 Yeah, I got it. I can. Yeah, I think I just heard we do not have a form to take an action recording in progress. Yeah, but I should be here. Okay, but in the meantime, we can still have discussion around the scope of work. Yeah, people's hearts content. Okay. So I mean, I would love just to. Kristen, do you want to do just an overview of the process that you had with Nathan? Sure. Yeah, it was a little difficult here. So yeah. I mean, at the outset, I would just like to thank Nathan for. Just accommodating our, you know, our collaborative review process and landing on what is before us this evening. We read Amanda and myself met with Nathan two times, which again kind of got us to the, to the final draft that we're looking at this evening. You know, we spent a fair amount of time just having some larger conversations around community engagement and how they looked differently in our two different communities and really just brainstorming around, you know, effective strategies given, given those differences and, you know, adjusting timeline, given, you know, that our approval process has been a little more long-winded than intended and also making a change in the timeline to accommodate more discourse, you know, among the board facilitated by Nathan, you know, once we have, you know, a draft final report in hand to really talk about, okay, now what and what we do with this from here. So those were kind of the bulk of which what we, what we talked about across our two meetings and then just arriving, you know, Nathan provided us a contract and we're here tonight to really just any final review and comments on the scope of work. We have a contract to approve, which I think my understanding is ideally that's also, you know, going to be on the table this evening. And then, yeah, another piece that did come up is just our committee makeup and which board members want to participate as core committee members. It's a bit of an undertaking. So just want to identify, you know, who has the will and the interest and capacity to play that role and be sitting at the table with community members, including youth in our communities. So that is also up for discussion this evening. But again, I just want to really thank Nathan for the super collaborative inclusive patient. Yeah, support as we arrived at what I think is a really fabulous scope of work. It's a pleasure working with you. As always. Yeah. I think Jim etiquette. And really, those discussions, the contract with a scope of work that you haven't been essentially three layers of stuff in black text is original. I just want to say that the start out in non gold, the first round the. Especially. The second. I was trying to represent content. The discussions that we have. With. I'm wondering if we're a little bit in a waiting pattern for, Oh, there's Amanda. Well, I'm going to get settled. Do you want to, or could you just give a quick overview Nathan while we're in kind of a holding pattern a little bit. Now we're on the whole pattern, but we'll give Amanda a chance to get settled to. I didn't have a couple questions. There you go. Yeah, go for it. Go for it. This was to. Okay, yeah. So I was looking at the vision. Work. And in that, we're going to use this. If I'm strictly thinking about the contract and negotiations and what's going to be the roadmap defined in the context. So we'll use the scope of work as this is what we expect. This is what we're going to. I don't want to use the wrong word but hold you to that right. And, and this is what's defined so the small, I'll start with a small thing. On page three of the top, it says I'm assuming that says in my opinion. I felt kind of, well, this is a scope of work that we're going to go by. So instead of the fact saying that, you know, this is my opinion. We should agree to something. This is what we are agreeing to, so then it shouldn't be. So this was to speak to that. This is what I was saying was, as in terms of around process for the committee. This is a committee of the board to do this work. And so the board members and other members of the community. So in that writing essentially asking questions. Yeah, and then my point was that, yeah, let's just, and then close it out. And that's okay with everybody. So this is a process question. And I think we may encounter some of these in the future. The board has many things in front of it. And defined calendar of activity already. In this case, so I've proposed a community of a pretty broad community. And so if we wish to recruit members to that committee. Have the board approve them. So that would be all happening. And we'll be efficient. If you are going to ask those prospective, meaning of this to address the board. Also that could happen. But you start to time that out. Take it from here, especially for multiple. We should, we should be so lucky that there will be multiple candidates for. So. The question might go, you know, today does an example we have. For board members. That's a form. It may be that some of the business of moving this project forward happens in this way, as opposed to sort of the normal. I don't. I have a dog in the fight. In this particular thing about who's on the community. But you all know. That's a good question. And we could, we could leave it as, you know, we could decide at that time. I was just, it just, it just. Another thing on page four. We're talking about rock theory engagement. Again, it's more think strategies. I couldn't find anything that. Finds what that is. So I think that way to page four, you said. Page four. Okay. Think that in the original proposal. So what I did was I took, took my, I think the original proposal. I think we're talking about the original proposal. I'm not a very good speaker. I think we should present the four. That aspects. Noted to acknowledge. Jerry and Brian. Because I. On. My ideas. Ask for anything. So I think that's. That is an artifact. Yeah. Thank you. Yes, so in the original proposal. And as a curiosity, we've listed out, you've listed out this about all these things in that engagement, right? This is what it's going to look like. It's not defined and maybe that gets defined, but who is going to do those. So, it is. There's lots of things in there, right. So it's so that it's a similar that is discussed earlier. Basically. Some of the core of this is an idea that committee. That process, the active going through this process brings us all together. And then asking of the asking of this, yes, on page. Which to that. Which to. Okay, so, So, ideally, if, for example, that one, really, that would be making the time, whether that's really not sure. So many members to cross over. So the, my intention is to share that work because then the committee, as I envision it, the people who serve on the committee can have a useful leadership will be resources for the board. Even after this process having formed relationships. If that, you know, if our vice group kids are not able to. So. Part of what happened in the negotiation with those guys. And the train for those every more time with this process for me to work with the board. And so that means that the lift. The potential. Yeah, so, so that ties into that. That's where I was confused. The interviews that you're talking in those two. That's the strategy used to get those interviews. Several. Five years to engage. And also the rock spirit amount failure ratio is way out of that. It's a question that has to be so good. Because that, that was a, that language was inserted after our first group. I mean, I think that this representation and walks very is pretty ambitious. I'm not super confident that there's going to be consistent committee representation from individuals. I have a feeling that there may be a group groups of people sharing in it. And I don't, I don't, I don't feel like the interviews is going to be how we get a lot of information and I had no problem with it being more. I do think that I have no problem with it shifting more closer to the population, actual population numbers. I do think I will be reaching out to people in Roxbury. To do as much as I can possibly. But I don't see people participating. I don't see people having that consistent participation. Or if you say that three non pillar members, one week it's easily. Give us the thing that we want. So I want to speak to that. I want to speak to that. I want to speak to that. The second point is, is, is saying a five adult community to us. So those 10, 4060. Yeah. And so, so in one of the thing it's, it's as well maybe to change that language for the second bullet point too. Yeah. I just want to ask Crispin actually wants to add something to that. It's, it's tricky because a lot of the voices are really muffled. So I'm, I'm not getting full, complete thoughts. Unfortunately, which is making me really wish that I was there in person, but. I mean, kind of coming back to Jim's original question. I think the concern was, is that the committee representation by Roxbury members was. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, the population ratio between the two towns. Is that right? Yeah. I'm just raising it as a question because I think it, it kind of. At least passively gets to the question of. Is this a visioning process for the whole district or. Is this a process with a large focus on. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Part of this. And. Yeah. If you've got a committee. Yeah. I mean, I assume we're going to want one more member from Roxbury. Got a committee that. Is. Is not representative of the, the town. Yeah. The town realities. Are you going to get a resolve? Especially if. Both towns are going to buy it. I would just say that. For me, it's putting a value system into the conversation that we need to have about Roxbury and not about the RSBA building itself, but about the community from how we're going to live from the discontent from what you brought about, like people feeling that, but there's. Two different communities. And by putting this together, we're acknowledging the fact that there's. An equity issue. Doesn't matter if we have more people here than there, there's an equity issue in the realities of Roxbury. And by. Attempting to add more voices, which is what we need. We are actually doing the work. What are we going to get it, but we're attempting to bring that voice in. So I think that is important when you have an equity, you have to at least attempt to try to bring. More people are in superior than live here. Because we don't have the purpose. We don't have currently the participation of Roxbury. So this is like. An attempt to fill that equity gap. Because the committee is not itself the one only doing the work. There's like all the service. There's like the work that we're going to be engaging in creating those phases. And bringing together all those conversations forward. So the committee is not the only voice. That is going to be building this. Right. It's like all of the other work that trickles into that. But in my opinion, putting that effort and say, and not counting it's not a matter of. Who has the more students and was the more families, the matter of. We have an ecosystem. And we need to at least attempt. To ensure that that voice feeds into the work. Because as a district, we are going to be deciding division for everybody. So we can have 10 people decide first to. So. I think they, thank you. On the school board, it's prescriptive. How many seats are held by each community. We could change this to make it prescriptive. In this contract. And then, you know, potentially face. Permanent vacancy. We could soften the language on the adult piece. To seek to include. Which allows us. The. So I want to answer saying that. And then I also want to circle back to indicates comment about. What will function. If we don't. And if it was a certain that. We need consistent participation by community members. Or. And. That might be true. My proposal. Including a larger committee. On the. Assumption that we will not get consistent participation. And therefore what I'm seeking is, you know, if we have five students on the committee. And we get three at a time. We're free next time. We're free the next time. But it's not a consistent group. Not making the assumption that any group is more. However. At the product of any single meeting. Ideally we'll reflect voices from students. Versus from an adult school. And so. I'm. Baked into the post design of this committee was an assumption that. In real life. We will not get consistent participation in the. The alternative is we have a committee of nine, for example. And then when two people show up, we'd have no students. Right. So that to me that represented a more significant risk. To. The integrity of the process. I completely agree with that. I actually read that I like that aspect. You mentioned that this is the reason why the committee is big. We understand the committee is big, but this is. And I appreciate that. My point was that. Not necessarily consistently in terms of. Two people not shown up for this meeting. And then. Another two people's not shown up for that meeting. My point was that. There's a committee of 15. That's it. 15 show up. Because we said three from. And two from. Three from. Every time show up, but every time it's. Different three, but some other. So we can't do that. Because we're saying that, hey, we need to have to ask for the people. And we couldn't even get those two. So. So we're saying that, oh, out of those four, every kind of a picture. Oh, and that's different, right? So that's what I was. So. To my. My intent and my interpretation. That I wrote is that. We will seek. By fixed members of the committee. If it, if, if Jim and Brett were students. Students. And it became evident that because of Jim's. Wrestling career. That he was not able to make. We might. We might then seek to. Make a permanent change to find someone to. Take that seat, but I do agree that we. Ideally, we want. The committee has formed in the next month. To remain consistent, even if they're. Participation in any given meeting. Yeah. Yeah, I just didn't want us to lock into, we, we said to. Yeah. So, but given. I appreciate that. And given what I just said about. You know, if it becomes evident, but there's a sort of persistent. Structural barrier to Jim. Yeah. Yeah. But it does raise the point that that should theoretically come before the board rather than. I just call somebody I know and say. We need you to step in. Put the phone. I'll try to be even louder. Okay, great. Yeah. Volume is helpful. Yeah. I mean, I would just. I would just piggyback on what Amanda was saying. I mean, I think that. The two, three split between Roxbury, Montpelier in terms of committee. You know, representatives was, was intentional in, in response to. You know, prevailing trends are that we tend to hear less from. Roxbury residents in terms of, you know, weighing in on process and policies and decision and showing up to, to. To board meetings. And that. That we were trying to kind of backfill for that really and get that, get that representation at the table. So I, yeah, I mean, I would be interested in maintaining, maintaining that, that ratio. I think that, you know, we. And kind of our last meeting had the discussion around, you know, we out how do we address the elephant in the room around the RVS building and its use and. They're being community. Concern fear and anticipation of school closure and that, you know, kind of as the process moves along, we'll have to figure out, you know, when we're in how to pull that conversation in. But that's, you know, a bit, you know, and I think generally going kind of way back where I think we really sort of reframed what this visioning process was about. After the rocks, after the board meeting in Roxbury in July was about that we can't really make any decision about the RVS building until we've kind of done this bigger, broader, grander visioning work as a district. And that that would form the use of all facilities going forward, whether that's, you know, concerns about Main Street middle school and its capacity. It's concerned about RVS and its ability to be, you know, to be effective, you know, but that we needed to do this, this grander, broader work in order to inform facilities decisions. So yeah, so going back to the two, three split, that was, you know, kind of the intentional reasoning behind that was to get more Roxbury voice at the table. I'm actually quite optimistic, you know, that we'll be able to do that. And that we will be able to engage Roxbury, you know, folks in the community. I feel like even just since I've joined on the board and, you know, doing a lot of talking to people, I think people are really interested in, in talking. They just haven't really necessarily seen themselves as part of the process much like there hasn't been much of a really clear, direct invitation. And I think it's really, really clear, direct invitation. And now that that's being put out there, I think more, I mean, I'm having really meaningful conversations with people on the regular about our schooling and our district and our kids current learning experiences. So I feel like the voices are out there. It's just a matter of us kind of mining them and, and by having a couple of different, and I think, you know, we also thought a lot about this, you know, committee makeup in terms of this is also about relationship building between the towns. It's not just going to be Roxbury, you know, committee members that are interviewing Roxbury people, but it's Roxbury community members also interviewing Montpelier people. And so that we're having kind of this community exchange is really built into the process. Yeah, no, that all makes sense. I just wanted to flag it as, you know, always like representation that's, that's not equal to population and other contexts, you know, like Congress. Mm hmm. I'm just thinking. I'm taking a class. Data. This is one of the things that are coming up. So I can send you a really nice life that I'm learning about. Um, I wonder if you will help to put in just a line around. We will evaluate the process. As we move forward in case there needs to be some changes. So that you have the flexibility to be able to go back and say, well, this is not working. We need to break things the way the community is working. And I just want to circle. Sorry. I like that. I was looking for looking at the original. Your question. Jim. Under for success. Yeah. Under number four successful proposals. Um, successful bids that will be considered for the contract will include number one, a proposal for the makeup of the committee and ideas for recruiting committee members from throughout the MRPS learning community. Community and Roxbury in particular. And so that is, that is what generated in the original proposal and now in the scope of work, the explicit call out. On my part for. Here's the Roxbury. Here's my Roxbury. Yeah. I just wanted to flag it. And also, you know, something that I think could be raised. If there are months earlier. What comes out of this. So let's talk. You know, that's the, to me, that's the meat. Or that's the. That is the highest stakes. Piece of your comment. Which is that you're identifying. The risk that the final product. Might be tainted. By. The process, right? Yes. Or it might be. Perceived. By certain people who may not pay attention to it. Sure. And then it gets to a final point. And then they say. It's not going to. Yeah. So I think that. It's a good point. I think it's worth. So. I was thinking. So we have the school board. We have this committee, which is a committee in the school board, but made up of. Some representation of the community. And then we have this process, which will be taking input from the community at large. And the committee is going to be. Describing and reevaluating the process as we go. And trying to execute on this. And reporting back to the board. So. The committee is. A filter and. A little bit an author. Right. But it's not. You know, the board is still the board. Right. The board is still going to be the ones accepting the report and taking actions based upon it. There are members of the board on the committee who can, if I were really off track. Or even somewhat off track. Could say. We need to change this process. And so I think that to me. My response. In August. We're, we're such a critique to be made with me to say. This is the structure of. This arrangement. This is how the process went through. And so if. If there are. Complaints or critiques. Those should be. Lodged with the board because the board had hands on and eyes on throughout. And so I think, and I think we need to make that so. Right. That's our. And I would add that. We need to be very clear through the process. Of all the. Points of input. People can have. So that will be the answer. It's like here all the way. So we did a call out. And there was a. It's good to identify the list. Yeah. Have the mitigation started even to me. When I, when I think about it. The. As Amanda said, we are, we're collecting input from the entire community. So that's, that's the first line of. Defenses wrong word, but the first, first response, right? And the second is, yeah, the makeup of the board, who is going to take the action is representative. The people and the population. So just because the committee is made up of this. But, but I agree that that. So that we are all aware. This is what it is. We feel prepared that this. We're okay with it. So I'm, I'm personally okay with the committee's makeup, makeup because of the other things that are going to support. Yeah. No, I'm too. I just wanted to play. Right there. Right there. Yeah. The first thing someone's going to look at. I was just going to ask another question. Well, I think that the. To Amanda's. Proposal that we. State. At least in this meeting. Which admitted. That we. Are open to evaluating the process. As we go. Yeah. No, I'm too. I just wanted to play. Right there. Right there. And yeah. The first thing someone's going to look at. Maybe sufficient. And I can. No, I was just going to ask another question. Well, I think that the. To Amanda's. Proposal that we. Are open to evaluating the process. As we go. I think that the board might, might ask if the board members. Is that we. If we are at a point like that. We're changing the scope. We're changing the approach. We name it. And we check in. To decide. Committee. Is this something we need to bring to the board? Is that a, you know, is that a significant enough. Deviation. Or is that. We're still within. You know, many of these things I tried to write with some flexibility. In terms of implementation. But that is something that I will try to keep my eye on. And I'll be. Asking. Board members sitting on the committee to. Apply that lens. I think. You know, like. The rigidity is in the outcomes were like, you have a plan. It's going to use the actual outcome that we need. I also just want to check that is. I have to go to feed my kids and do a training. So. I was wondering if you have some language in there to. To. Follow the change process. Okay. We will have a change process. To. There's not one. Right now. Maybe in the contract. Let's make sure you're right. I think it's important to have a lot of. A lot of language that allows us to be flexible with our process. It's flexible with our expectations while being consistent with. A vision. And in the outcome. Because I think that there's going to be a lot of. We have. We cannot predict the future. We can't predict what. The. And then it is going to do anything. I think. I think if we. Stress that we are trying to. Build relationships between these two. Communities and maybe we put language there. Many members from Rocksbury are going to explicitly be interviewing people in Montpelier and vice versa. It can sort of take some of that. Give a lot of flexibility because. I'm really looking forward to. Communicating with people in Rocksbury, but I have concerns that I don't have opportunities to communicate with people in Montpelier. And I feel like. I want to represent everyone as best I can. I don't have those relationships. So. I don't mean that just from a very personal perspective, but I hope that this process will. Build relationship, whatever the outcome of the vision. Whatever the outcome of RBS. The district. Will be. Will be one district. And we don't have relationships. We'll have prices. Yeah, that flexibility. I felt like it was built. However, I just wanted to know if we should have a change process. Some kind of call out. That if it needed. If something needs to be changed, that's significant. What's the process? It's. You asked like, Hey, should it come to the board? Or not? Like who's going to make that decision? That decision. I think that needs to be in there somewhere so that. So that we can say, yeah, that, you know, we changed it, but we followed that process. And this is what happened. It could be as simple as, yeah, any, any significant change. Would require a board approval or would require an approval from two members of the committee. That are board members or something like that. Right. So it could be as simple as. Under. Let's see. Three. For the page methods and practices. I call out a monthly 16 minute call. Or meeting with the board and administrative leadership. With board and administrative leadership. Not the whole board, but could be living in the gym. Or could be designates of the board. Part of support. There's all that is pending items. New business. This is sort of a. The clerk of the works model from. Architecture practice. What's pending? What have we resolved? What are the questions? Third ballpoint. Seventh. Six or seven full point. Make process changes findings and participation. Visible. So that is not a process. A change process, but it is a commitment to make changes to the process. So we could. Elect. To assert that change process is that. We make a proposal from the committee. And that has taken up. The monthly call. So. Can I add one? But if the committee proposes something. And then they need. I know. I know. You said no. They say yes. And the. I might change that method. To. Board. That's. Right. Because. I don't need to assume that it's Jim. I also don't know. I think that. I'm assuming that. So what I'm going to do. I'll. I'll. Then. Send that back to the group I've been through. Where. I'm on the. Cristin. Jim. Whatever we've just decided tonight. You're not. Yeah. That's approved. No, that's, yeah, that's approved. So are we making a motion to approve this contract and then the changes? Yeah. Where does it cost? And then you can give Christian and Rick the power to make this. I don't know if that needs to be, I think if the motion is to approve the contract pending the changes discussed, then Jim would just need from a contractual standpoint Jim would just need to sign it at the board chair. Okay. Okay. I'm going to ask a couple questions and I'm not obviously any stretch of imagination. Reading contract documents, a couple of things came to me or jumped out at me. Page one. 1.3 in the middle there. It says the consultant will not use, I think everyone else you said, build our score just. I'm just creating the new version of the state. 1.1. Because there's no mention of what. The last. It could sound like a lawyer these days. The last line. It says the client. And again, we're not defining. I think you've got a new helper at your. Unfortunately, I have to. It's very similar. This looks similar. Okay. Okay. No, I did. No, I did. Okay. So we're still in 1.3. Yeah. Again, I skim through it. I mean, I've seen it. But what else we could do here after just say build more. Again. Again. Yep, exactly. Yeah, I was mentioning that the. And this is just a question. Maybe I've missed it. Yeah. There's a contract specifically say that. That you're going to provide the services and. Entrada, which are satisfactory. So. The satisfactory part is probably not. Well, it's so 1.1 services. The school district has engaged bill to provide consultants. As described in the end of the day, because we've worked for the duration of describing. And then later on. I know for terminating. Either part of me terminate that's broken free. So. So. You're looking, you're seeing something that says to the satisfaction. An acceptability. So this is interesting. And I think I'm okay to add something like that. I don't have it to me here. You know, the pickle there is. I submit. Right. I submit a report draft. Get feedback. Based on feedback submitted again. And the district says this is unacceptable. You know, there's a. I don't know what the outcome is going to be. I just can bet that there are going to be. Groups of people that either like it or don't. And I don't know how to. I don't know how to. It's a hard one. Cause there are just some pickles involved in the solution. That are going to be. I don't know what the outcome is going to be. I just can bet that they're going to be. I don't know how to. What would. What would constitute. The approval of the district. So, so it's not that the decision that. Make is, is whether it's satisfactory or not. That's where it's going to be some members of the community may not. Like that decision. We're talking about the contract. We're talking about vision process and what the, what. If the end product. And so typically, and again, I'm not a lawyer and this may not be applicable. I just thought that typically the contact that I've seen. Has the language in there that, Hey, this needs to be. Satisfactory acceptable at the end. The end product needs to be. And maybe there is some legal definition of that with enough. Flexibility that. What satisfactory means. Not the outcome. Well, in the sense that Nathan's not going to hand us a stack of post-its. Yeah. Here's my, here's my report. Yeah, that's my report. Hey, we're going to write a report. Yeah. Needs to. I think you have something to hear about. Like. I would ever say that. I don't know that I said. Let me, let me. I'm trying to open up. Yeah, I mean, we're talking about contract things, right? We're all going to work together and it's going to be a great process. So, so that's not the point. Yeah. We're talking about contract things, right? We're all going to work together and it's going to be a great process. So, so that's not the point. I mean, Yeah, or if 1.1 we talk about services. 1.1 is where we talk about services. Builders is going to provide services to provide services and improve data satisfaction. I mean, I would. I would say I would act. Because this problem. If we, if the committee decides not to do anything, or we don't have to make it back. You know, like. So that's like. Adding that. I think, you know, I think. Yeah. Yeah. This is what I mean, we're seeing the process is, is we're going to get feedback and based on the feedback. That we're going to write report. If we don't get the feedback, the reports going to reflect that. And that is satisfactory report. But then for him, that is. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So two, two comments. One. If. The services I'm provided were not acceptable. Likely that would be evident. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Process and we need to termination conflict resolution. I don't have course. Right. It could be that I do fine. And then in the last two weeks, I decided to send you posted notes, which has been consistent with past behavior. In one point, one of the contracts. Like. Second services. A duration described there in a deliverable, you know, what the wording be. We're going to have to. Four minutes. We guys vote on this. Good. Let's get some language and it'll be done. So I've made the other changes. Okay. Let's, let's have a quick vote. Do you want to insert this language? Cause right now it's not in. Yeah. I'm okay either way. I do not have. In there. Yeah. I'm okay. I just, I just thought I liked it. I've seen it. The contract. That's amazing. All right. Let's make a motion. Okay. All in favor. Hi. Hi. Great. We have. Thank you. Thank you. Yeah. Appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.