 On the agenda's public comment. I do not see any public Move on to the action items under number three I would like to add one item to the action item, please all of you have a copy of the minutes of March 28th 2018 special meeting for the purpose of retreat for the Montpelier Roxbury Board of School Directors We could do both minutes. I think in one motion to move approval of the minutes Small approve. I make a motion that we approve the minutes of March 28th and March 21st 2018 Second all in favor Any opposed Discussion It's not a consent agenda Which is the same as the March 21st minutes, which keeps saying that I was absent You did you stepped out Okay There's no no motions to amend you're comfortable with them. Okay, all those in favor Any opposed make sure we have discussion Second item on the agenda is the approval of the bleacher bid is that for Another kind of good news item the bid was actually just for bleachers here and in the middle school and for a Jim Curtin in the middle school in the hopes that maybe the bids would come in low enough they asked for alternates for a Jim Curtin here as well as the middle school and to to repair or replace some backwards here at the high school so the Bids actually came in well enough to accept the ultimate so we're getting Two sets of bleachers to Jim Curtin's and we're getting the backwards replaced here so all of that was within the amount and Recommendation was to approve a plus athletic products as the lowest responsible bid And we had a hundred and fifty-two budget Was board of the high school Curtin in the bond As far as inside the gymnasium itself Without the locker rooms and surrounding the lock the gymnasium itself the only really Ealing in the bond really related to the gymnasium itself was HVAC Validation and the roof Any other questions for Grant? Emotion to approve the bond and if we approve a plus athletic products bid for Gymnasium work at the high school in the middle school all second Any discussion all those in favor? Any opposed there's a new teacher contract Emotion for approval of the teacher contract Second any discussion all those in favor hi any opposed You can pass the blue sheets into Man even reading D's All right, we're moving on to the beamers item, and I'm not even going to read the whole thing Let me take it away. This is probably worn in a long line of activities That is going to have to approve or action under support of a new entity So both Roxbury and Monterey are currently offered be immersed as the retirement But as a new entity be moves requires that the board Make a statement that says that they will Allow administrators without teacher licenses to participate in the members of the group C and all other Eligible employees to participate in This is basically status quo. This is what we have what Roxbury has but since it's a new entity They need something recorded that you have made that decision So for anyone in the public who is following along and still awake Beemers is the retirement system that our non-teacher employees participate Participate in which is the Vermont municipal employees retirement system And on the bottom of the memo from Brian carrying on second page is a language for emotion Any discussion all in favor And then this the approval of the vis-v-it power of attorney and member agreement And there will be more in future meetings, but both Roxbury and Monterey use the Vermont school board's insurance trust for general liability insurance workers compensation and employment So whenever you do that vis-v-it's a power of attorney and a member agreement That Roxbury has done as part of Washington South and we have on file with this bit for Montpelier This is the exit these are the exact same documents that we already have on file with them But unfortunately, it's as Montpelier public schools. So they need the same documents But as monthly Roxbury and so if I assume we're fine with this bit I'm happy with them. So if you're okay with it Then you just need to approve the vis-v-it power returning member agreement and authorize me to sign those documents and send them back So we're on course to have our coverage as of July 1 So it's a trust that provides our basically provides our liability and first cop insurance This is a lot of school districts Most most school districts use vis-v-it and say probably So I move we approve the vis-v-it power of attorney and member agreement and authorize business manager Grant Geisler to sign documents a second Any discussion of the vis-v-it motion all those in favor Any opposed and This is the next thing is what Grant talked to the Montpelier board about briefly earlier the approval of the declaration of intent to reimburse bond Expenses and Paul Giuliani who wears many hats in this case. He's bond counsel He recommends that everybody who gets a bond should have an approval of declaration Intent to reimburse bond expenses. What that allows you to do is We want to get bond proceeds until probably sometime in July or maybe early August if we are incurring a lot of Expense up until that time or architectural work or anything else that might happen If we have this declaration of intent to reimburse then I could go back with bond proceeds in July or August and I could Reimverse our like our general funder our fund balance and charge it to the bond So I'm not sure we would do that, but I do want the flexibility to be able to do that And I think there's language on that as well as far as the To reimburse expenses does the part about Tammy legacy needs to be in the motion? No, but we'll just show it's Like she like she did for the last bond related Recommendation from mr. Giuliani, so I move we approve the declaration of intent to reimburse bond expenses Any discussion this motion? All those in favor All right, and the last action item is the approval of the night people's United Bank resolution, and this is only one that will need we use people's United Bank or a scholarship fund and since we don't anticipate any activity on that account between now and July 1st we can go ahead and transfer that from Montpelier public schools to Dr. Roxbury and We will have another resolution kind of like this Probably right near July 1, and you may not Well, I'll try I'll probably have you approve it right before the summer break to get like our community National accounts transfer as well, but this is just Court but yeah And I will need at some point to contact Jim Murphy because you'll have to sign this one And it's long and drawn out, but they are very standard documents that I Don't I'm curious sorry the second page has a list of people for authorized signers Shelly Quinn was yelling am I recognized on there those other folks with the bank or were they They are Those are those are I can let you know those those are the members of our crafters edge team So the scholarship account is the Cori fund and then there's also one other account and it's crafters edge And so those names are First page That's the one scholarship. Okay, so different accounts different I'm not saying I'm sorry, so we can run the crafters edges. This is so therefore has been they make great furniture I Each every year the eighth grade has a company that's called crafters edge at the end of seventh grade the seventh graders apply for Jobs in the company for the following year. They have to submit applications. They have to get references. They get interviewed What you know how you get a job in life and then they They run the middle school dances as fundraisers they sell baked goods and You can order pies you can order cookies you can order quiches anytime from the kids who are Cooking for crafters edge. They have a big craft sale in the fall where they sell a lot of their wood products As Bridget said you can get a lovely table. They have beautiful Adirondack chairs. They have cutting boards There's something for every budget. They'll make a drawer organizer to your exact specifications of your drawer They do really good work and they And they put on a dinner theater Which is coming up at the beginning of May. I think it's May 3rd and 4th. They'll be performing the Madagascar, so if you know the movie Madagascar, they're putting on the play of Madagascar and they have a dinner And it's here at the high school and the community is welcome You can buy tickets for the dinner and the show or just the dinner or just the show and they the kids make a Great usually Italian pasta kind of dinner, but fancy. Yeah, sure It's not just a big bowl of spaghetti. It's a good dinner And and they put on a great play and at the end of the year They can use the money that they raised through crafters edge for an eighth grade trip and they also Choose some community Organizations to donate a portion of their proceeds to they give some money back to Then it's next the seventh graders coming up as seed money for their crafters edge And they bring some of it to the high school for their class activities Thank you more than you ever wanted to know but it's Kids will get to do that And you should all come to see Madagascar Especially King Julian not that I would know Any other questions for Grant about the bank And if not, then I guess the Motion would be to approve the resolution and authorize the chair I'll make a motion to approve the resolution and give permission to the chair Second all those in favor, hi, can you post? All right, great. Thank you. Thank you grant. Thank you for keeping us on track And also the memo was great Thank you, Grant Would you can I ask before we jump the next section? So some of the policies we had listed for second reading first reading Wasn't totally accurate. Does that make a difference how we start this if we have to get that corrected now? Or if it is okay to continue with where they presented I Think we should probably correct the second reading Yeah, some of that's Was it the it's the board member conflict of interest be see board member code of conduct D board superintendent relationship policies will be discussed tonight, but because we didn't reach them the last time Oh, that's right. They're not so they're still in first reading right Shall we say that we move them out to first room? You can I mean it doesn't So the reality for this is there's no There's no there's no minimum or maximum number of readings, right? So if you read a Policy on a first reading and there's no substantive changes it can be adopted at the next meeting though The critical part is that there's a 10-day warning for adoption So we can certainly be clear about what's first second or third But ultimately it's not the most critical point for us is that we give the 10-day warning for when they are ready to be adopted I don't think it affects the order in which we take things and I So just so this is sort of outlined in the memo, but the folks are are clear Tonight we're going to talk about the conflict of interest code of conduct and board superintendent relationship as a discussion Those are really in a draft form and really just looking looking for a fairly robust Discussion and input on where we're going with those the Everything else in the list under second reading Are things that we have already? Discussed a We need to revisit the inter-district school policy has changed. We're definitely going to revisit and then I think EF G and H substitute teachers fiscal management budget execution volunteers and work-studies students We did talk about it in the last meeting We're not adopting them tonight because they had not been on the website And now they are in my understanding So they'll be up for adoption next week So we don't have to have substantive discussion on those Well, they actually know what I thought they can't be up for adoption next week because that won't be within the 10-day warning So they'll be up for adoption at the first meeting in May No, I actually have comment okay as I was reading through all of these policies I thought to myself first of all I wanted to thank you and Ryan and Steve policy committee for This is a lot of work But I was it occurred to me that it's an unusual place to be in to have a whole board Read all of the policies that will be in existence Before their in existence, which is July 1st, and it's an interesting thing to me You usually get handed a big policy book and maybe you look at a couple policies, but we will have read them all So I thank you very much. Thank you. All right So I think we should start with the first reading ones We'll start with those and then we might switch around the order on the second reading But These are the three that we are looking at for the first time It's a new board alcohol and drug free workplace drug and alcohol testing of transportation employees and prevention of employee harassment Brian gave us all an additional Document, which I somehow already knew Steve if you need the And the packet that's on the right Is relevant to No, I don't think yep, it's relevant to the drug and alcohol testing for transportation employees. Got it Sure, so the these are from the Mentor list from the VSBA website Laurie and I went through these they are similar to the ones that are already in effect for both Montpelier and Roxbury There are no substantive changes that we are recommending to either one of these What I did want to point out and that's why I gave you the extra packet Because the drug and alcohol testing is so minimal. I thought it would be helpful for the board to see what our current bus company student transportation of America does in terms of a comprehensive drug and alcohol testing program With the caveat that we are out to bid for our next busing contract So this for the time being is in effect while we are partnered and contracted with student transportation of America We'll have something similar with whomever else we contract with if we end up not going with student transportation of America Yes, and that's covered in there there are percentages by which they go they Review and go by and employees must sign off on the randomness of the So I drive the citizen bus and they drive up in a truck and Call out somebody like me to go in to be drug tested on a random basis It happens, okay The one about an alcohol and drug fee workplace is really simply about notification of it If any individual is convicted or pleads no contendray That would be a recommendation to you as a board depending on the circumstances for dismissal And in terms of the prevention of employee harassment Again, very much boilerplate and both what Roxbury and one player public schools already have In effect, so no substantive changes So I have a question about the alcohol drug fee. It's really just a clarification This is a policy that governs people that work correct. It is not relevant to no, but each Building specifically the high school has its own drug and alcohol requirements and those are listed in the handbook So yes, this is just for employees. That is correct. I was glad to see there's Someone other than the principal you could report to less the principal Yes, we've had recently we're not Taking action on these tonight. So we're not reading your motion. So if anyone has questions, I'll just be sure we're comments or questions on the on the alcohol and drug So so just to bring up a comment with my Day job we had to undergo a legal review of our alcohol and drug free workplace Policies in light of a couple of things including anticipated legalization of marijuana And how that would affect potential drug testing After accidents or incidents As it turned out our current policy the attorney felt was was strong enough But just to raise a flag perhaps that someone might want to take a second look at that I think that has a better eye than thank you very much. I appreciate being that was not even on the radar Comments or questions on the transportation or the prevention of this will you harass me? Okay, I think the last one was very thorough This the harassment one is fairly similar to the student harassment We are required to have each one And procedures come with again much like the student one I'm sorry harassment is this this is the legal standard on this for action by the district is that is that in statute? So in other words, is this this under procedure? You know, I'm not familiar with the harassment laws and how that plays out I'm familiar with like bullying and that kind of stuff and There's a There's a pretty strong standard where the district must take actions and that is the case I mean if you see the under the duty of invest to investigate We are required to investigate the harassment even if the complaintant does not wish to proceed with a formal complaint So it's it's essentially much like How all of our all of the adults that work within proximity of students are mandated reporters We are mandated Investigators if we learn in some way that harassment may have taken place Even if I approach you as the potential complaintant and say it's understood from a conversation I had with Tina that This conversation was held and directed at you you could potentially confirm it and say but I don't wish for this to go forward that it does not That will not deter my investigation And would there be a set of procedures not written here that says how you do that? I will tell you that anytime we've had either one of these I've been quickly in consultation with our legal team and have outlined the procedures That we will take in order to do so. It's done on a case-by-case basis. It's done on a case-by-case basis I mean there is Seizure in this policy, right? I'm right, but it's not it is It's not quite a detail And these categories are the employment categories for protection is that I don't know if you recognize it This is mirroring the oh the list of protected the state of protected These are the protected In addition to it in other words or I mean I'm sure it's a Okay If there are no further concerns on these I would propose that we warn them for adoption at the May Second sounds like at the first meeting I'd say the first meeting in that is For these three Thank you Second reading and then we've moved things around. Why don't you want to talk about the transfer policy? Yes, but it seemed like a discussion the board had Two weeks ago regarding the in-district elementary school transfer policy was You like the direction we want more specifics in there make a very clear cut in terms of what to expect So that's what we put forward for the second draft that's in front of us tonight Is again kind of that same theme that were at this point in time not anticipating students transferring regularly between elementary schools So we outlined what parents might expect to see if they were to ask to do so And the section where the line is drawn through it you're taking out Correct Yes And so And since I didn't hear the discussion last of it the question I have had is it says the board of school Directors will consider parent requests for in-district Transfers does anything happen before that this does not indicate In other words if I'm a parent and I wish Transfer somehow to my student does something happen before it comes to us Yeah, so a lot of the other policies And again even some conversation the first time around But a lot of the districts that we looked at or that I looked at drafted this policy regarding elementary school and in-district transfers They allowed it so their policy was much more in-depth in terms of details on how that's implemented and who does what So those districts who would have had essentially an expected transfer of students between buildings Had pretty much everything geared towards a superintendent or the administration Gear toward the meaning they were making the decision right things weren't coming the decision wasn't coming to the board In those districts who were expecting a lot of transfers so They were different there, but No, we don't have anything in terms of Well, I've personally been asked You know we don't have a policy on it yet, but you know it had a conversation, but you're right There's no procedure There's nothing to tell us that we should send them to the principal or we should send them to the superintendent or write a letter to The board for what to do. I mean we usually take advice from the administrators And if they hadn't been consulted for example would be hard to get advice, right? So is it So maybe just put some more specifics in here in terms of how requests should be sent how they're handled That be I mean, I think that yeah, I think it might just simply adding something like that the board shall act on the or shall You know act on the recommendation of superintendent or shall You know something like that if the board wants to retain authority to make the final decision But the other thing is that I mean effectively this is a this is a policy of permission, so it's saying we will do it It doesn't quite say that was is we will do it if these things are met effectively So we're we've changed this around instead of saying we're not doing it. We are doing yeah I mean, I'm not sure we resolved that either way Maybe you Ryan you have a memory of that, but it feels like if we're saying yes It's okay. I mean at the big the big caveat or the big if you want to circle one phrase in here It's student needs students needs are is a very large undefined Issue here and so it still leaves us with that subjective standard that somebody's gonna have to Way against the other stuff. So and maybe that's what we wanted, but it's pretty big hole I guess I'm concerned that we've lost the concept that it would be only an extraordinary circumstances because it's Yeah, it doesn't read that way. It doesn't read that. I think it does kind of read now like this is something you can ask for Does anyone think I just want to keep pursuing the issue that Tina Does anyone think it should be the superintendent's decision and not the board's decision? I mean, I think anything we tell we put in policy as a superintendent's decision to probably come to the board person disagreed with it Someone coming to us say they disagreed with the superintendent's decision as opposed to coming to us make a decision Honestly, I hadn't really thought about it. Well, I was just thinking how it read to me the first time wise I want to transfer my child. I'm going to the board. That's the way it reads We don't let anything like that happen straight down a process how you get the board. I'm not saying you shouldn't come to the board I think you should eventually perhaps but why wouldn't somebody else have solved this problem before I did have a similar Similar to the tuition waiver thing where right now if somebody requests a tuition waiver for 60 days I think Brian can approve it, but for longer than that Brian actually brings it to the board if he is going to recommend that it should be Approved so it might be that they make the request to the superintendent who will then Forward requests that have merit to the board for approval Either way, that's a Board making the decision though because half shot may right for whatever that phrase we want to use is Someone's going to just feel that it has merit, right? So it's coming up I think what Brian was at least nodding his head at last time when we were discussing this was give Give some more structure about what standards we're using for approving and student needs is maybe as strong as we want to be but You know this is saying it's all good as long as we can Demonstrate all of these things But the capacity the school is there the staffing will work The student has a need the transportation works and the class sizes work as long as all that happens It happens. I mean, that's why I would read this if I were a parent I think in most cases we're going to be able to do a few a year if we do that and is that is that what we want And then they stay in that and then they stay in this in the school till they matriculate from that school Which means that then we build a new capacity around that new being able to dig that new student body size moving forward And then perhaps the next year there are more coming in now some may matriculate out So but I just don't know what our what our objective is in terms of preserving the school and and Roxbury also As a community school Well, it's that should that be added in some way to the consideration We'll strongly enough about that if ten people decided from Roxbury. They wanted to go to Union There's a real problem. Well, Bridget had a that would be the just alluded to this last time we talked about this idea of the Extraordinary student needs somehow, you know that we were going to make the decision based on student need We're going to make everything up. We're going to part the waters for a student who has a syrup who has the need We're not going to we're not going to let anything stand in the way if they if there's an extraordinary student need But that's a pretty high bar and if we could figure that out because we are one district We're going to take care of students the very best we can No problem with a transfer if it really is an extraordinary need of some sort and we don't how do you define that short of You know, how do you define that? Well, we as a system might recommend transfer for extraordinary needs special ed might recommend it for something I this policy is not about that, right? That decision would be made in 18 and that would be something that the sport and honor I'm confident Yeah, and I I agree with Steve with all the points that he is making I think the I would be cautious and would would Suggest perhaps at the board think about at least in the beginning a higher standard Simply because there is a commitment to preserving the the community at the Roxbury Village School, and I I think I Think I'll say this I'm sure this will resonate with Tina as well as anybody else who's been in the classroom I think it's always easier to start off a little stronger than you need to be and back it off a little bit if you find out that that's that you're having too many requests that you Can't honor as opposed to having it be a little looser and then try to you know, like to Steve's point Oh, we have ten now. We have to make this stronger because we are we are struggling with the capacity issue That that's just something for for the board to consider because I know that of this board's Commitment to the viability of the Roxbury Village School as part of this Yes if before between the first sentence and the second sentence if we said something like In extraordinary in in some extraordinary instances the superintendent may Recommend that it is in a student's best interest to be served in a different school Then the board of school directors will consider that recommendation and decisions will consider but are not limited to etc It's good. It's things with the students. It doesn't come back to family. So that's good Did we already resolve that one? We didn't want it to be extraordinary family or student right situation I just said in extraordinary there may be extraordinary cases in which the superintendent May recommend that it's in the best interest of a child Or may find that it's in the best interest of the child too You want to use that standard? I thought wasn't what you said the first time. I'm pretty sure Maybe I'm wrong. I think the superintendent may recommend that a student Would be best served in a different school or I definitely didn't say that I said no The students needs would be it or it's in the students best interest I probably separated too fast Superintendent we're extraordinary best interest to me are two different things. Yeah, I'm well I'm saying it's extraordinary because it's very unusual. It would be a very unusual Circumstance for the superintendent to find that a child has to be served in one or you know in a specific elementary school We want to convey that that's Extraordinary not an ordinary as a board. We're saying we would do this transfer only in extraordinary search Stances if the superintendent recommended it to us on the basis of it being in the best interest of the Student and we're not going to try to preview what all those circumstances might be It's better to leave it It's like if there are extraordinary circumstances then Potentially a child's best interest would be met at this other school But you can't have the best interest separate from extraordinary circumstances Is that is that approach generally working? So then we'll bring back a draft that has things going to the superintendent first highlighting extraordinary circumstances staying focused on students not families I Think from the decisions point on that so good personally So would we like to keep it so right now if someone were to be Granted a transfer for whatever the circumstance was Would we like to keep it that they stay in that school until they move on to middle school? Or do you think it makes sense to have them just for the remainder of that academic year? No, I think I think we wanted to stay put so that we That's why we stuck at that way this time I mean, I'd like to the idea that there might be extenuating circumstances Because the extraordinary circumstance could be a short term. They could change right right. We might have room for that Any other input on this So we'll have another draft of this the next meeting and I'll label this as a third reading people okay Okay, so you also have in front of you these draft policies that are part of kind of a core governance policies for the board and that's the board superintendent relationship the board member conflict of interest and the board member code of conduct I'll talk briefly about the board superintendent relationship and then Ryan is really more responsible for the conflict of interest conduct First of all disregard the numbering Numbering things one when I draft things because we don't have a packet of policies together yet for governance policies But so the board superintendent relationship is in is a stab at redrafting that Provision that we have in the NPS policies, which is called that and Sets up the the division of labor between the board and what's delegated to the superintendent So it's a stab at redrafting it in a way that is Shorter is not phrased in the negative the way the classic policy governance policies are drafted And otherwise tries to I Guess try to trust them, you know, just Expand a little bit on the evaluation piece. So I'll start at the beginning In terms of what's similar and what's different the One the board would direct the district's operations only through the superintendent. That's pretty similar To The board acting only as an entity is certainly, you know, we talked about that at the retreat. That's a very similar concept The board supervises the superintendent and not District staff again that is also, you know, basically the policy governance model works that Working through the superintendent The board role in hiring dismissal and discipline. That's just an effort to simplify what's in the current policy Then there's the section on because the board's most important role is to create policy that part is really still a Work in progress for sure because we haven't really talked about how we're going to structure the policies in this district in the new district When I read that one, I thought well, we can't really do that one until we decide what our model of government is Well, I think we made a lot of progress towards that on the at the retreat, right? We did but you know Right, you know it all sort of fits together as it's kind of a jigsaw puzzle pieces all fit together But right we need to make more progress on what kinds of policies we envision having and I would flag under one point for You know this discretion piece this again, it's raised differently, it's because it's not using that negative phrasing from the policy governance model, but it's the same concept that the superintendent gets to interpret the policies and adopt any reasonable interpretation of the policies and that's part of the delegation of authority So that language there under 1.4 near the end the board must respect and support decisions made by the superintendent That reflect a reasonable interpretation of an existing ends or operational policy Even if the board or its members may have made a different decision That's that's basically saying if it's a reasonable way to interpret the policy it goes Do we define reasonable anywhere? That is not defined in the current policy Good question. Yeah, it's the word reasonable defined anywhere Yeah, I Got confused the first time I read that one and I wonder if we I Don't have it right now But if we want to think of different wording for the very last bit of that section because it says Even if the board or its members may have made a different decision, which When I the first time I read it I read the board has to respect the superintendent's decision Even if the board made a different decision But that's not what it's saying It's saying even if the board in the shoes of the superintendent might have come to a different conclusion It's not that's exactly what it means, right? And so I think it is different phrasing there because we don't want to say The superintendent can make a decision even if we already made a decision, which is not right Right or that we've declared some decision in the superintendent make it entirely different right stuck on this one Because the language can make it seem almost an unimpeachable decision, and I don't think we want that standard either Or maybe we do maybe we must have that standard But my sense is that we want is the superintendent to act without a bunch of second-guessing and and Negating of authority But where is the standard at which point we say it's the unreasonable is that the standard but it's no longer reasonable that That's I mean, but it's up for discussion, right? This is starting from the policy governance model, and yeah, that would be the policy governance Yeah, and in fact what you know an interesting point that you take from the policy governance model is that they say You have to really it really is any reasonable interpretation if you're thinking in the back of your mind We're just giving them discretion because they're going to do the right thing You're not doing it, right because that's like you're thinking that there's some standard that you would apply So what would be reasonable that you're not putting in the policy? So it's it isn't about they get discretion because we trust them to do it, right? It's We've said we've set the policy We've said as much as we feel like we need to say and anything that falls under that policy That's a reasonable version of it is okay because we've given them discretion to do that But if somehow they didn't follow the policy then you would be glad to do that's a difference How about my reasonable which carvers might mean like not illegal not Evidently mental illness But anything above that bar is So an example of how this plays out realities where Brian comes to us and says hey, I'm about to make a decision on something I just need a little guidance first He goes off to make the decision and we're really happy he came to us and asked us about that first And he probably is too because now he's got he's got his discretion but he's also got like kind of knows where not to go practical, but he doesn't have to do that and But sometimes if he doesn't do that He feels you think he gets burned and Brian is just a placeholder at this point because I'm not picking on him I'm saying any superintendent might feel this way so he does it because he's smart and he's and he's thinking about not storing up a hornet's nest unnecessarily, but We're saying you know don't do that You don't need to do that basically or if you do that and we give you a guidance and you ignore it And it was still reasonable Or doesn't get to come back to it. We just had a discussion about this Because we've had a discussion, but he can ignore it and we can't then spend the next meeting saying why did you ignore us? And so I'm just wondering like are we good with this? Is this really where we want to be? This is the time to have that conversation. Yeah, this is the time to have that conversation, you know That doesn't have to be in the policy at all. It doesn't have to be framed that way It is good to define the idea that when we when we delegate authority under a policy We've truly delegated it. We've truly let go of it And I think reasonable standard is that's the idea of that is we truly let go of it And we haven't held it just tight enough to be able to fight him fight him or her I would agree. However, you choose to go with this. I would simply suggest that you're clear What is truly the superintendent's work and what is truly the board's work and however again strictly or For lack of a better word at 830 loosely you want to define that It should because you do to Steve's point you want the individual to have the freedom to say This is the policy the board gave me. This is the work that I can do within the policy I'm gonna go and do this work Or conversely, this is not you know, I do have to check in or I you know, whatever the actual parameter The board is comfortable with extending Be clear where that line is or where we say now we say could you please check in before you make that decision you can be like No, thanks Right, and that would be fine. We need to stop asking in effect. So, you know, but likewise, I'd say the superintendent Shouldn't come and ask us our opinion if if the superintendent Doesn't intend to listen to that This policy I know but I'm just saying as a matter of practice You wouldn't want to have a discussion with the board who said We think you ought to do this and then you go off and do that Why ask just do it. You could say as a purely advisory Discussion I'm asking you all for your opinions I need some guidance on this but I retain the right to make this decision And I want to make that clear at the beginning that I'm gonna make this decision And I may disagree with what you advise me, but I want you I would still like to hear your advice You're my counsel I mean, I might do that I might say look I get to make the final call here, but it doesn't mean I don't want some opinions It seems politically dangerous So that's what that's the place we put someone in when we say this the only standard is that it be reasonable unless we want to say and In consultation with the board or after having heard the council the board or you know, and then then all said you're certain You rode that that autonomy and authority Do we have Model policies for these or other districts policies or the model policy for this kind of thing Yeah, is the is the carver model, which is what we have in the MPS With all the negatives with all the negatives. That's the model No, the VSBA doesn't Do this in the same way at all? It's very very different. Well, we don't have to go so we don't have to go this route Or we you know, we could but we could look at what they have for how to draw that line It's it's really not it's really different. It's really different. I mean, it's really not they don't have a policy that Outlines the categories quite the same way Because they're big into that delineation you would think they would have a description Is there I would read what they have the intent being that it's more policy by policy maybe Well, they don't have this pile I mean, this is not how they structure the policies this the concept that the carver model has The board superintendent relationship here are the limitations and here's the guy Doesn't say that just a totally different framework Can I look at orange Southwest is a neighbor of ours and they're pretty close to policy governance the way that they've structured it At least according to what I could see quickly as long as the superintendent uses any reasonable Interpretation of the board's ends and executive limitation policies Superintendent is authorized to establish all further procedures make all decisions take you know, essentially they're there as strict as it can go So if you don't you don't have to necessarily go that far, you know So you could take this and I could send this to to you and Ryan if you're interested You know you could go I Mean instead of I'm trying to think of how you could help here instead of just any reasonable I don't know somebody can help me word. Well, maybe a reason. It's really the reasonable interpretation of what so it's the policy and the board's The board's current temperament, I mean, it's really what it is It's both those things so you're taking a policy and then you're kind of taking a temperature reading of the board and saying I made a reasonable Determination based on that the question is how do we codify a Temperature-taking process and I don't know that you can do that if we really hone in on the operational policies as part of this We're talking about I mean all of that work has to be done under operational policies In terms of what how much structure do we give and I think Bridget said it really well is that you kind of have your peace You have your say when you build your policies, so You build your policies as thoroughly as you want to guide the superintendent and then you stop And if you feel like boy the superintendent really blew it on that one It's like well, let's write a new policy next time and not and you know, but until then We don't get to change it And so if we were to look at our operational policies as our hard work in this and leave the reasonable standard so that there's a There's at least at the end. There's a line that everyone can follow which is look you delegate it to me that's it I Didn't I did something reasonable under what you delegated and you were you were you didn't say anything about that So I mean think about this as budget creation time It's like it's chaos, right? If you don't and how do you create policies operational policies that guide your you don't But that's I mean you've been working on that seat that we're hoping to bring before the board a budget policy That it's not like any policy the NPS board had before that would put more Specifics into the expectation and the process Creating those expectations through a policy that says this is what we expect Do we only do that during budget building and do we not do that during other types of building? I Think you I don't I think that's entirely up to the board Because it's a very specific operational policy basically the budget policy is an operational policy I guess we could do that for adopting new policies We could have a Operational policy on that and that walks us through more carefully or any other policy We could add as much detail as we want and I think what we identified early on was that we at least have to do that for The budget policy because that one has been a train wreck and I think to your point I think you would then be able to quote-unquote limit or expand your definition of reasonability Based on the policy that you write You know so so that that could almost be the temperature taker there I mean you could you could craft a budget policy that says the superintendent shall not bring a budget that exceeds that You know you could draw the line and stand right there or shall consult or right or how to actually do it Yeah, and then the reason ability is well. It says you shall consult. You did not consult You know so it that becomes less black and white based on how you craft it. I'm getting comfortable with the standard of reasonable Knowing that it leaves a lot of work in the operational policy creation sphere for us and what BSBA's Super board superintendent relationship policy says it says a bunch of stuff like will be nice to the superintendent and his office staff Which is a good idea But to this point it says that the board directs the superintendent through written policies that prescribe the results The board wants to achieve Um But still that you're I think you I'm not I'm saying the same thing Steve that it's all about What we set out in the policies the extent of the policy is what creates Like the more detailed the policy is the more constrained the superintendent is more broad the policy is the more we're delegating or you can even just say the The way that I could even see you continuing to use the word is you're limiting the scope of reason ability You know so there's either more interpretation right or less the more we put in the we have a tighter We make the fence or the bigger we make the best is all about what we put in the policies Unless we want to have I mean if you say anything other than this reasonableness thing then you're creating a new You're creating something outside of Yeah You're you if you didn't say that you would almost be creating a Weird like gotcha category where you're like which is not the superintendent has to carry out all the policies Except we can at any time say that that's not what we want The universal claw back So we don't I don't think we want that in the Current NPS policy also in this board superintendent relationship policy, which is here in 1.5 is the monitoring piece Which we did not really get to at the retreat in terms of talking about whether that's something we see as part of the In the friends at the bottom where you've got a question. I'd substitute all mandated policies You've got everything else Right that you would say it's supposed to be monitoring on all the policies, which is well, you've got ends compliance with ends operational In other words all mandated policies plus It's an interesting point because it's not under the NPS board They don't know the things that we think of as the mandated policies weren't really in the work plan No monitoring because we were only monitoring the ends and limitations. Yeah Yeah But I would think that man because the end of your system to the goals right and the limitations were just like compliance with Some of them touched on And you wouldn't be able to do all of them once I think it would be a good idea to Thought that I have which I put in here Her discussion was if folks want some plan of monitoring to continue as part of the way the board works But instead of putting the monitoring schedule in a policy We should commit to that being part of the work plan that we adopt every every year We have an annual schedule There's a point at which we're supposed to start the annual schedule Which in theory could be may you know Started and at that point we would say like this is the end This year we're gonna do all the ends here, you know, we're only gonna do one or we're gonna you know, whatever it is We're gonna do it That's what we're gonna do this calendar included all the ends and all the Yeah, and my sense is that we couldn't do all that Didn't do like it was really hard to do it all the big problem with the ends was that before we did an end Report we were trying to define the end indicators and that was what took a huge amount of time because we didn't have indicators The limitations were pretty straightforward the review it the mandated policy thing is just a little weird because You know so Brian has to report on are we in compliance with the alcohol and drug free workplace? Does it tell us to do anything, you know or like the trans are we in compliance with the transportation policy? Yeah, what would that report look like it says that the board must systematically monitor the superintendent's compliance with that doesn't That doesn't necessarily say to me that he has to give a report on every single one of them all the time But it allows you to Do some I mean some of the things I mean, but I don't know how we would operationalize this but one one is are they being updated? Yes, like that's a thing right are things like the right having the right person to be the reporting like you know We've updated who the report person is based on turnover You know some of the other things like that that change in the policies like it's so Do we know where do we know we're keeping them up to date and how that's primarily the superintendent's job? How could how would the board sort of well in place? It's making sure that's happening Yeah, the VSBA gives us all at the end of each legislative session they tell us all the changes that will affect our policies and We should put it on our calendar to review that and then schedule Updates That should come out in you know, July or August probably every year So all that likewise, I don't think needs to be in the policy It's just part of our procedure of how we would do that and I and I like And then there's also this is a very much that Rough stab Tina also looked at this Something about the evaluation process, which is very bare bones in the current MPS policy This This language is really a departure from the Carver model because you know in the car Attendance performances the performance of the district So there you go go away and evaluate that and this was an effort to come up with something more to You know details and framework around Around the evaluation, I think the effort here was I love this I think that the effort here is to see look at the performance of the district But you also look at the process of managing district sort of the The work of the managing process which is separate from the performance outcome And they both have to be very good You know to have a high level of both and so I think that this kind of Points that idea and you've you've actually just created a detailed laundry list Which is certainly more clear than the category of Shall be evaluated on management Process, which is kind of to me to to beg to be And it's in a positive manner and preference to all those negative things I Think it looks pretty good. The first sentence is the one that comes out of Carver and it's Is it clear to folks what that means because it's it's this in the Carver model. It's a big sentence, right? It's like they it's like a mathematical equation Which is the two are equal and there is no other fact there is no other Factors variables in and this adds new variables. We want Actually hadn't thought about this but before the retreat reviewing some of the Carver stuff You know Carver would really emphasize that board's evaluations of themselves is really important. Also We don't have a policy I think That's what's now in like for 4.4 the board That whole section four is the board governance So that's what I would fall into We have done So those ones were fresh in my mind Can I ask Kind of a semantics question 1.1 the opening sentence only decisions of the full board Acting as an entity our binding on the superintendent Do we need to include full? Yes, should Does that make sense or would it just be the board? Because Are you concerned that full suggests it has to be everyone? Oh, I'm not sure a decision of the board That's not unanimous Right I wasn't sure if it was an issue or it might be a concern, but Because if you take even if you take out full the next sense makes clear This by the way that second paragraph is a It's new it is new. I think there were pieces of it in the Carver policy pieces of it in the BSBA policy and I may have even found them somewhere else, but the idea is to Actually the BSBA policy has options on this issue It's a really this is an interesting question of how much you want to allow board members to interact with Staff the superintendent and with staff members. There's actually one version of the BSBA policy that says something like, you know, the board staff Relationships or board staff communication is Encouraged, but you but the board doesn't tell them what to do Right, and that's kind of confusing because they're really We're out there talking to them about what they do, but not telling me that's dicey So we had some discussion about that on the policy committee. So this was a proposal to basically, you know try to funnel Request for information through the superintendent But that's a question. I mean you could say that board members could ask for things from staff members to And I think actually it didn't make its way into the policy Stephen Ryan and I talked about whether We might want to say something like if a board member is directing a request to the superintendent They have to copy the board chair So that the it's kind of like a check like right board chair like knows what's going on Do y'all feel like this is a reasonable approach here The idea here is that you're not prohibited from asking for something But the superintendent needs to feel very comfortable saying Mm-hmm, I give you that but that's going to take more time than you imagine And I'm not going to be able to produce that at least not in any reasonable amount of time And so if you really want that ask the rest of the board to make the motion Otherwise, it's very clear. It says you can ask but Be prepared that he's going to say no And it gives superintendent a little guidance to feel comfortable saying no or yes depending on the standard It says it's okay to ask, but he doesn't have to Work that the standard is significant, right? Yeah Which is fine just me that's basically However, it does indicate that then The full board could be asked and if the full board says yes, then the superintendent has to do it What I like is that the chair is not the second step here, right? Because it doesn't put the chair in the in the place of acting on behalf of the board Which is what we talked about So So that'll come back. Oh, it's definitely going to come back I mean my vision on this if others agree is that we're gonna have to have like a packet of them before we act on it But like it's just really important that we kind of understand that this is all in the right direction Yeah, we have to be sorry to keep them more as I think we've seen already one sort of affects the next exactly So the conflict of interest and code of conduct are pretty related. I don't know if you want to talk about them together No, we could I mean I could give a little bit of the background but yeah as we're talking about these do keep this in mind So the the board members conflict of interest is a mandatory policy required policy set forth by BSBA Both of our districts have had that essentially adopted kind of status quo in the past and then the board member of conduct Roxbury had some code of conduct stuff set off by itself The Montpelier policy has had a lot a lot of the content in The code of conduct was included in most of the BSR the board superintendent relations of policies in the Montpelier district So it's not also 4.5 So it's not new new but it is kind of all combined by itself a new policy And we did want to have a general discussion whether or not we felt that it made sense to keep these two things as separate policies Or potentially combine them into one But the so again your conflict of interest policy pretty straightforward Nothing too crazy there the code of conduct policy kind of came through fruition One of our first policy committee meetings that kind of came up, you know, does this board need bylaws? You know Montpelier had a city charter. There was this there was that doesn't make sense Do we need to essentially kind of? reaffirmed some of the things that were decided upon in the Articles of Agreement when we merged and So I reached out to VSBA to get some guidance there and like no the Articles of Agreement are good to go as they are You know, you have your board terms you have the number of people how the votes etc. I'll take them care of You can consider the Articles of Agreement your bylaws for the board but You should really have how the board is going to operate you really need to code a conduct so a Lot of the stuff again has been combined from the existing Rocksbury a Montpelier of information But then a lot of the stuff also came from VSBA in terms of their best practices So like the what we included is the appendix the declaration of commitment That is looking verbatim from VSBA's essential workbook That literally came out of their their page. So this is straight from VSBA Again, there's There's a lot feels like it's kind of nitpicky But we figured again General discussion tonight kind of get some guidance on how detailed we want to get with this If it's too over the top if it's good it gives us a structure. I'm etc. So This is what we have to present and discuss Well first of all, thank you for all the work. So I think I'd say Number two there at the top We agree to avoid words and actions that create a negative impression on an individual the border of the district so I'm not fine with the part about the individual but It seems a little constricting like for example Am I not supposed to say this meeting that I'm very disappointed as an example that the playground is very behind schedule and Parents that are upset and I'm upset too. I mean that would be creating a negative impression of the district on the border district I think that's just saying that a project is behind schedule. You're not saying like this board is mismanaging the project. Okay Well Okay, so let me just say for the cameras and everyone else. I this is a hypothetical Let me pick somebody else. I am very disappointed that the board's management of the project to redo the baseball field is well behind And I think we're dropping the ball Like to me that is not necessarily that is that's critical and meant to inspire us to take action But I am creating a negative impression of the board in the district on purpose is I Believe we need to do better So I I mean, I think this is more about like going, you know talking to your friends at the basketball game and being like I Just feel like the board is terrible. Okay, but so but you could see how There's a little to me that this infringes in a few areas on Sort of the speech rights of an electric show and I think I think we need to comb through it with that a little bit I don't I think there's most of this is fine and good, but the areas where it feels the most nitpicky are the areas where it's It's asking us to all be a team, you know all be like a one voice And I think we have to be careful about that when we're elected And we talked about this at the retreat a little bit and it's you know, I think most of this is probably just fine but There's a few of those spots that I think we have to be careful the current MPS policy says that individual members will make every Reasonable effort to promote to protect the integrity and promote the positive image of the district and one another and Never embarrass each other or the district Just I mean just say Okay, well, I think this the next sentence it says while we encourage debate and differing points of view We will do with care and respect Say something about the people can feel that's fine. He's just not gonna yell at me and avoid me I worry about being told that I shouldn't be creating a negative impression of the border And you could someone who is let's just say hypothetically I Was the only conservative member of this board and everyone else is super out there You all could use that against me because I'm creating negative impression of the board Because I don't believe y'all should be spending all this money I'm doing something like I just worry that I mean it's probably not gonna happen, but we are like So I kept to bring up my two other things we can move on or we can So that's all I have to say I'm not one of we could work with it or Did you have other points you wanted it? Well down the list. I don't know. I don't want to skip past anyone else Before anyone else when I You know The others I heard Steve say he shares that concern Yeah, I hadn't even picked up on that one, but I think that's true I was more down in section B and then also I've later on being also I have a sec. I've section B comments, too Actually, I'm thinking if even you eliminated that whole sentence that you don't like and just said while we encourage debate and differing points of view We will do with care and respect. I Mean I like what Michelle said though Michelle what Michelle said is what we should be doing We should not be disparaging the district and the board Right, we should not be doing that thing. Oh, this board is terrible. We're such a bunch of losers like that's not contact Or like at it similarly, I'm just gonna keep using this basketball game context But you know talking with other parents and like oh, yeah, the district has a real problem with you know Making as as parents. We are inclined to speak irresponsibly in social situations, but when we're on the board We have to remember that Actually, we kind of represent the district and we should speak supportively and not irresponsibly It I could not agree more, but I don't know how you express that in a way that okay So if what if we came up with language that was Less mandatory and more aspirational. Yeah More about you know just keep board members aspire to Like as a smaller example Again, and I just a home to put a little finer point because Michelle's right like I'm saying next to Brian Compaired they were speaking out board stakes like that is inappropriate. I think we all Get that but like for example, let's say the example again that you all have gotten super super liberal And I've gotten conservative and I went to a meeting of Comparance who are share my politics and are very conservative and I would go, you know, this board is out of line with up here And I want us to spend less money I think the board is way out of line with voters like that's very negative but that is to me a reason like Steve will say that's kind of a Free speech like I want to get people to run for office and change the composition do all that stuff Like that should not be seen. That's not out of bounds to me. Maybe this is one of those Felix Frankfurter or a pornography things like you know pornography when you see it Yeah, but maybe you can try to put words into it because there has to be a free speech element Where we're trying to be constructive and do what I think is right for the board without disparaging its members Okay, so in section B To be efficient and effective long board meetings must be avoided You know she'll slip that one. I mean no one likes long meetings, but some people less than others I think what this is getting at We did not make this up. This is the BSBA Pretty sure I think some of this came from Montpeliers I think what this is getting at is You should be keeping that in mind as a board member like it's not that sometimes the board might have so much work to do That the meeting is four hours, but as you're participating in the board meeting But when you read this word Someone could say well, there's seventy-four people in the audience We're not here because right there we signed the photoconics long meetings avoided y'all And that's all I'm saying like we're not gonna do like a filibuster thing here. Yeah, we're not gonna like yeah But there has to be more clarity that The reason to avoid a long meeting is one person going on and on and on and on right and I Think Bridget's point to help move this conversation along is that this could be written in sort of an aspiration You know, I think I think Bridgetz. We want to respect board members time and Yeah Even with this with this Section B1 instead of the word will aspire to or will try you know, I mean, I think I agree It's hard You know, I look at the one that says to not interrupt each other We try I mean Also, it's not like there's any punishment Well, I will say on the on the third to thank you, Brian on the third page I am asked to sign something Yeah It just says you're doing everything in your power to be productive and it doesn't say and if I don't I understand But I just worry that I hear you So also on number three the board will consider research best practice public input and financial impacts in their decision-making and I Worry is this site an exclusive list for example Becky is an expert in HR, right? She has a lot of experience in human resource issues No, that's not listed here like personal experience isn't listed In or interest of the students are not listed, right? So there's a lot of things not listed and I know we can't list everything right? So it kind of concerns me to cut it off it these top five And again, I know what you're everyone's getting at we're trying to have some basis We can't just say well today. I feel like we should move left or we go right like that's not Policies we put in friends not limited to Well this practice would incorporate someone's individual experience Okay, that wasn't clear. So thank you. Well, that's very appreciative So I only have one more but I'd like to know that I really don't comment on that many policies, so I feel like I'm getting So on the appendix that dairy was supposed to sign I Maybe this is my hang-up in that first time excellent return on investment for taxpayers Yeah, what does that even mean? I know what people are getting at like people feel like it's the amount of money Like let's say we want to spend 30 grand a student, but all of our kids went to Ivy League. That's a great return That's a hyper like but that's not what we want to judge anything by I'm not sure So I totally heard you say but This again, this is the verbatim thing right from the declaration Do folks generally want to go down this road? I mean to me that the first question is we never did this in MPS I don't know if you did this in Roxbury. We good. I was trying to get I ever signed something It was when I saw when I joined the board it was signed I have no idea if The passport members Kate came on after me. I don't know if it was brought forward again after that I'm not sure how far it continued or when it kind of came into on the rocks very board on the rocks very board I was gonna say somebody asked you to sign this when you joined this like I said There's never been a day when somebody came up to the meeting and said hey Ryan. Do you remember here's your declaration of commitment? that Has been buried somewhere in a file for a long time, but I can see the pros and cons and I think we go down there We have to have a pretty robust discussion about what's in it But I guess I have a question People think we should do this that we should agree on some principles that we have never signed What's the enforceability of it and why are we signing it? Right? Yeah? I don't think it's impossible at all. Does anyone You can't get and off the way someone's elected and says I don't think I want to sign And how do how does the board member get I mean what's the sanction is there? Can a board member be Sanctioned in some way Can they be removed from the board? I think the only thing that comes with further process is a conflict of interest Which is in the conflict of interest policy and that that is part of what's in here You wouldn't be you're signing off to agree. I mean what if Becky punches you? Yeah, there should be some kind of consequence. What if you just get so mad that she punches you like I mean obviously there are civil There is no course we don't have the ability to remove people from the board. That's what I'm asking There's no mechanism for any kind of consequence So I think so We're just outlining what we would all like Why should we have the right to? Someone from the board well I'm not suggesting we should have that right. I'm asking whether there is a mechanism to do it Right, you can get rid of one of your members Recently So we could have one, but we don't I'm not sure that we could I Don't feel the need to sign anything I think when you swipe join the board you read through them But you read through all these policies and it's up and at some level you agree to this member code of conduct I'm not sure like you're guiding light Maybe people have to sign this when they turn in their petition and if they're not willing to sign it That I suggest that we don't appendix a yeah, right second the content I have a comment. There is a reason to if there's an unavoidable conflict of interest say if your husband is An architect bidding on a project here. You need to be able to publicly In some form or manner be able to say so and recuse yourself from the decision-making do we have a process for that? I think we should sign to it. I think it should be identified in some way and Signed to it For conflict of interest, but not necessarily You think members should sign the code of the conflict of interest policy or the conflict of interest should be or the public But that they should sign the policy or that when they have a conflict they should In in And maybe this is weird to health care But any place I've worked in the last 30 years I've had to sign a conflict of interest document that in the last decade or so I've had to reveal my husband was an attorney who occasionally took cases Signed something disclosing Conflict of interest, but also that you would disclose Yes, and that you make a plan to disclose And so I you know I think if we restructure this declaration or make it a conflict of interest Declaration that would be sufficient, but if I was a member of the public, I would want to know if a member of the boards Had a financial interest in the outcome of a decision of the board So it's all true. The question is enforceability. So if the board has the authority to enforce something Then the so when you when you are when you are elected on the board We have a whole packet of policies that you can ignore One of those policies because you've been elected, but you will become but the board will simply Enforce it themselves. The question is what is unenforceable by the board versus enforceable and that that's my concern so the board can't enforce that you will Not play to the audience during a debate, and they could try I guess They can can they enforce conflicts of interest? How does the board enforce if they just we see this a lot where where Elected member will not disclose a conflict. Everyone knows they have a conflict. They don't do it Everyone's like yeah, but they have a conflict and they're still voting. Yes And how do we do we have a board of a we have a mechanism for kicking that person out of the vote? Well, we have a mechanism for having a hearing to decide There you go, whether there is a conflict of interest and if we find that there is then we would say that we find And that's that's satchitarily enforceable, I don't know Well, I think that's in here Even if I didn't sign it by the fact that it's policy it says that if there's a conflict of interest I should be disclosing it Some of the some of the language in the that is in the declaration of commitment is Maybe better than some of the language that's on the previous page And the folks on the policy committee I would just say before we jettison appendix a because of the offensive signature line We should review it because some of these things might Well, so just rework it. No, there's definitely there's definitely overlap between the two. Yeah That's what we've said. It was a little bit unclear keeping them separate documents or keeping it in the appendix So, you know if we want to scrap and I guess as that the consensus of the board the direction of the board on this is We'll scrap the the declaration Use some of the better language and then come up with just a general code of conduct I do think I mean I I just want to say that I think both be one Standards And I'm gonna say see commitment to the work of the school board You know that these things are important But they should be in the policy that we should be We might not be able to enforce them, but we should be monitoring working on improving for example the degree to which we Have equal participation in a meeting and avoiding people dominating a discussion and avoiding playing to the audience And that we should be openly. I think I candidly discussing What it means to be committed to the work of the board what it means to be a participant in committee work and to come to meetings And to do work outside of meetings Because that's that's kind of where the rubber hits the road Bridget, can I have an awful last meeting further? Yes, the chair's permission I I'm gonna go back a Step because I actually think it might be useful to sign it not good I would take out the sentence about agreeing to abide by it But to sign it indicating that you've read it and that it might be worth For each new member who comes on The chair should pull this out of the binder and be like you really I really want you to Read this and and show that you've read it But I might say that's part of procedure. We've discussed a long time ago what we do for new board members Yep, who knows what we do so that might be part of the Procedure for new members is to say to every new board member We're gonna for sure take out these three policies Whatever they might be and say we'd like you for sure to read these these are our Expectations read it sign it return it to the superintendent So that we know that we so that when I later say You know Tina you've got to stop doing X and you say well, I didn't know I wasn't supposed to Just though my last one is the first bullet just seems a little hokey Recognize that a board members responsibility is to see that schools are well run, but not to run them It's not really something I'm really We've talked about all this other stuff That's just In the appendix say the first thing about is the thing Peter objected to Which I don't think I object to but I want to be clear Basically this goes back again to things we learned at BSBA about there's really two things we do One is we take care of the students the other is we take care of the taxpayer basically for the arm and The idea here is that we're gonna always do what's in the best interest of the students, but always balance it with Getting a really good return on on the dollar we spent so you know That's not really codified anywhere in terms of the actual mission of a school board member I don't think like I don't think that says that in state statute about why we're being elected and if that really is our Mission statement for each of us individually our role You know, I don't know but that's what this is effectively saying and that's what we hear over and over again And I think that's what this is attempting to say here is don't forget that this is your role as a board Yeah, is to do this thing which is look out for students and look out for taxpayers So that's it. That's all I just don't know how to word it any better all some things But it's the term would return on investment that bothers me. I don't it's a finance term. It is our lives It's it's it's not the right wording. I mean, yes, I believe we should be looking at I believe we should be counting paper clips I do like I want to know where every dollar is spent and we are accountable for that But to think of like these kids as a return on investment. So like do we measure them when they're 24? Yeah Really like you may have a class of kids who are just not that great not that many go to college Well, all them go to Votek or become you know, and like that's a great return on investment Which taxpayers think that's good which don't like who we talk about like just a But yes, we should be conscious of all our decisions how we're spending taxpayers money But that's ROI is not the term that I'm comfortable with But I agree with Steve right those are the people we are serving not just students, right? We're serving all taxpayers Actually, I would even argue we're not even serving all taxpayers. We're serving all residents of up here There are people who don't pay taxes, but still Was that all a discussion at all helpful to the policy committee? We can expect a good long conversation on this one Okay I would also just add the I've used up all my words for the evening Don't say that you don't have any Okay, so we also head on for a second reading substitute teachers fiscal management budget Execution volunteers and work-study students those were really only on for second reading and not adoption So I have a comment about the substitute teachers all right and that is it says nowhere in here that you have to have a background check and You did say that for volunteers and I think you should say that for substitute teachers. Isn't that a law? Covered in another policy Well, there's no I mean it does say so in volunteers. It says you have to Anybody who's in a teaching position? I mean, there's anyone who is has unfettered access to children at any time must can only do so with a background check under which policy Right, but I'm saying we don't state it under state law state law We don't have to because if you are substitute teacher It is state law that if I put you in front of a classroom You have a background check and the only reason it says specifically for volunteers is because you are not a teacher And so I have to do that for you. I'm not hiring you and so I'm not paying you But if I'm gonna give you unfettered access to children, you do have to have a background check If I have a volunteer who's in the presence of an appropriately background checked Educator or member of the NPS who's an NPS employee. I don't need a background check for that So it's state law, which is why it's not stated for substitute teacher. Okay, as long as we do it. Oh That is if you recall and I'm sure you do Last year's Act 166 debacle Was certainly around the fact that I was one of and my colleague Laurie Gossens who's in the room was another who said, uh-uh I'm not I don't care that I'm holding up your money. I don't care that I'm and I did but the principal was I Don't care that you're not getting your money This person right here I don't know that he has a background check and I'm not going to release public dollars For a public school student to go into a private pre-k if I don't know that every single person in that private pre-k Has been appropriately background and not only it lights that it was the same kind of thing like all of a sudden because when this became law Background checks did not go through with any Regularity and that I remember that first year a backup of background checks and you had all these teachers already hired and nobody had so yes, that is Done and done Quick question process question When we hire teachers, of course, we do the background checks are they rechecked So we don't know no, it's what lawyers in right Relicited yes, yes, yes, thank you Thank you for reminding you Good question Anything else on those four policies So, can I be clear that since and for those who are Following along TV if you go to our website Mpsbt.org and Go under Montpelier board of school commissioners and go to mr. SD policies There is a web page called policies in process And all of the policies that we are working on are there in their entirety and can be reviewed and Comment on the public and if anyone is having trouble accessing them for any reason They should certainly feel welcome to contact me in the office at 2 2 3 9 7 9 6 or Brian at mpsbt.org And I'll be happy to get you a copy of any policy electronically hard copy or otherwise That's my word Five two five two So that'll be substitute teachers fiscal management budget execution volunteers and work-study students. Yep Class-sized policy the will that change to show Sure, do we do that wrong? I thought that was in my notes It was in the notes to change Shall Sorry, I thought that that was across the board. Sure. Well, no, no, it's across the board changing shells to will Okay, those to show got it So could I ask for clarification for this but I tried to figure that out from the notes But you weren't I wasn't at the meeting so the I'm just curious for a brief explanation of the multi-grade k4 elementary. I remember why It was a Roxbury thought about that. So where are we now on that? That it's by classroom, but I like right So we Laurie and I spent a lot of time on this and tried to run as many numbers to reasonably account for how best to support the diverse Numbers that we could potentially see in Roxbury including a class Including the great cohort that could have as few as zero. Yeah, and as many as say What were we thinking Laurie like 10 or 12 right? And so we decided instead of doing it by grade we would do it by classroom and With the caveat that no teacher will have more than two consecutive grade levels per classroom So this top portion here is simply for The one right here is simply for a Roxbury Village school So in the k4 school the minimum average number of students per classroom Would be eight Optimum we're saying is 10 to 12 and in order to account for every mathematical possibility We're doing less than or equal to 40 which we feel Satisfying any permutation and the way that we will do this to satisfy both Reasonability and educational outcomes is that no teacher will have more than two consecutive grade levels per classroom So for example you could not one two three, okay, and that was really put in to replace this Because we didn't feed we felt that in order to in order to support the most a Good policy with a lot of viability for a smaller school Rather than doing it by grade because Lori and I just could never get around how to do it by grade With the numbers as as we were projecting them like it would not it just simply wouldn't work And I think it was lawyer said what if we just do it like like physical classroom Yeah, and that'll actually make all of these numbers work So that was the rationale behind making that change on the back page Third paragraph, I would like you to consider some Pray a phrase at the beginning of the last sentence that starts the principal has See where I am. Mm-hmm. Yeah, okay. Would you consider? The following phrase after considering online Platforms and dual enrollment options the principal has a discretion to approve these courses That's a pretty big change there after considering What and now so here are my two points and I did talk to that that All you're saying is considering After considering online platforms and dual enrollment options in other words I'm just saying Actually, I will say that we are doing great at this the Percentages are up. I think we are doing this now And so I actually did stop in to talk to Mike about this because I didn't Want to say anything indicated. I didn't think he was doing a great job. I think he is I just think that it's The reason I thought about it was we haven't always done a good job at this And I thought maybe writing it down would help us You know, I mean, I don't mind considering anything I just don't know what are the things we should be considering, you know, is this this this is a this is a narrow list based on I think up a Value or a priority of that we should we should be Doing more of this I'm not opposed to doing more that but I'm concerned that are we just singling these things out and I haven't had a second to Think about what other things should we be considering so that we're not Making a special point on maybe one or two things out of five or seven we should be considering I don't know but I do think this is a value statement that we throw in to a document that's Maybe has a few value statements in it, but you know, I but I'm just saying that I mean I think the idea is to give it some some numbers here and I don't know I mean, I'm not opposed to it, but I'm opposed to it until I have a chance to think about what other Things we would want to consider to I'm also not opposed to doing a broader after consideration of meaning Yeah, consider something before doing this so One concern I have in terms of the time We don't have to adopt it next the next time, but it's um, this is the third reading and And before we you know There was a process of getting input from all the principles on the language that we brought to the first reading And I'm reluctant to change it and adopt it without having a chance to go back to the principle involved and get some input on the changes because You know, that's that was part of the development of the policy And that's the person I think who would have the most Input from the From the leadership team side So I think if we were going to make a change that I would want to at least do that step first What others I think that's appropriate So are we directing the principle to do something with that statement? Yeah, if we had this other language We are and that's kind of stepping outside of our realm in terms of how we're supposed to be interacting with staff and the granites in policy, but still I'm gonna guess you could say our policy is limit other staff members also besides just a superintendent, but It feels a little bit more heavy-handed in terms of telling somebody else besides the superintendent What to do or how to do it would it be helpful to have something broader to the extent that the language Could be proposed to Mike after considering other alternatives. I Mean I get the spirit where you're trying to go with this Yeah, you know and so that it's not because this also goes to kind of Steve's point before about I guess and Michelle's too about the reasonability of the Interpretation of the policy. So if you're looking to be less heavy-handed perhaps You know Mike might consider Whatever I just said after thoughtful consideration of alternatives So therefore it's not just a hey, I've got discretion to go below the minimum the bar is that You know and however, it's reasonably construed I considered these alternatives and For this reason and this reason this reason it didn't necessarily fit in the mission or values or how about that because then Kind of gets to what you're thinking about, but it also doesn't say you have to think of these two things as well Would that be? That said your timeline is a reasonable question to And Ryan usually in policy, we don't even refer to the principle Because we refer to the superintendent We could just delete that whole sentence, but I think we've deleted the sentence that would really change the meaning of the policy We're trying to specifically say you can't bring the minimum average below well, I thought the sentence before that said that Yeah, I'm not sure the second sentence is clear enough to To say it's okay if the minimum average drops below okay in that content area any other comments on this so we can Reaction about Proposed language that I have two proposals there after considering online platforms and new enrollment or after considering other alternatives I mean I prefer the more general language. I think We'll get some reaction and Back on Procedural do you want to try to get the in district elementary school transfer policy on for the 11th? Or do you want to wait for the second and I'm okay either way I think I could really come up with draft for just you guys think you'll have a chance to Go through some iterations in the next week. So you'll need it by Which is two days from now You want to shoot why don't we shoot for the second? Let's let's keep it Okay, that's helpful Thank you for all your hard work Tidy meeting The motion to adjourn