said and that's what i have to say thank you for your comments Keith i got it down um 802 last two digits five three any comment that's star six two on mute five three hey vik i'll move on eight oh sorry there okay wasn't too quick on the trigger there um i just wanted to um comment on the the notion that um people are unsure about the merger and i think that i think there's a good story to tell about what's been accomplished and the potential for further accomplishments but i think i think there's just the word is just not getting out publicly to Rochester anyway i don't know about stuff where you can't speak to that but um i think i think if there's a way to tell more of the story of the upside of the merger it should be done i think uh i think people will respond to that favorably that's all just a suggestion great thank you vik hey ethan i just this catherine again i just want to thank this this has been a very educational process tonight and i want to thank the board for their perseverance and stamina and for the for really just trying to work with everyone it's very impressive thank you thank you catherine 802 six nine star six two on mute if you have a comment please identify yourself yeah hi carl this is leslie um i want to ask my question that i ask every year do we have a special ed uh certified in the wilson method in both schools or or combined to both schools and how are we ensuring that these children are not falling between the cracks like my children did bonnie lindy can you address that please yes hi leslie so um our special educator is shared and she is um certified in wilson and um so thank you for keeping us in check with that it's appreciated and how we ensure that is i have to say that we're probably doing more frequent uh data checkpoints for kiddos to make sure that they're still progressing progressing instead of waiting for large chunks of time to go by awesome yeah thank you very much and i also wondered um why the rochester people can't find someone to walk through the school once once a day uh where i work i have plenty of things that i do that are not my job description and i'm thinking if it's only going to take an hour to walk through the school i don't understand why i'm working there they can't find someone to do that come that herd thank you very much leslie uh and finally 802 um last year digits 91 please star six to unmute and identify yourself please 91 hi even it's kate on mckinsey how are you um so i don't think i really i have one question and then a couple statements um i'm wondering i know a librarian at least from maybe i was looking at it incorrectly but from this past year's budget the the librarian position isn't shared is that something that could be shared something that's been looked into as being shared katelyn we actually the librarian's position we actually um we actually do share between the two schools oh we do okay then i misread that well wait a minute katelyn you know what i i said that no i i said that wrong the the person who's the librarian at rochester our teacher is the art teacher at stockbridge so i i stand corrected on that because i believe donna donna's the librarian exactly donna's the librarian yep since the uh okay so so then we either don't share art teachers or is that correct we we do share an art teacher we don't share a librarian right so we have one person that's doing hold on a second lindy oh that was me jenny i was waiting for the rest of katelyn's question sorry i just wanted to comment that the librarian in starbridge is also i'm not sure lindy her official title but she does a lot of reading and literacy in humanities she's a literacy instructor for four five six so she had she's a shared position within the building does that make sense okay all right yep just on the budget it looked like it was two separate independent librarians okay okay where shared hats in different ways within the building each campus okay perfect um so my other ones are just kind of statements so eve and i really appreciate you mentioning uh the regular updates even if you can't tell us everything that goes on in the executive session that's fine at least me personally i'm not looking for you to tell me every gruesome detail i just as the community member i would like an update because it's it's kind of like crickets where we get a piece here and there or then we hear some news through the grapevine whatever but to have just a regular update it doesn't even have to be every meeting but like every other meeting or you had mentioned maybe coming out of executive and just giving us a summary of what was talked about not necessarily the specifics that you can't talk about that i i feel the community would be very happy to have that and my next comment would be to taking i agree with keith taking out that time frame in the beginning and i agree with carl and i i i really think giving a time frame is is necessary especially since there's already been a lot of conversation there's already been all this effort going into subdividing and even now we had the woman from the rochester select board say they're willing to move forward so i don't understand why accepting the offer in a 90 in a three month period to just accept the offer is unreasonable um and my next comment i believe it should be my final one um amy i mentioned that she's unsure where the 36 percent of people who approved dissolving are coming from and i spoke with justine on the phone earlier it's it's coming from a very big place of insecurity of our school and unequal treatment between the schools and other board members have mentioned it other community members have mentioned it it's been noted it's been noticed and commented on and that's a big big reason we don't have security that we're going to keep case through six here in our school it's been mentioned several times by several different members about whether it's moving grades whether it's closing the school and you're probably sick of hearing this but the merger was to save both case through six schools and we have a lot of insecurity issues here in stock bridge from my perspective and from other people i've spoken to that this is what we voted for and it's continually being talked about either taken away or extra funds are going to rochester or extra treatment is going over into rochester school there needs to be equal treatment between buildings between schools i understand rochester is bigger so in general they need more funds but as far as updates as far as anything budget related that's extra it needs to go into both schools the same amount of energy needs to go into both schools and we need to stop talking about moving grades or closing the school that's not what the merger was about we need to know that we are going to keep our case through six school that's where the 36 percent is coming from i appreciate using the word insecurity that's a that's a very clear term and that is uh and maybe it's as you say it's been said many times but i hear that um that that's a very different it's not an aggressive word it's a we're worried word and i i i really do hear that um i would appreciate you know what kind of motions we can make because i want i want the stock bridge people to feel secure that's the whole point of this of us having the school board meetings we're not perfect we don't do it right every time but i certainly want to reassure people uh because i'll speak personally that is that is what i'm working for is both schools in both communities that's what i'm working for and you know um that's i can't say it anymore emphatically um and and and maybe we need more statements of it like that i mean you did hear that everyone's for the merger and and that that's what the merger but maybe this is where this committee will be useful to go over the argument documents so really know what this is about but thank you for your comments thank you uh we've gone through everybody once um we're just over three hours uh thank you all for your patience is there anybody else who has a uh a further comment okay there being none i would say both of these uh executive sessions with jamie not here his is moot and the building we've lost david and we've done that business for tonight so i think that's moot so i believe i'm just getting back to the agenda which i know it's right here i was writing in the back of it um i think we're um i didn't entertain a motion to adjourn when's a regular meeting uh next meeting will be tuesday december 1st 2020 6 30 p.m via google meet i i would like to ask though uh and it was a comment and i am unclear and i think it is unclear is where the documents from this evenings uh are going to be posted where where a public have what are what are our usual um can we include uh the the rochester stockbridge um facebook page um and or should it just be on our website what's the what's our what's our um usual we put it we put it on our website we've never we're the the the concern we've always had that if we if we support facebook book a or front porch forms b that we're not being that we're not being inclusive that instead we have a location that we are public about and everyone comes to and that is the one place okay central information then let's then we will post this document um and i believe we said with jenny's comments is that correct on on the facebook page or do we want to wait and do a second document with jenny's comments well then i think i think until the comments are resolved we should go with the original document good thank you as we resolve comments we update the document that's you know let's do that it'll be an it'll be an ongoing place for updates updates to be included so we will put the current document as david senate to us on the bull on the bull on our website and then as he comes up with the second document addressing jenny's questions well that will be posted in due time after we've reviewed it that sound good ray had a comment ray has his hand and he's the person behind the scenes for the website stuff so thank you uh yeah i was i was looking at numbers ray what's up so ethan um it's it will it's okay that i email those out to the same group of people who get the email for the reminder for the meeting and those will go into the board documents folder tomorrow correct where the agendas are found yes i just want to make sure those two things are okay yep we voted on that tonight will it also be posted on our website as well or are you saying this instead of no no in addition thank you great thank you good clarity thank you carl thank you all jenny for and thank you all for clarifying that my brain was a little fuzzy didn't follow that are there any further details we need to address before we adjourn tonight and thank you for your hard work tonight um but i think i think we did well sorry if we disappointed some people but i think we did well tonight i move we adjourn thank you all in favor all in favor signify by saying i bye bye thank you all and good night