a lot of school districts and superintendents. The superintendent's rubric is actually designed for that. Uh if your if your superintendent is proficient, uh you you just do a rating every two years. We have always done a yearly evaluation partly because in my mind it was merit-based pay was based on the summit of evaluation. We've moved away from that in for my contract. So it's sort of um we may not need to do that. But again, it'll be a choice. We'll lay lays out the pros and cons as to summitative informative retreat agenda. Exactly. That's exactly what it is. So we that's what I had shared with Jim when when he brought it up with me earlier. I thought it was more more appropriate for a correct in-depth because I just want to understand there's one I think there's one thing in terms of like dealing with Jim of course because we've worked together for so long and at this point you know we know your strengths and weaknesses like everything you're you're fabulous and you know that we think that and whatever but it's also kind of preserving a process for the next right there was a conversation that came up within our superintendent round table.
Um but um you know, I I guess we can we can follow up with Dak on that and ask confirm like what sort of need lead time they would need maybe beyond Luther getting Dco in the room is is valuable. Emily. Yeah, we actually have a meeting with them coming up. So, I'll add add that. Going to ask them if you could uh also ask him for a status update on electric buses. We'll do Tim. They already gave they they came I don't know if mentioned it to you, but they came and they gave us a probably a twohour session on it at one point maybe a year or two ago. They know I'm a pain in the butt about it. I'll ask him. Um, all right. I wanted to give a quick update on the energy performance contract. Jeff, do anything else? Yeah, just before we move on.
Yeah. How many folks are on yearly summitives versus the two-year um plans for a formative and a summitive? Right. Until Jim told me, I didn't even know the two-year was a thing, right? Um and you know, the only input I had now without really delving into like the pros and cons. I mean, at least on this committee, when we do the formative, there's a lot more work that gets put into the summitative than the formative. And I want whatever process we have, I want it to be me, right? That's all. Um, so and and you want any all the members to have the proper input y carry forward. So if we did on a two-year cycle and somebody left during on in between, we'd want to ensure that they have the ability to their comments carry forward into the summitative and that puts the onus actually on on you or whoever is aggregating that stuff.
I mean, this is an initial conversation. You know, there'll be I will update the board on this when we have our meeting on June 5th. You know, obviously, we'll talk about it in planning. you know that but we have to have the conversation and so I mean if Emily and I can get some information from Dco Luther Mike Zuba before June 5th I think that'd be optimal but you know this is uh an initiation of the conversation that will take you know weeks months to to work through. That's why I wanted to make sure we were kicking it off ASAP. Sam Yeah. I just want to just kind of get a sense of what the timeline would be. I mean, you know, I'd like to at least hear from kind of the primary stakeholders, obviously, one being students um and the teachers and staff and administration if at all prior to them leaving for the summer.
That's a downside to it, right? Again, that's why it's a good conversation, I think, for a summer topic. Exactly. And again, I'm not looking to change it. I'm just saying the formative does have uh pros and cons to it and the pros from a from a logistical standpoint. Uh it it's it's less time consuming for sure, right? You're focused on the goals themselves mainly and you're saying okay where do we stand with the goals? What goal attainment what do we need to adjust? We sort of try to do that in midcycle you know in a January February time frame to say hey Jim you know what's happening. Um that's sort of what so let's put it on there and Jim if you can come with hey if we were to move to there what would you recommend because would then we not do that midyear you know is the is this that's what it's formative for is it for because only do it annually so right or or is that check-in yeah a good thing for you that midyear check-in you know so kind of lay out those how that would work and what your thoughts are on it and we have good good conversation Perfect.
Jeeoff, if that can happen. Yeah, that might be possible. um you know verifying with uh with uh Mike Zuba and our transportation people. I think I I wouldn't want to put something out and I know you wouldn't want to put anything out that was like absolutely you know can't do X Y or Z. So um this is where we're starting. We'll verify with them if they you know say yeah this is this is spoton accurate. Um, we just want to double check before we put it out. Like if they say this is spot-on accurate, then yeah, I think it's it's doable by the end of the school year to get some feedback. And you've had conversations, I'm assuming, already with the before and after school. I mean, the Y. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. They were involved in the meetings that we've had, had meeting, you know, had conversations with some different principles, with the athletic director.
Yep. All right. So, that's that. Um, so if you have questions, as always, call me and say, "Hey, you know, Jim, can I get more evidence on X?" Uh, and and we'll try to provide it. So, again, all of our goals and we've had this conversation from the administrative side, uh, has they're all intertwined, all of us, uh, in terms of our goal setting. You know, Mike, for instance, share one uh working with the AEA coming out of our negotiations with our evaluation tool and whether we had, you know, we didn't perform as many walkthroughs partly because Mike has been really working hard with AEA to uh revamp and look at whatever um evaluation system we're going to use in the rubrics. Eventually, that has to come before you because that's part of the negotiated contract, the evaluation cycle, right? Um, and it was out of out of nowhere.
you know, these are things that we've been kind of working through. So, um, in the in the draw up to this point, I guess you could My concern was that there's already currently, you know, assumptions on what the the start times are going to be and I'm not sure how these narratives began, but it's floating out there. Yeah. Yeah, probably. I mean, you know, there's always rumor and conjecture, and I think it's going to be really important. Um, and I think we've done a pretty good job of that in the past of just making sure that there's a a point of information for like the reality of this that's very clear like on our website for example, this is this is the conversation. These are the considerations. These are pros and cons. These are how you give feedback. Um, and you know, I think it'll be really important for us to continue to publicize that through any means possible, right?
Kristen Scully actually wrote me a nice email, which I'll share as evidence, saying, "Hey, we didn't get everything accomplished this year, but we've made a lot of progress and we're going to continue to make progress in standards three and four next year. We've worked on standards one and two, and while you guys didn't meet your goals, we understand like so they're sort of recognizing it as well. So, it's good. That's that's good just to hear from yeah, you know, with the change over the collaboration is still going forward. Very close. We still meet every Friday morning, she and I. And yeah, it's great. Excellent. Okay, next up, policies. We did have a subcommittee meeting. Uh my best recollection is most of these policies had minor changes. Um Yeah. So So maybe we'll we'll go through just give you you want Yeah. Because you obviously see some in the consent agenda right now.
And I'm, you know, I'm not a I'm not against I mean, I I really would appreciate a tangible if you're going to do the survey, some tangible data as opposed to these focus group style. Yeah. You know, Yeah. Thank you. Sorry. Go ahead. No, I mean, you know, we talked about survey data, too. So, but I think it, you know, just the the focus groups, I think, are more opportunities to engage in dialogue, share feedback. um in addition to the the survey. I think that's as I was sharing earlier, I think that's part of the process before we issue a survey. And I think too it's you know we've proposed a couple models here. um they might make sense for you or there might be push back and that might be the same for the community and you know there's other we could do a lot more proposals but I think there's a point at which you know just seeing what people are reacting positively positively to versus negatively so it can inform do we actually need a different proposal uh do we need to go down a different path or explore something more thoroughly um that will kind of give us an opportunity to do so so I don't think like these five proposals don't have to be the end all be all but it's just a reaction ction point for people, right?
So we had a conversation about what do we do because part of what we're doing in in the in the Palestin is Jim Haz goal to go through all policies and it's and it's not necessarily hey we certainly are addressing ones we think we need change first but we're still also just going through them. So um we're kind of tearing them in three tiers. ones that are hey either just want to mark them review um or there's just some very minor cleanup that there's not really notable changes to them. So, those we'll be putting in the consent agenda. Um, you can obviously always pull them out if you think there's something needs to be addressed in them, but uh and then there are ones that we might put on uh and I maybe put them in the all in the first. I thought we had one that fit in the middle category that uh here, but I don't see it.
And I feel like the reality too is that we do have a natural deadline because I sometimes believe that, you know, we we don't message it out or like Tim said that repetitive nature. We don't have enough time to message it out appropriately, too. it's just, you know, here's what the the community voted on and and then I think there's a subgroup that may not be paying attention. And so I I would like to give us enough time to ensure that every, you know, at least the primary stakeholders understand this is the proposal that we're actually going to go with moving what we're going to end up voting on. And you know, I'll leave that to Jeff basically, but um that's just what I hear and I don't know Tim about you, but it's what I hear in the community is that we just, you know, I didn't receive that email or I wasn't, you know, part of that um message and so forth.
Then we might put it in in a uh it's just an agenda item because it's not substantive enough for our to read um polic trigger that. But we just want to note something. Hey, there there's a notable change, but not not something that would rise to the level of, hey, it's a significant enough for that that be listed that's like approve for approval that time independently, right? Not need a second read because the consent agenda we're not going to discuss at all where uh that one was like, hey, we want to just point out what we did here, right? Like there were a couple things where they just changed like the vocabulary. I forget which one it was, but I may have included I may Yeah. Which is which is fine. Uh there was that wasn't yeah it wasn't wasn't wasn't blatantly hey put it in the middle but uh so so there's those want to go through policy the ones that obviously trigger more substantive thing of the of this first read second just to give you an idea of now you seeing stuff consition so with the policies like the first read policies and I'll preface this by um saying Jen King, our attorney on record, uh, has reviewed these policies.
So, I'd like to at least give us time. Yeah. I don't I don't see the board taking action on it until the fall, but um you know, we need to have time to process this through the summer, you know. Yeah. I mean, as as far as I'm concerned that you are our designate for the board action because if the people are not aware, it's the board gets held responsible for it when the changes happen. So uh yeah as from my perspective those are like inviting the board members to any of those discussions to whatever extent possible. Um I would personally like to attend a couple I mean I'll talk to people as well but one another thing that goes through my mind is the I'm not sure if it's the right word the tenor of the discussion um you know if it's a I don't want to do that versus I am going to kill you people if you do this.
I I share, especially the ones that have significant changes. All of these policies have been um, redlined to meet MASC recommendations after general law changes. And what I've done is made sure that if there are significant changes, all these first policies have gone to Jen King. And for instance, I'll give an example of one where she just got back to me and we had a conversation with regard uh to student um uh discipline JIC and it related to uh whether we can use the term principal and or design uh for uh suspensions and the answer is yes and no at the same time. But but she recommends having a designate in certain areas because deans, assistant principles are can be the authorative uh figure in in issuing a suspension and then informing the superintendent if it's a 37H and 3/4 violation which is significant. So but if it's 37H and 37H and a half which are sus are um potential for exclusion those have to come through as a principle.
there's there's a difference um in how widespread something like that might be uh because the the like I said before and as you know there's just a lot of moving pieces here and things are changing it's just how do they change right and I I feel like a lot of times and Jeff you do a great job with communicating it to the you know internal Treasure public schools community but it's this clearly is going to, you know, impact the external. So figuring it out a way to ensure that they're receiving the correct message as well too. So are you talking about when you say external people beyond our parents? Yes. Okay. Because the the first group that will post on social media is really not the group that truly is impacted is all I'm saying. What? But I digress. Yeah. So, we'll try and figure out how to get to that group as well.
Um, so, so it's a good delineation, right? And that's where Jen's like, "Yeah, we can put it here and we should because you do grant authority when the principal for a dean or an assistant principal to perform a suspension uh if need be in house and or out of school. Uh, so it's in the certain areas where she's recommended it and that's it." um she's been she the the hazing this um policy she's like no we like it the way it is the way you've written it the way it's adjusted because of MASC um so yeah when we come to those things this is where the balance of varying greatly from the MSE template versus doing our own that's a situation where a section that defines terms and then you use the term and then it would in there you and say this, you know, the whatever you turn deem the person that can that can uh issue the suspension or whatever and you lay out those conditions, you do it there and then you use that term the rest of it.
Uh question Jeff. Yeah. um the union contract that fits into this somehow and you are confident that you would probably be able to build consensus for any changes on that unions sorry however yeah um we've already already had a lot of conversations with different groups about the fact that there will be changes y as a result of this move um in terms of the the times. I think it is really important to get their feedback on this and um you know talk through contractually what sort of impact might might happen there. All right. So you've you've had the you've had the conversations with the with the union eboards and you are uh cautiously optimistic that you'll be able to make that stuff work. make the contracts work with this. Yeah, cautiously. Um, you know, more so on the the teacher admin side, but um, you know, I'll I'll, you know, as well we're circling back with our, um, our transportation folks.
That would be the cleanest way to do it as opposed to remembering which sections you can say designate. Um but I don't you know so we'll talk about whether there's a time when it makes sense to say hey let's do it this way because it's it's cleaner and easier to maintain that way. All right. Should we go through one by one? Start with student absence and excuses. JH having trouble asking. Okay. So I I mean I can if you if you're able to just summarize what the change was. Well, if it's if it's my Yeah. I don't think this one was a lot of stuff, right? So changing terminology from child to student and adding guardians. I'm sharing it right here. I mean, there it's it's really it's moving a couple things around. Um, no substantive nothing substantive. And again, you know, yeah, I I can't think of anything we looked at that was substantive significant the it was just updating.
It probably doesn't hurt to circle back with them. Okay. Thank you. Are you all ready to move on to my energy performance contract update? Great. Perfect. I'll make this one quick because I know we're a little we're a lot of it overtime. Uh but we met with Johnson Controls last week um who received the initial award. Uh again, we're not locked into paying anything at this point because Johnson Controls needs to do their comprehensive energy audit. the CA. So that is what we talked to them last week. That is where they'll kind of really thoroughly go through our building beyond the initial walkthroughs that they they did. Um so we talked to them about specific scopes of work along with the town when we met with them last week. They're going to start the audit after kids have left and they have uh more full access to the buildings.