 at 6.05. And as you all realize, we had an appeal come in, a complaint appeal come in. So I've arranged, that's why we have a different agenda. We arranged the schedule so that we could accommodate Emily and then sort of focus on getting our work done for the last half. And that way, hopefully we can kind of get through the things that we need to do on our agenda. Open it up to public comment, but it doesn't look like we have any of the public here. So unless anybody objects, we are going to go into executive session for the complaint appeal. So I'm sorry, Orca. That means you just got yourself going. I moved to enter executive session on an appeal hearing. We have a second. I second that. Seconded by Sarah. We have that. Chelsea, you know you're new on this. OK, all those in favor? Aye. OK, so we're going to go into executive session. Sorry about the delay, Theresa. We had a hearing that we had to do and it ran over longer than we expected. So hopefully it didn't inconvenience you too much. I just wasn't sure if you guys were coming or not. That's all. Hard to tell if I knew I had the right date, but I wasn't 100% sure. OK, so you guys all have the audit I'm assuming? Yes. Chronically, obviously this is all very old news considering June 30, 2022 has already ended. So I'm mainly going to just try to talk about the governance letter, which is addressed to you guys. And then just ask if you guys have any other questions. So first of all, you received the unqualified audit report, which is still the best audit report you can get. And then the governance letter is just a way for me to communicate a couple of things with you as you probably remember. It really hasn't changed a whole lot from last year, but I'll just kind of go over it. One thing I just need to let you know that there are estimates in the financial statement. And the biggest estimate in the financial statement is of depreciation on your capital assets, because we never really know how long those are going to last. We had no significant difficulties with performing the audit. We had a couple of uncorrected misstatements that were noted in the audit, one being just accrued compensated absences were understated. And the current year, FSA liability overstated, neither one of these were material, otherwise I would have asked you to do them. We didn't have that many actual regular adjustments in your financial statements, just one adjustment. I'll keep going because I do want to talk about stuff that takes us more time. We did not consult any other outside independent accountants on page three of this letter. They're talks about, again, checking savings and investment accounts that still have the old school district's names, or they did, as of June 30, 2021. So you really need to get those. I mean, most of them, every year it's less and less, but there still are a few that still are in the district's names that no longer exist. So you really should get those changed. I can go into detail about what's going on. What do you guys have questions after? I mean, a part of this has to do with the treasures and the schools and part of it, all those stuff still being in RTCC. Most of the ones that are still kind of in other names have to do, which I'm going to come up next to, which is custodial and scholarship funds. The custodial funds are now called, they used to be called agency funds, but now they're called custodial funds according to GASB. And this is where, and I know that part of the reason why they weren't done for June 30, 2021, was the accounting software, but you really need to get all of these funds on the school district's accounting system. We do spend quite a bit of time accumulating all this information, which is a little bit outside of the audit scope. And it's just a matter of getting that onto the accounting system. And then we recommend that you adopt a fund balance policy. This goes back to GASB before. So I mean, again, not a whole lot's changed since last year, but there is, since June 30, 2020, as far as items that we think are significant, mainly is just getting the accounts in your name and working on the scholarship and custodial funds, which are kind of outside the business offices where are those? Are those at AG Edwards or with what's his name? So the request has been to get the extracurricular, the custodial funds as part of the general ledger. Five years ago, we were supposed to transition to a state-based financial operating system. Our current operating system, which is done with Tyler, does not support the ability to bring those in. So we had been waiting for the state to follow through on what it was supposed to do five years ago. We have checked to update Tyler to be able to do this as an $80,000 cost. I have budgeted for that because I was expecting the state to make a decision during this legislative session about the fact that, hey, the state software that we were trying to have everybody use as such crap were doing away with this law, they didn't do away with the law. So again, we're sitting in limbo for another year. So unless the district wants me to pay $80,000 for something that might go away in a year when the state mandates something different, I'm happy to do that. But that's a question of whether this rises to the level because these things are in their own ledgers. They're under Quickbook. They're just not brought over onto the summary ledger, which is managed by Tyler. Right, and I think that there could be a, so I do some work to get it all summarized into a trial balance system that I use. And maybe that, and Robin could definitely do it. I've just never really pushed for her to do that. She did help me this year because the custodial funds needed to have a little bit different of reporting. And so maybe that's something that it doesn't it just needs to be all accumulated. So we're not just chasing down every little scholarship fund under the sun, right? So, you know, part of that. I'm in agreement with you that it needs to be done because I came from a financial background. But again, we're in this limbo or we even called the state and said, did you guys make a decision? Are we safe spending the $80,000 for Tyler? And they couldn't give us an answer. Yeah, because they said, yeah, you can, but the odds are you may, it may all go to waste because you're going to get forced with the system. So the state and its infinite wisdom did what it always does and says, we're not going to make a decision on this. We're going to put together a study committee to look at it for a year. Teresa, do you audit other school districts? Do you find this is a common occurrence? Yes, we do, which I'm going to bring up this subject after, but we have in the past audited lots of school districts, although we are reducing the number of school districts we're doing. And sometimes they just have it as a separate fund right inside their accounting system, but it's always been a struggle on all schools to have this done because it's kind of like each school, you know, the scholarships are kind of like, nobody's kind of really overseeing in one fellow swoop everything. So the definitely is stuff that's getting, that sometimes is a problem. Just to give you guys a heads up and I have told Robin, this is June 30, 22, it's going to be the last year that we're performing this audit because we are kind of forced into making some decisions because we can't find staff and our tax business is just really very busy. So that kind of worries me as, you know, like the transition just to us from the last auditor took a long time. And part of it was these, you know, these scholarship accounts, but I mean, I think Robin has a good handle on it and I have trial balances that I can share with her to move forward, but that is something that, you know, if it was all in your accounting system, it would be there and not in a separate one, right? So, but any auditor will be able to follow it. I'm not, you know, it just will take, just to make it easier for them having it in one place. And probably what I'll do is just this year really trying to work with Robin to maybe have her do the piece that I was doing. And then that will go away. That would take away this comment because at least it's all like she's providing it to me. If, you know what I mean? Instead of trying to accumulate, you know, every little scholarship account, which a lot of them now are combined, that what happened is the transfer from, you know, free entry, all the districts, they slowly are getting the scholarships into the new name and then sometime combining them into one account. So just having so many checking accounts and making and savings accounts, making sure you have them all is always problematic when other people are signing, you know, making sure that it's all complete. That makes sense. So that's all I really have because like these numbers, like I said, they're so old, I don't want to talk. I mean, we can talk about what kind of your fund balance was, but everything was pretty much assigned for other, you know, basically for future budgets. And I'm sure you've made a lot of decisions that I'm not even aware of right now, you know, during June 30, 22 and forward. So obviously you had quite a bit of fund balance, but I know a lot of it was allocated for different reasons. But if you happen to look on page 11 of the audit, it kind of shows all the fund balances and what they were. I had on the fund balance policy, we were trying to get a model of it. You know, my understanding of a fund balance policy is it's really kind of establishing what the minimum amount of money is going to be in a specific fund defines what the fund is used for and defines what the district will do to replenish the fund if we ever go below the threshold. But it didn't feel in talking with Robin that that was the same definition that was being used here. And so I had just questions about that so that we can investigate it to try to get this in place. Yeah, did I, I can't recall right now, but I feel like I've sent a couple of them that other districts, I mean, most school districts have adopted these. So we should be able to find a policy from another school district. This was just a GASB, it's old now basically said you needed to, you know, really say who could commit funds or and when they needed to be committed. But again, you guys, you know, the school districts in the state of Vermont are really under the statute in what you can do and what you can't do. So you kind of have overall fund balance, you know, cause everything is supposed to be somewhat assigned to, you know, the next year's budget basically if you're not using it for something. So the policy could follow the state rule. Possibly, but I can send you another, I don't know if I did it, it's been a while but I can ask around or Robin can ask also Vermont Leagues and Cities and Towns if they have one. Well, perfect, I can reach out to them. Okay. Is there any other questions? I just have one quick question regarding this fund balance policy. Yeah, she was just talking about it. Nope, that's all right. Go ahead, let me ask you a question. I'm all set. I'm all set. I don't think she heard you. So she doesn't have a question after all. So, but as far as you were looking at everything, everything is looking in order. I always wonder, do we have enough eyes on everything as you sort of looked at the processes in the district? You mean segregation of duties? Yeah. Yes, I mean, you have, you know, outside people doing bank reconciliations, different people, you know, signing the checks, you guys are looking at the warrants. We did not, you know, we don't feel like there's any problem there that we've, that we noted in our procedures. I mean, and that, you know, in the past, there was we did have some issues and those have all been cleared up, you know, like, and a lot of it really just had to do with it's, you know, getting your books to match the audit. And, you know, Robin does a really good job with the numbers, you know, as far as everything being approved, it appears with the, you know, with the invoices that we looked at that everything was approved the way it was supposed to be and there was purchase orders and complete sign offs and, you know, each department that signs the stuff. But again, you know, we're just kind of doing, you know, a random fold. Random fold, not even a sample. And then as far as, you know, the single audit, all the federal dollars, it appeared everything was being followed according to the standards, that, you know, most of the money, most, your major program in 2021, of course had to do with all the COVID money. And really those were what you could spend that on and what you could do with that was pretty open. So that everything appeared to be, you know, you pretty much follow what the state suggests and everything we did not find to produce. Okay. Now, and then, you know, like hot lunch, you know, hot lunch now, everything was, there was no testing, you know, it was for everybody. So it wasn't, it's pretty easy to follow those rules at that point. Do we have any other questions for it? All right. Well, we all have the letter, we all have the audit. And so, and you've let us know that we can have you audit this coming year, but it's the year after that we'll... Yeah, so, and I, when I spoke to Robin about it, I said, you know, probably sooner than later starting to look, getting the proposal out to look for somebody. It's just one of those things. Yeah, which we like school district audits, but we have to give up something and there's a lot of requirement to stay up with standards and extra schooling that we need. And so we're kind of petering out all of our governmental audits at this point. Could change in the future, but that's right now is what we're, what's happening with us. Okay. Okay. Right. All right. Thank you. Have a good evening. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. All right, 809, but we were moving on to EL 2.7. So that was whether or not we wanted to make a change in the wording to our executive limits policy 2.7. And that was in just the very last section of the policy. And I think I have, and that was Lane went to Pietro. He had Pietro read through it. Yeah. I also, I had one of my own. And I, it basically was vesting me with the power to change, retirement benefits for non-union individuals. And then so I brought it up. It seemed like an awful lot of power without oversight to be giving to one individual at the time. And it was what started the discussion at that point. Right. I brought this. Yeah, I should be in that. No, I brought my own. Okay, here it is. I do have it. Sorry. So this was, we were looking at though, we were looking way back to the very back, the last provision five and that is establish or change pension benefits. So as to cause unpredictable or inequitable situations. And as I was looking at why we were changing that, I was looking back at some of the other things and it seems like we're, you're using the same rationale, but for some reason in this one, the rationale you didn't think was sufficient enough. Not necessarily the rationale. Like I said, the thing that came out to me was this idea that oversight of this is probably a good idea because it is a lot of power to best in one person. The last thing you want is to be in a position where you potentially have a corrupt person who is giving more to friends and less to enemies than, you know, this is fair and equitable, but unless there's oversight, how do you know? You're taking my word for it. So I talked with Pietro about this. Pietro basically said, yeah, it does seem like a lot of power to best in one person. And he recommended that at a minimum that I should inform the board of any changes before they are implemented. So not necessarily seeking approval, but putting it on your table, this is what I intend to do. And so I've changed my interpretation to kind of include that piece there that, yeah, you know, if there are any changes being contemplated or intended to go into place, they will not be executed until the board has been fully informed. So you changed your interpretation. Are you going to give us an updated monitoring report that gives us that interpretation? I can do it now or you can wait until the next round that it comes, but I've already actually updated it in my copy of it. And that kind of covers what Pietro was suggesting, just to make sure that you're in the loop if I'm contemplating doing this and that. So were we accepting this one this time? No, it was already accepted. It was already accepted. So for the next time, so you've already made those changes in the interpretation. And we already accepted the interpretation you gave. Yeah, I just brought it up as an aside that, hey, as I'm looking through things, this seems like an awful lot to invest in one person. We didn't accept with the exception of that last one. It went, you can check back on the records, it went through the two. I thought we accepted the report with the exclusion of that one, which is going to be. I'll be able to try it. EL-227. She was made to have Pietro attorney review provision number five in the EL-2.7 policy and to advise the board of any wording changes that should be made in provision number five. So we didn't accept, we didn't accept EL-2.7. That was the second reading. Oh, it wasn't, okay. Because I know we had the second reading. We had the second reading, at the second meeting, we made a motion to have that read. Right. So this will be the first reading. Well, this would be, if he gives us the one with the new interpretation, we need to look at that and. So I'll get that, I can get that to you now or I can give it to you at the next. I already put it in there, let me see if I can find it. I don't know if it's appropriate though, if it's not as part of the public packet. So it might be better to wait till the next meeting. Okay. I think that yeah, we would just have to put on the agenda that next meeting we'll review. The updated EL-2.7. Okay. Good memory. Amazingly, off to help with the reading. Yeah. So we hadn't accepted that one. So we'll put that in. So we'll do that as a second. Will we consider this, if it gives us, if you email it all to us, the next meeting, the August meeting, that'll be the first review of that? I think we can call it the second reading. Or we'll call it the second reading. The updated. Yeah, it's not a. The interpretation. Readings go along with changes to policy. I'm not, you're not changing policy. Right, right. Just revising my interpretation. Right. Based upon a discussion that I brought up with the board. Right. Yeah, second reading with a revised interpretation on. And. And provision of the five. Right. So we'll just, well, it's, yeah, we'll just decide on that interpretation. So it's a, it's whether or not. Yeah, I did a little bit of research myself and the problem with this, because these are non-union folks, finding consistent comparables is difficult. If you check five different districts, they're doing five different things. You know, it's one, it's one thing, you know, that amount of meritability. Doesn't number three, though, tell you if they don't, if they don't have exactly the same first, same position that you look at the skills? Where was it I was reading through this? Yeah. Establish or change compensation and benefits that negate materially from geographical or professional market for the skills employed. But what I'm saying is with, with these particular retirement benefits, there's a dramatic amount of variability in what districts offer. So if, if, if one district is offering nothing and the next district is offering five times what we're offering and there's five districts that are doing different things in between and what is truly comparable. It gets complicated. You know, you can do averaging or things like that, but. Like it's hard to have a discussion until we can see the rationale for the next meeting. Well, and he's got to interpret that. So it says you will use statewide compensation data to negotiate and establish salaries and benefits for all non-unionized employees. When this data is not available, the superintendent will use the salary and benefits of comparable district positions as a basis for determining overall compensation. So that's the interpretation of that, of that that he's using. And we then have to decide if we agree with that interpretation. And if we need more, we need to tell when we disagree with the interpretation. And that's like I said, as I've been investigating this piece, you know, the variability piece became more, you know, we've never, we've never changed retirement, retirement compensation, et cetera, on the non-union folks. But as I investigated as part of this in the conversation with PHR, like I said, the variability became obvious, partly because some districts rather than increasing salary significantly will pump additional into retirement to compensate for the fact that they have low salary. Some district that have high salaries change the retirement piece because the salaries are so high. So again, variability makes comparables difficult. So you're gonna present this, we'll look at this. Yeah, so we'll, so, and if you want, you can look again at the other provisions since we're basically, this is his monitoring report for 2.7 compensation benefits. So any of his interpretations and rationale and evidence, we can question it if we have questions. All right. So moving on, we are, we haven't gone back to, oh. Are you looking on the revised agenda? Oh, I am not looking at the revised agenda. Because I'm like, wait a minute, this is not where we're supposed to be. So I am totally confused. So I did, we jumped, sorry about that. We're at board education and ownership. Yeah, sorry about that. I should just peel this one off. Jumping ahead, I was like, what is going on? Okay, sorry. I'm getting rid of that one. So I mess with me. I am, I will, I'm gonna make a motion that we table both five and six for this meeting. We are looking at an hour for these topics and it's day 20. And I don't think this has to be thoughtful conversation. And I just feel that at this point in the evening, it's gonna be difficult to have that. Okay. Due to exhaustion. So do we have, do you have a suggestion? I moved to table this to our August meeting or to hold a special board training that focuses only on these two topics. Special work meeting, yes. Let's talk about it. I think we should have a special meeting to just talk about those things and just be able to spend the time and do it. I also think other hearings should be there on special meeting. It's a really hard year too. To go from that, yeah, for sure. And to give both the hearing and then the agenda items, the brain power that they deserve is really hard. So can we make that a policy? Sure, yeah. Well, I mean, it doesn't necessarily have to be a policy, but maybe it'll just be a procedure or process that when we have hearings, we'll make those special meetings. I'm totally okay with that. Other board members on? Well, but the motion on the table is the moving pot. We made a mess of your motion. You didn't have to say anything. So should we pick a date? So I moved to table the discussion on board education ownership linkage and monitoring organization to further a date to be determined for a special meeting on those two topics. Okay, I'll second that. And we'll send a doodle poll. Okay. You just wanted to say something. I just love that one. So are you mending it so that it's, you're adding that and we'll send out a poll? No, I don't have to add that. You don't have to add that. Okay. I'm totally going to say it for Chris. So seconded any further discussion or regarding that? Okay. So all those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. All those opposed? Then hopefully Megan can also participate. And I think she would appreciate being a part of that. So we'll send out a doodle poll. Do you want to do that? Or do we want to have our clerk, Linda, do that? Linda, you want to send out a doodle poll? Do you want me to do that? Sure, I can do it. Thank you. Thank you, Linda. Okay. So we're going to table board education. Five and six. Five and six, thank you. And monitoring. Discussing seven. Oh, we discussed, yeah. Can I ask you, are we discussed eight? Wouldn't you want to do this? I mean, give me a ballpark or some dates July, our next meeting is August meeting. So, maybe like in the middle of that. That will be the last week of July, first week of August. I will not be here for the next board meeting. We'll be on vacation. There's not a good time to tell everyone about this. Okay, let's throw in that out there. Thank you. That is the first week in August is, I don't know, for me. Look at our doodle poll. We'll throw out a couple dates. Yeah, I'm going to Julyist that. Yeah, between now and... We'll figure it out. You guys have a preference to date? No, just say, we'll just do our doodle poll and see what times come back and dates come back if we do a two week thing. That'll work. So we're doing two weeks from the last two weeks and for the last week in July and the first week in August? I'll send it off. I'll do a limit. I'm happy to do it for you. I'll do it. Okay. All right, so we'll do the poll. See ya. Okay, so next up in this site also, we should probably just add that also, the monitoring the board, assess boards compliance with 4.2. Do you want to just add that on? We're adding in number nine monitoring board. We'll also be adding nine motion, please, thank you. So five, six, and nine. Yeah, five, six, and nine. What's that? We missed eight. No, eight was the... Was we talked about? Seven, five, six. Oh, we don't have a seven. Never mind. Sorry. Is that it? Okay. Actually seven's in... No, that's good. We just have a little bit of a punch. I think eight is missing, but it's... Yeah, it skipped a number. I noticed that earlier. So now we're just adding consent agenda. This was kind of a crunchy vision. So I don't like that. Yeah, I don't know. Okay. Do we need to vote on having nine added? I mean, we typically would probably do. Yeah, I'm okay. If you're taking it off a public agenda, yeah. Yeah, and then we'll amend that to add nine to that as well. So I move to add nine to that. Do we have a second? You seconded by Hannah. All those in favor? Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. So then we're moving on to the consent agenda. So this was minutes from the last meeting. New hires. The non-union master agreements. Yeah. I have a question on one of those. Sure. First, I want to thank you for the yellow highlights. Yeah, there wasn't a lot to change. For the changes. I appreciate that. The one that stood out to me was in the non-union master agreements. So there's admin one, admin two, supervisor, confidential. And it was the confidential that had something added that the others didn't. And that's what stood out to me. There were some things that were just clarification of wording that didn't change meaning. And some things that were, so two of them, actually all of them had added holidays. Right. There were two of them that also changed the life insurance amounts. And that was the supervisor and the confidential. And the rationale behind that was that those policies, those little term policies were originally intended to be able to cover funeral expenses. $5,000 does not cover a funeral expense. Ten probably doesn't cover it, but it's closer. Yeah, like I'm manning it up. Oh, probation, sorry. Yeah, that was one that was clarifying language wasn't changing anything. So it reached me what it said. Well, so in the confidential one, it says during said probationary period, the employee may be discharged at the sole discretion of the superintendent in the confidential one, but the others do not have that sentence. The others just say a newly hired supervisor will be offered a contract for the probationary period of six months. But it doesn't have that at the sole discretion of the superintendent. That was probably from old, which part was highlighted on it. The extra sentence was highlighted in the confidential one, but wasn't in the others. It may be because of the purpose of the confidential. Yeah. Like a principal shouldn't be able to fire them up because they might. So there are certain employees that the board has the authority over, so anyone with an AOE license. Aha. You guys, that's why you get in the consent agenda. Usually the teachers, you get principals, you get superintendent. Folks that do not require an AOE license, the legal authority for their hiring and firing is the superintendent. You're making me think so. Which is probably why I put that. Well, the four ways to terminate a contractor are all the same. Yes. It's that probation that it can be done during the probationary period. With the other folks, though, I couldn't terminate them. I have to bring it to the board and go through the process. But the confidential employees, you... Anyone who does not require an AOE license for their position. You have the discretion. Yeah, by statute, I have the discretion, the board does not. Got it. Thank you. So sorry about that. No, no, thank you for that. I'm glad you bring it up. There's so many pieces, it takes me time to draw up the info at times. So yeah. So during that probationary period, they would still come ahead in front of the board for a recommendation of termination? Not the confidential. No, these other ones. So bus drivers, confidential secretaries, anyone who doesn't require an AOE license for their position are people that are hired Wait, so the administrative ones should have that sentence as well then? The administrators all require an AOE license to do their jobs. With the exception of some of the supervisors. And so you're getting into an issue that we were actually discussing earlier this morning is why the heck do we have four different categories of that? There should be two. Okay, yeah. There should be those that are the boards, there should be those that are the superintendents of the districts. Like the, yeah. The business manager, did they have to have an AOE license? Because they're in the middle of a contract. Yeah. So they're grouped with the principals. I don't like the business. And some of that was being done before my time and I was asking PHR questions about it like what makes a confidential employee who fits under the contract? There is no good answer. His answer was continue to do what you have been doing but the district has been doing. Really? Not a good definition of what that is. Especially when it comes to potentially moving people in and out of other master agreements. So the real solution may be to eventually revise these so that there's two. There's one that covers people with AOE licenses and there's one that covers people that don't have. Yeah, that makes sense to me. Yeah, because there was no rhyme or reason to me. We had that big discussion when we were rehiring AD director. Why isn't the AD director an admin too? Versus a supervisor. Uh-huh. There were decisions made long before my time. They've always been a supervisor. This seems like they should be admin too. The tech director who does require a license. You know, why was she always on a lower one? I moved her up to admin one last time based upon that. Uh-huh. I mean it came in front of you. Yeah, but there's some messes there that need to be cleaned up. Well, thank you for clarifying that. Yeah, thank you for the question and making me rethink that because I did these changes a while ago and sometimes it takes me a while to end in talking with folks. But the major changes to all of them was adding the two additional holidays, the Indigenous People's Day and Martin Luther King Day and that came about in terms of comparables. I do the master schedule and work with the districts that send their students to us and there are things that they have that we haven't. Don't know why that was. So I was adding them in to be more comparable to that. The other thing that was changed just in the supervisor in the confidential contracts was the idea of increasing that little term life insurance policy to hopefully get it more in line with what an actual funeral cost would be. And then the last piece had to do with going off and taking education courses on the district's dime, just making sure that if we're gonna be paying for it, then we want you to get at least a B minus. Yeah. And everything else pretty much stayed the same. But we do need to go back and review that. Like I said, rather than discuss this one about why we got four different layers and there was no good answer that anybody could remember. They approve the reserve funds. Those, do we normally have, we have to do a separate vote on that, correct? Or does it get? Or you could vote to include it in the, if you do a separate vote, you could vote it separately or you could vote to include it as part of the conception channel. Can I ask a question about that? Yeah. I'm reading this correctly. It says that as far as this proposal, is this exclusions to the proposal? Is it hazardous materials testing and removal? Is that excluded in this bid contract? They've already, before they could go out to bid, they already had to test to see if that was going to be an issue. It wasn't, it shouldn't be. So there's no concern. So what they're saying in their contract is that they encounter that, that may change the cost of doing the work. But under state regs, before we do any kind of deconstruction or construction, we have to follow our asbestos policies and things like that and come in and be written and testing in those areas to see if those hazardous materials existed. And they did not, we were lucky enough that this was a building that was old enough that those weren't problems. You have some buildings, you know, if they're right in that, that certain time period, you're probably going to see PCBs, you're probably going to see as fast as this building is so old that, as my guess is that, that just wasn't a problem at the time. And when is this, what's the plan for a time? If you, if this is approved, it is already going out to bid. If they get three bids on it, which is unlikely, it could start as soon as next week. If they don't get three bids, they have to go to a waiver process. So say they get one bid, they have to ask for waivers on the state on the other two saying, hey, we went out and did our due diligence, but nobody wanted to step up and do it. That'll probably extend it another week. So the hope is early August is this work starts. I'm trying to get it up and done. Staffing shortage is everywhere. A lot of them. You left out how much we have in the reserve. 2.75 million. Other handout. I confirmed it with Robin today. There's 2.75 million in there. And this McGee is part of that? So there's, you'll see there's $2 amounts there. There's like the 343. That is for the internal work. The McGee is for the office furniture. We've actually already paid for half of it out of our remaining funds, but to pay off the second half has been a requirement for the reserve fund. So I think that's another 17,000 on top. So that three, whatever total is, that's the two together. There will also be outside work that is done. They have some pretty serious repairs. They have to do the wood around the window sills and then get that painted. That's a separate piece, which we think we can just do within our regular budget. I think it'll be between five and seven thousand as far as we can tell right now. The one thing that I do want to say about this reserve request is that given the supply chain issues and the cost for materials, things could change by 15% depending upon what happens between now and when they actually get started and start purchasing the materials to get this done. Let's see. So this is renovates inside such an office includes a minor redesign of the office space, replacing repairing walls, changing some doors, replacing the flooring, putting in an efficient HVAC system, putting in efficient LED lighting, repairing plumbing, electrical upgrades, finishing the basement for safe storage of materials, and then replacing the office furniture. And like I said, the outside work will be a little bit different. We're planning on getting the windows. Anything to protect the asset that needs to be done is going to be done this year. And then next year, the intent is probably if you go and you take a look at chef's market in town, the painting scheme that they have when they're painted their bricks, we're probably going to bring the same colors over and do that as well. We keep the bricks from further degrading, bricks weather over time. And so that's kind of a long-term plan to get that done. Sorry about that. There's questions that folks have. Okay, so are there any other questions on any of the material in the consent agenda? Well, the appointment of school district truancy officers and the approval of signer change of our Harvard account, I don't see this on my. Yeah, so the appointment of school district truancy officers, this is something we're supposed to do every year. Typically by July 1st, I ran across the obscured reference in the general laws when I was flipping through. Our principals have always done this process anyway, so it makes the most sense to appoint them. It would be Patty Sprague who is new at Braintree, Melinda Robinson for RES, Lisa Floyd, Katie Sutton for the high school, and then David Roller for Berkeley. And that's who I'm recommending to the board to appoint to those positions. Their role is actually to connect with the courts if students are, the word is true, but if they're absent for school consistently without the right reasons to be absent, they have a responsibility the district does to get them connected to the court system to get that resolved. And then if it's approved, then Melinda as the school clerk, her job is to record it and notify the town offices of who those folks are. Police officers in the town are de facto truancy officers just because of their role. You don't have to appoint them, they just are. And then the approval of signer change for Harvard. So that, I believe, if I remember correctly is to change over the Braintree. Student activities amount to Patty Sprague, the new principal. I went in to try to do it and they said you guys had to approve it. One of the reasons the name changes have been so difficult, like going from OSSU to OSSD. Some of the things that she was talking about in the auditor's report is the idea that back when we were separate boards, they still have the old OSSU designation as opposed to OSSD. It is incredibly difficult to work with the bank to make these changes. You did some approvals of some last winter. I mean, the hoops that we have to hop through and the people that have to vote and sign and it's a pretty involved process. I was so frustrated with it at the time I asked Robin is are we better off dealing with a different bank? Because I've never seen it at the expense. It's probably a good thing, so it does take some time. And Linda, we put her name in the minutes. They asked that her name would be in the minutes. Patty Sprague. Patty. Yeah, okay. Thank you. Matter of fact, all those folks that I'm recommending should be in there. Last, before there used to be a list, but you didn't, you were saying you didn't stand in the back. Oh, you meant the people you're recommending for true and officers. Yeah, true and officers. No, that was discussion. There was the list of the new hires. The new hires. Yep, right. But I didn't see the true and officer and it's the approval for a sign change. That's why I was asking about this term. Oh, the signing change one should be in there. No, I didn't ask it. No, there was anything that I was given. Robin had it. I thought she had handed it over. I actually saw it and signed off on it because I had a signature to do it. If you know, they'll just ask you to bring a copy of the minutes when you sign. That's why you just have to have the name of the minutes and then that's actually what we got it on there. Do you need the account number? I have it. Yeah, you won't worry about it tonight. Okay. I make a motion to approve the consent agenda. Do we have a second? Which I can get. Oh, we can discuss. We can go. We need to vote to include, I think the reserve funds for the OSSD renovation. I second that. Any discussion? So all those in favor of approving the consent agenda, including the reserve fund allocation. Say hi. Hi. All those opposed? Okay, that's fast. Okay, so recap. We got off schedule with our hearing. However, I've heard clearly from the board that the next time we have a hearing that we want to do it as a special meeting. And therefore we can focus on the work that we have to do. Given that, we are charging our clerk to, Oh, no. That's me. Gotcha. Is going to be sending out a doodle poll to try and create a time that works for the majority of us to do a special meeting, to do the items, board education, working on our annual board agenda. So that's that piece where we map out what we're going to be doing in each of our meetings. So it's really tiny, but if you pull it out and open it in Google sheets, you can see it a little bit better. So think about it sort of outlines everything that we're going to do for the full year. So think about what you would like to see added, what you think might be missing, that sort of thing. And don't forget to read in your, our new handy-dandy books here. Read about ownership linkage. Read about monitoring. Read about annual agenda. Mine looks, it's a different edition. It's just an earlier edition, but it has the same content because I checked. So that will be really great preparation, just those few chapters before we do that work. And then, this needs assessment. Oh, that goes along with continuous improvement plan. Oh, okay, okay. And the nurse leadership grant. Oh, this was incidental information. Okay. And then the other thing that I had on here, Rachel, Chelsea, and I remember we're gonna do sort of a brief orientation in that August meeting, our real August meeting, not the special meeting, but the August meeting just to sort of go over, kind of thinking about our processes and what it means to be a board member and that sort of thing. So. That meeting is August 12th or something? That's August, I think it's just noting that one of our new board members won't be here that night, so. I will also not be here, I'm at a conference. So maybe we'll have September. So maybe we move that to September. So let's keep that in mind, so I will have that. And then, Lane, do you wanna share anything about the needs assessment? So there were two documents there. They should just show up on the board agenda. They don't necessarily need an approval. Usually a vote of support is good. The continuous improvement plan, it kind of, it pulls from the strategic plan. The work that was done was went in the way back then. It pulls from the district analysis, the student performance. That's what the data inventory that's in there as a part of it is included as it's relative to the end's report, pulls from there as well. And it's connected to kind of the state and the federal performance expectations for students. And in this year, it was also connected to the needs that we had to be able to operate safely in person under COVID. So it pulled from all those parts and pieces and it's basically a strategic plan based upon that for the next one to three years. It is required by the state who then uses it to the federal government to keep the federal dollars rolling. The data inventory is probably of more interest to the board because that kind of talks about student performance in the areas that we're concerned about with the ends. And usually you do that analysis first to figure out what your strengths and your weaknesses are and then you build the continuous improvement plan to address the weaknesses. So I don't know if there's a kind of a broad general overview of what it is, it's a lot of work, but it's good work. And that is, is that this? This is our continuous, or is this? That's the data inventory. So pre the pages before that will be the full document of the continuous improvement plan. Okay. And at this, this here is the needs report? That's the data inventory. So it's kind of a needs assessment. Okay. You're taking a look at all your district data, student performance and trying to figure out what's going well, what's not. What you need to apply some, you know, budgets, the biggest tool to be able to impact things, which you're going to apply some funding towards to see if you can get some improvements going. Okay. And then the nurse leadership grant? Yeah, that was one, you can talk probably more than I can on it. That was a grant that the nurses are pulling together for the specific purpose of developing a leadership hierarchy and better training for nurses across the state. Part of the reason that that's here is it's nice to get the support of the board as they're applying for that and to be able to state that that support is there. It is a competitive grant that will help them in that competition. So do you need from us? A bonus support would be great, but not necessary if it's on the agenda so that you've at least seen it. That's really what the committee that's going to be doing the review is looking for. Yeah, it's $70,000 to support professional development and growth for nurse leadership. And it was a very well-designed grant that provided like template letters. And it was very clear that it wanted the board to be notified. Okay, so this is notification to us that you're applying. She did the awesome. Beth Oshia did, really, Beth and Sadie did all the work. Yes, okay. But then had they worked very closely with them on it, so. Anyone not in support of this? Yeah. Don't think so. All right, I think they learned it. I think that the board recognized the nursing leadership grant. Who's on motion? Yes. Seconded. Seconded by Hannah. All those, any discussion? All those in favor? Aye. Aye. Aye. All right. Good luck. Yeah. Okay. And then the data, we already talked about that. All right, 850, move to adjourn. Let's move to adjourn. I'm seconding because I'm going for 100% of the second digit. Thank you.