Amity Board of Education Special Meeting - February 23, 2026

001Whenever you're ready, Jen, let us know. >> Okay, you are live. Um, and ready to go. >> Okay. Good evening. The AMD Board of Education special meeting for February 23rd, 2026 is called to order. This will be a virtual meeting. I will ask all participants to please mute mute your sound unless you are recognized to speak. And with that, um, we have our first order of business. I'm going to ask if we, um, if if there's no objection to skip the pledge. I don't have a flag. Uh, is there any objection? We have no problem doing it. No, we're good to go. Okay. Uh item three, approval of minutes. Uh this is the uh board of education regular meeting from February 9th. Uh it's on page three of the packet. Uh do I have a

002motion to uh approve the minutes? Uh Donna. Okay. Second, Kathy. Thank you. Any uh comments, discussions, questions? Oh, >> I have one comment. Um thank you for linking the middle school presentation, but wasn't there also a um budget presentation as well? >> Uh not Yeah. What? >> Yes, there was a budget presentation and um Miss Celeleski um will get that linked in the minutes. >> And I know you said we will add that to the minutes. the last couple. Can we make sure those get linked and uploaded as well? >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> Any others? >> Can I can I just ask a quick clarification? Um, chairperson Davis, um, was that the meeting where the AFC was in the middle? So, that is the budget presentation in the AFC minutes. Is that the

003last meeting that we're talking about or is it there's been another one since then? No, it was the the first February meeting and there was a budget presentation as part of that. >> Okay. >> All right. >> And also just for um procedural clarification because we're a virtual meeting um all of our votes uh do still have to be by by roll call. So um when the time comes if you can just be ready to um be unmuted so Miss Alleski can call the role. >> All right. Uh any additional changes or additions? If not, Lisa, can you call the role, please? >> Sure. Muse? >> Yes. >> Mr. Davis? >> Yes. >> Miss Cloud Ingram? >> Yes. >> Miss Schlank? M like are you a yes on the minutes from the last meeting? >>

004Yes. I'm sorry. >> That's okay. Thank you. Um Miss Jay, >> yes. >> Dr. Ola Delay, >> yes. >> Dr. Kunakuran, >> yes. >> Miss Bradley, >> yes. >> Thank you, Miss Shuster. >> Yes. >> Thank you. Motion carries. Yes. Think M Mr. Young did I miss somebody? Oh, I'm sorry, Mr. Young. I'm sorry. I skipped over here. >> Thanks. >> Sorry. Thank you. >> It's hard with all the little tiles. >> Uh, next we uh uh are now going to go in. Uh >> um Just one second, Paul. Lisa, you missed me, too. >> Oh, we missed you, Dana. >> You did. >> Sorry, Miss Lombardi. I'm so sorry throwing me off here. >> No problem. Yes. >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. >> Maybe we could still go by alphabetical order

005just like usual. That way we won't miss. >> It's hard because the AFC is all mixed in here as well as well as like admin. So, it's just tough. I was just trying to go in order of the tiles on my screen. >> Right. Right. Yes. Okay. >> Okay. So, we're we're going to uh go into recess at this point and uh going to turn the meeting over to our uh AMD uh finance committee chair. Thank you. We didn't know if you'd make it. So, uh uh glad glad you are here. Uh just want to um mention that uh uh I'm going to ask uh at the next AM finance committee uh that we put on the agenda the election of a vice chair and it has to be a non board of education member

006uh that that should be done at the uh on the agenda for the next amity board of finance meeting. Okay. >> Okay. >> All right. >> Thank you. So, >> yes. So, let me call the >> Did I go ahead and call the meeting to order? >> Yes. Yes. And I just want to make one more comment. Um our our uh uh bylaws specifically permit uh the board of ed to have a quorum and sit in with the finance committee and specifically permit us to have it still as a finance committee uh amity uh finance committee meeting. So it's up to you if any votes take place uh during this meeting. It's only the amity finance committee members that are voting and uh I would also indicate to you that um as an exeicio member

007uh I can vote at these meetings and uh I would also be casting a vote on the eminity finance committee if it requires a vote of some sort today. >> Thank you. Uh so it's uh 68 I guess. Uh there it's 4:38 a.m. for me here. Um so calling the meeting to order. Uh let's start with the update on the superintendent's proposed budget for 2627. >> So if you can just give me one minute, I will share my screen. Okay. Uh so um I do want to um just uh make sure um everybody understands a little bit about our bylaw um particularly because we have new um members for both the finance committee and the board who haven't been through this process yet. Um but our um bylaw that governs the AMD Finance Committee says

008that by March 1st the AFC would recommend a budget to the board and by March 15th the board has to um deliberate and vote on the proposed budget. Um, if the recommendation that comes from the ASFC is not approved by the board, in other words, if both numbers don't match, um, the budget goes back to the AFC and they send a new one to the board. Um, and then it keeps going back and forth until both the AFC recommendation and the board recommendation are aligned. If for some reason that doesn't happen by April 15th, um at that point the board would recommend its proposed budget to the district um regardless of what the AFC recommendation is. And um then um after the adoption, any other amendments um that happen prior to our district hearing keep

009going back to the AFC for consideration. Um and then ultimately at the the district hearing um the board would take its final action on moving the budget forward. Hopefully we don't get there and we can have some agreement by March 15th. It's much much le and more pleasant that way. >> Um so where we are in updates um we knew this um this is part of the reason why we sort of took >> Before we go there, Jen, Paul, can you just clarify h how you get to vote on AFC? What is how did that happen? I don't have an objection. I'm trying to understand it. >> The the bylaws permit the chair as an exeicio member of every subcommittee to vote as a member of that committee at his will. >> Okay. Thank you.

010>> You're welcome. >> All right. So, um health insurance change uh changes, we got those last week. um our health insurance cost uh went up by about $123,000. Um so it was sort of in the ballpark of I think what we were expecting. Um the the increases are being driven by um the increased claims that we've seen over the last 3 months. So again, no surprise there. um because we've had so many people um hit the um stop-loss threshold, we have an increased cost to our stop-loss insurance and then overall the cost of prescriptions, drugs has been increasing and so that is also driving the change. Um what we had to do then is um add some things back into the budget. Um the first one being the medical insurance. Um but the other thing

011that we've been doing over the past week is Mr. Grant and Miss Lumis and I have been sitting down and revisiting all of the special education um placements. Um we usually do this in March. We typically would push it until the very last minute and that's often why the board had been able to approve budgets that were lower than what AFC recommended. But because we um had to add so much for the medical, I actually asked Mr. Brandt to to do it two weeks earlier. Um, so you can see that we have a new student who's coming in and requires special education services, an increase in tuition for a student who is already existing, some additional behavior supports for a student who is already there. Um the other things is the um Woodbridge Police Department

012just settled their contract and there was an increase in the um salary for our SRO um that we had to um now reflect um what the actual price was going to be. Um we have added in some transportation software. Um it's some uh it's a resource that we're going to hopefully be able to use along with our elementary districts and can get us on a path for perhaps looking at a transportation study. Um and then the other thing that we did is um the health and PE teacher that um we were proposing to transfer from the high school to the middle school um has been added um back in um both their salary and their benefits. What we were able to make reductions in um were um two actually three um places um three tuition

013placements. Um two students who um do not require those uh placements and then one is actually just um a lower cost than what we were anticipating. And to offset adding the health and PE teacher back in um we have decided to defer the STEM instructional coach for a year. Um so we have pulled that position out of the budget. Um the other thing we had to do is because we um reduced uh those tuition lines so significantly um those students aren't going to meet the excess cost threshold. So we had to lower the amount of revenue that we were anticipating from the state um because we um are are not going to get that in. And so it doesn't change our budget, but it does change what the town allocations are going to be. The

014personnel impact under the current proposal um as I said is to defer the STEM and instructional coach for one year and then hopefully look for an opportunity to fill that position using existing staff. It's what we've done for our other coaches and um hopefully something that we can do in this case as well. Um there are two health and PE teachers um in the budget, one for each middle school, but this will also allow us to maintain the current health and PE staffing and structure at the high school while still allowing for the middle school schedule change. Um it still has the world language teacher to increase world language choice in the middle school and it still has the um special education teacher for the sales program. I know there's been questions about um whether

015or not we could defer these new positions and um you know I I don't I I I don't see um an opportunity in the upcoming years where we would be able to add um even potentially one new position. um the three-year forecast and the projections when we look at contracts um where we know the fixed costs as well as we look at taking on um the uh potential for the bond for um some of those facilities improvements are really um not indicating that we would be able to find another year where adding positions would be um quite so opportune I guess is um a way of looking at it or way of putting it. Um, so I know again there was some interest in in potentially not um adding quite as many positions. Um, but

016um I'm not sure that I see an a chance to do that um in in the near future. Uh so with all of those changes um as of today um the town allocations um you can see went up slightly again because of that decrease in the excess cost revenue but overall the budget um dropped by 01% um we are at 1.53% increase over the current year. Um again you can sort of see um we are still the lowest in the district I mean sorry the lowest in the state um both across all the school districts and obviously within DURB um significant below the the averages um and you know again when we look at the impact of the prior year credit I can't tell anybody how to use that money but what will be credited

017in March um and the um actual variance it sort of shows what the impact is overall all to each of the towns. Um we do have a couple that the upcoming meetings keeps getting shorter hopefully. So on Monday, March 9th, hopefully the board can take action based on the recommendation from um AFC tonight. Our public hearing is March 6th. Our annual meeting is May 4th and the referendum is May 5th. And that is the update on the budget. Um, Sud here, I think you're >> Thank you. Thank you. Uh, and, uh, so we'll open it up for discussion. >> Megan, I see you. >> Yeah. >> Um, so, one, I don't think that the argument that because our debt is declining and the budget increase is low this year, then that's good rationale to add

018people. Um, that's just not like good financial practice, I guess, is the best way I could put that. Um, and frankly, I have very grave concerns about the middle school schedule change. Uh, we had staff come to the last board meeting to share their concerns. I have since heard from staff at the other middle school as well personally about their concerns about the change in the middle school schedule. And for those um members of the AFC who are not on the board of ed, we also got an email from the teachers union that surveyed every single teacher at the middle school and 50 out of 59 teachers overwhelmingly do not support this change. Um, and they shared a range of concerns from that at this point staff morale is very low because they feel unheard

019and they don't appreciate kind of the lack of transparency that has gone about this with this process in terms of, you know, where the committee thought they were at. Um, I've heard outright that the committee doesn't feel like they actually made a decision. So, they were very confused as to why anything was being presented to be moved forward. um they've shared with me that they think it's developmentally inappropriate. Some of it I think is you know the increase in length of classes, but I think the bigger issue is the fact that you have academic classes not meeting every day and whether or not that's appropriate for kids who are already making a big transition from elementary school to moving classes. Um and that just the concern that you know when you have this team model

020and you have assemblies and things like that or there's a snow day for example or two snow days um and then classes that aren't meeting consistently then may not meet for like an even broader spread of time and just the ability to keep up with that. Um, I heard concerns about the win block being longer that kids now, and I frankly was surprised by this because I know my kids do very much utilize the academic success block. Um, but that many kids do not and that it's too much unstructured time for kids this age and that there's a lot of behavioral issues and so the fact that it would now be even longer is a concern. Um, so that is kind of the staff side of things of them broadly not supporting this. Then I've

021heard from special education parents who, you know, one of the arguments that was made was that special education students aren't currently receiving electives under the current schedule. Um, I've heard from multiple special ed parents who said that that's not true, that their kids do have electives and that their disability actually um deems a world language inappropriate for them. And so that is when they receive their services and that their electives aren't impacted at all. And frankly, most of them were more concerned about the schedule change. And one of them did say like if a child's elective is impacted that that's something a parent is agreeing to in an IEP. So it's not like it's un I guess an unknown. Um and then just a bigger picture concern that I have is just overall transparency. I

022feel like what has been presented to the board by administration is not consistent with what we're hearing from staff and that concerns me a great deal. Um, so my I guess if I had to make a recommendation as an AFC member at this point, it would be to recommend a budget that is less those three additional staff members at this point because I absolutely do not support the schedule change that none of basically none of the staff at the middle school support. It sounds like >> uh uh Megan, I'd like to thank you for uh the explanation because I I think you covered almost all the bases. So I don't think we have to have everybody else uh talking about it, but I have a question that maybe the principles or the superintendent could answer.

023uh if we do not go with um the particular uh schedule that was presented to us but there are ways of you u accomplishing some of the things that you felt was important uh and getting done. Uh would we still need the extra teachers to do that? And if so, then uh I I would think not funding them would prevent you from doing an alternate type of uh schedule. And um that's that's a question I think is important because we don't want to put ourselves out of that uh area where we can do something uh that helps meet your goals uh helps the kids with their education and not get stuck that we can't do it because we eliminated those positions. So like to see if one of the principles or superintendent has answered that

024question. Well, I c I can first weigh in on the world language piece. Um, so again, right now we do not have choice in world language. Um, there is um a way that we can take world language off of the team and allow students to at least have selection in which world language they would want to take. Um, and I I I think we I mean we can do that without changing anything at the moment if we had an additional world language teacher. So that is one of the things that we've heard from a lot of people is that they do not like the fact that kids have to take two world languages and the addition of a world language teacher would allow us to have world language choice. Um I will defer to Jason

025Kathy and Shannon because they remembered um some of the other options that we looked at. I think in every case it the the content area was different but we always needed to we always needed like another teacher at each school no matter what iteration of the schedule we looked at. In some cases, it would have been like a different life arts option um if I remember correctly. But um the the types of schedules we were considering always required sort of that extra teacher either as the buffer around health and PE or in the life arts area. And that was um typically because we were trying to not make kids take two musics. Um, so it was it was offering sort of that alternative so that they didn't have to have music twice. Um, Jason, Kathy,

026or Shannon, do you remember if that's correct? >> Yes, that is correct. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> I do believe that >> it was a math problem like we just needed five five spots to send kids. So by taking Spanish off the team, it's a little complicated, but you you did need another section so that you could run uh everything without um compromising the class size, >> right? And I one of the things that would have to happen in all that is that health would stay kind of in the rounds where or the elective kind of area, not be paired up with PE. So um they would the kids would take health like they do now, not with PE. Bana, go ahead. >> Um, a couple things. Um, nobody likes change. Um, as long as

027I can remember in my career when, uh, things had to be shifted. Um, you know, you would it it's very difficult for people to like change. People get very comfortable with what they're doing. Um, I do think that, um, Megan, you made some key points there and I've heard them and I think there's something to look at. Um, but I think the other thing is about the thing about longer classes, being in education as long as I've been, um, when you have a good 45 to 50 minutes with a child, you can go so much deeper into content and there's more room for dialogue and understanding. So, um, you know, that to me, I think the longer class periods is is is actually a better thing for the students. Uh, but I would like to

028hear and I maybe it'd be beneficial for everybody. Uh, Jen, if you could tell us some key bullet points about the biggest uh points of why this is going to be advantageous for our students. I think we might need to hear that again. At least I know I do. >> Yes. Um, so um as you mentioned um the the first advantage is the longer class periods. Um, and coupled with that is less transition from one class to another so that kids are actually spending more of their day in an academic or classroom setting. Um, the second advantage of the proposal was um taking um the world language off of the team so that way students could truly have choice in their world language. And um we were looking to um kind of build the across

029the entire world language department. So again, right now all kids at the middle school level just get Spanish and then when they get to the high school, if they decide that they want to take French, at some point they have to kind of double up their classes if they want to get to the highest levels of that language. um because we just aren't giving them sort of the the first year of it at the middle school level. Um the second or the third advantage was we lost electives for our eighth grade students under the current scheduling model. Um the idea that um by 8th grade kids could have some choice in what it was that they were taking. And so the proposed model actually adds electives back in and it would be adding electives in

030um CTE in digital media and in um uh visual arts. Um we would stretch that out over sort of a three-year kind of process to build up those curriculum and those elective choices for the teachers so that they they didn't feel too overwhelmed. Um the wind block um is um actually we've already are in a planning phase to be able to use that to deliver some very specific targeted lessons around um executive functioning um around our portrait of the graduate. Um, and so what we have done in the past, and um, Kathy and Jason can can attest to this, is I I think the middle school gets a special schedule about once a week, um, maybe once every two weeks because there's so much going on, and that just creates further disruption. we would be

031able to use the wind block to accommodate those special activities so that we wouldn't have to have a different schedule once a week to try to build all of the other stuff that we want to do in. Um then the other um uh advantage is it allows our intervention services and our special education services um can be delivered during the windblock time so that students don't have to miss classes or um pick between sort of that type of intervention and doing something else. Right now we can only have the interventionists if they are working you know using academic success. It's all happening at the same time. So, they're pretty limited in the number of students that they can see. Um, but when we spread it throughout the day, they're going to be able to have

032five periods where they can see kids um at a at a at a um a different point um during the daytime. Um Jason, Kathy, what else am I missing on this? >> So, it's important to know that any change in any kind of a schedule, even half of what we're trying to talk about here, will have a domino effect. Um, and one of the things we were trying to get to have happen in this schedule is choice. And so right now, um, in well, in this new proposed schedule, students wouldn't all have to take music. Um, if we go to an option where we take world language off the team, say add a French teacher, don't add a French teacher, whatever that might be. um that decouples the the health from PE and it puts

033music back opposite PE which means everyone in the school now will have to take some sort of a music class. They'll either have to take general music, strings, uh choir or band because that'll be opposite the physical education class. Um whereas in the proposed model, we put health opposite that. So then students can choose band, choir, or a different elective, art, or something else. Um, and not have to be forced into taking um two languages and not having to be forced into taking um a music class. If we go to the the music like I said the language off the team um health back coupled um in the rounds opposite PE will be some everyone will have to take a music class which is kind of where we were about four years ago. >> Thank

034you Carol. >> Thank you sir. Um so a couple comments and a question. Um, I'll start with my question like how how does digital media, which is a new class, a new elective that we supported, I think a year or two ago in the budget, how does that factor into the schedule, like choice, right, for students? Because I thought that was offering them like more choice at the middle school. Um, and based on what I've read so far, um, about, you know, the middle school schedule versus the traditional junior high schedule, there are pros and cons of both. So, and I guess I'm based on what I'm hearing, I'm still not I'm still not sold at the need to make that make that shift. Um, yeah. And I guess you know you mentioned having time

035uh spread out through the day that um intervention services can be provided because all the kids won't have um academic success at the same time. You know what's the volume of kids that are in need of those services? I know that was a period that lots of kids would go see a teacher if they missed something or if they don't understand something. Um and you know at least personally speaking it was it it seemed like it was beneficial um at least for my kids. So um I guess is there that much is the volume of kids needing intervention services that high that the current schedule just does not help meet those needs. If I may, um the the again with intervention, we want to keep the case load small, the class is small because that

036targeted intervention is what we find most effective. So um while our the number of students is not overwhelming thankfully um we do want to be able to provide the optimal environment for those kids to be successful because intervention is not the idea of intervention is not a a permanent um solution. In other words, we want to go in for you know whatever that student needs for a given period of time. We don't want you. We try to help students get caught up and get to where they need to be so that they don't need the intervention anymore. So there is some fluidity in that class. Um and I think what helps make it successful is the fact that we can keep the numbers uh fairly small. And by allowing the interventionist access to the kids

037at different periods throughout the day, that helps with that because keep in mind some of the interventionists um one student might have two or three interventions. I mean we certainly have students that have EL support, math support, and reading support. So for that student to get seen by all three interventionists um is rather challenging. So this schedule would help us with that. and Carol to answer some of your other questions that were in there. So, when we first added digital media, we did add it as a choice opposite the health and PE. Um, it ended up being such value for what students are asked to do that, um, we moved it as into one of the rounds so that all kids would be able to take advantage of that course. Um, we did that the

038second year. It was incredibly popular with the students, but it was also very beneficial what we were able to teach them in that course. Um, and it's uh knowledge that can expand really beyond just the digital media course. They can use it in their other classes. So, so we saw value in that. So, we kind of were victims of our own success when we designed it because we couldn't keep it as an elective choice when we really thought it was appropriate and needed by all of our students. um it would if in under the new schedule um also become an elective in the sense that we would be able to have more specific um digital media classes. So if students wanted to do broadcast journalism and work on the news um real you know sort

039of every day is kind of that would be their class around that. um there's an opportunity to make it um a class um that just kind of looks at photography or video production. Um so we would be able to build electives off of it that we would offer to our eighth graders. Um so and and then in terms of um you know your experiences with kids being able to go and see teachers and get help during academic success that would still be available with the introduction of win because an entire team is going to have win at the same time so that if I needed to go see my math teacher but I was in my wind block with my English teacher. my math teacher is also in win at that point and I would

040be able to make you know arrangements to go get that that support. So we so the schedule is structured so that the kids um are still going to be able to see their academic teachers during the win period. But the other thing we'll be able to do with the win is when we have either specialized developmental counseling lessons or some of the activities we do around Pog, we can build that into that period also without disrupting the whole rest of the day schedule. >> Thank you. >> Anyone else? >> Uh yes, Jen, go ahead. Um, so I know that you had mentioned that we don't have numbers for the world language choice. Um, but even without that, it seems like at the very least you are transitioning some students to a French teacher. Um, is

041there an option to reduce one Spanish teacher? I know we hate to say that because we I love the middle school Spanish teachers, but maybe is there the option of reducing one and having one be shared between the two schools. Um because it seems like with what you're proposing with choice, at the very least there would be enough students theoretically to go to a French teacher who would no longer be taking Spanish. >> Um I think it's certainly an option. I just don't know if it's an option in year one because in year one we would only open the French to seventh grade students. So it because we need because we don't want to disrupt the entire French curriculum going into the high school. Um, so it would we would need kind of that that

042buffer year to onboard seventh grade and then have a fully developed two-year French program. Um, and we would probably be able to look at that in year two. But for that initial um sort of first step, we're still going to have a lot of kids who are still going to be in Spanish because pretty much all of 8th grade is going to continue to take Spanish because they didn't have any other choices. Um and we would be able to have a few kids who maybe select Mandarin. Um but we have to remember we're limited in terms of 22 students per class. Um, so there's really only 22 spaces in each middle school per grade for an alternative language. So, uh, yeah, I wanted to add a couple of thoughts. Uh, first, I think I agree

043with Megan. I think we should never frame a choice of adding a teacher uh because the next year's budget will be you know higher or something because that I think is is the wrong framing. We're going to do this because this is the right thing should uh always be the framing. Uh so uh so let's not do that. But that said like you know I have a couple of questions. one is uh we've known for a long time like you know like this is uh that the students taking music uh when they don't want to is not a good thing. Uh and and so I think it's important to give the students the choice. So that part of it seems to resonate with me. Uh the second thing that I I I'm not sure like

044this postponement of the STEM coach like you know would the students have access to it? I said I I know that you said that uh that you would be able to do within the system. If that could be done that would be great but if it's not possible that doesn't uh seem to be uh very good to me. And the final thing I wanted to ask is the AEA's report seems to be a little scary that if 50 out of the 59 uh staff say they are opposed. Well, I agree with Donna like you know change is hard and uh and in general I think the administration should be given the respons you know the uh the leeway to be able to make changes this level of opposition I worry you know whether it would

045be feasible at all uh to be a when of course they would go go ahead if once we uh decide on it but would how much would the resentment be I would like the principles to be able to talk about that a little bit more So, Sadir, I just want to comment. Um, I love Go ahead, Kathy. Sorry. Yeah, >> that's okay. I'm of the same mindset, right? If you I know change is hard, but 50 out of 59, there's something wrong. Now, is it the wrong plan? Has it not been communicated? Has it not been a good transition plan with them? It just it gives me great great pause. I mean, if it was 20, you know, 10 out of 15 or but 50 out of 59 is a big red flag. I also

046am concerned we just did um leveling and now we're in introducing more change more change in the middle school. So, those are my two um those are my two challenges. And I have to say when we sat through the last board meeting, which was the first time we got a detailed presentation um of the uh middle school plan, at least as I recall, um to have uh heads of class sitting in there saying they had never they hadn't really been included, they hadn't been reviewed the plan. Right? So that's where I say is it something in communication in transition and whatever but it's not set up for success. >> Thank you. >> Uh Donna >> um yeah to uh Kathy's point um I'd like to know um how much were teachers involved in uh in

047this process or decision making? I was under the impression they were more involved in it than they were. Maybe I'm thinking of something else. Uh and also um how was it communicated to them? Because that might be um partial um of the problem. But u Jen, if you could speak to that, I appreciate it. >> Yep. So um so the scheduling committee was made up of 12 members, correct? Six from each of the middle schools. Um, I know that at the time when we formed it, it included um the building rep for the union. Um, they changed from year to year. So I think they were the rep when we started. I'm not sure if they were still the rep when we ended it. Um and so um they were involved in the process from

048I think essentially setting what the vision of and the goals of the new schedule were were going to be from the the outset as well as looking at um potential different schedules and structures that are at other um middle schools um so that they could have sort of a a a viewpoint of the different possibilities that existed. Um then um when we sort of and and when we got kind of like um feedback on sort of what the those goals were and and pros and cons of different middle school schedules um we went into sort of the mode of um actually designing schedules. Um and and that's that was more at the administrative level because we sort of had to design them and kind of test them out with like real kids to see if

049they were going to actually work or not. Um and at that point that was when we were also getting a sense of how much additional staff would be required to run the schedule. Um some of the schedules that I would say could have been more preferred by um in terms of meeting all of the goals required significant more staff than what we're requesting right now. So, um, some of those ideas were, um, sort of, uh, or those proposals were were were stopped because it was just going to be far too expensive of a proposition to move forward. Um, so ultimately we came up with two schedules that met most of the goals of what we wanted to do. the increased student choice, slightly longer academic periods, um making sure that we um were addressing um

050you know, getting kids to be able to have intervention services without disruption to the rest of their day. Um and so we presented those two schedules back to the scheduling committee. Um Shannon's a great picture taker. So we have photos of them writing the pros and cons of each of the schedules, having discussion, um talking through what they um you know saw as benefits. They were also giving um and you know negatives and they were also giving us in that process some recommendations for what I would say were tweaks um that we thought could be um could be done. Um ultimately we did tell them that they they didn't get to sort of vote and but um we did ask them to do a preference of one schedule over the other and um the schedule

051that we have currently proposed is the one that was the overwhelming choice. Um we use sticky notes so sort of a silent vote and the half you know that schedule had pretty much every single sticky note on it. Um, we shared the the new schedule, the exact same presentation that you saw last week. We shared that with the staff in November and and since then, you know, I think um the principles and Dr. Carlson have been meeting with um teachers um either individually or through um uh content meetings to talk about concerns and then kind of work through um whatever um you know sort of that they they find you know a challenge and then we um spend some time with them and work through um what that challenge is. So we're still sort of

052making adjustments or tweaks or um trying to find ways to support them in the change. Were the teacher were the uh folks on the committee actually teachers? >> Yes. >> Okay. They weren't administr Yeah. >> No. Uh no. Um Shannon uh I'm sorry, Kathy and and Jason sort of led the committee, but there were there were 12 teachers. We made sure that they represented different content areas. We wanted to make sure we knew we were talking about world language, so we included a Spanish teacher. We wanted to have um at least one um either special education or interventionist person. We wanted to make sure we had representation from life arts um from the academic areas. So it was a very it was 12 very diverse teachers within the middle school um uh you know faculty

053who were um members of that committee. >> So there are three uh uh members who want to speak. I'm going to start with Patrick and I know Autumn and Donna have been raising their hands as well. So, uh, go ahead, Patrick. >> Hi, Dr. Buyers. Just a a quick question. You talked about, uh, you had another plan. There were other plans that required more FTEEs that unfortunately the reality of this district is we are probably the most have the most financial oversight of any district that there is because we have the AFC. We have so many people coming in and saying this and so we always want to have the smallest budget that we possibly can. Uh can you talk more about how many other that those other plans how many FTS they would require?

054>> Um I think the worst one we needed seven um and then I think most of them were at five. >> So a plan so the the plan to have a plan that would make pro quite possibly make our staff happy that they believe in that they can get behind that would maybe work better would be five FTEEs. Yes. >> Okay. So, we can think maybe we can look at that as a possibility instead of instead of, you know, trying to always go the cheapest route. May we go the right route. >> And that's not to you. That's that's to that's to us as a district of of always coming in trying to make things pretty small. Thank you, >> Autumn. Go ahead. >> Thank you. Um, so first I just want to say I

055uh I definitely have appreciation for the work that has gone into um the planning of this schedule um and all of those that um of you on the call that were um have been a part of it. One of the things that I want to make sure that I clarify, I want to make sure I understand is around the equity concerns with students that do that with the current schedule that receive intervention that um are a part of special education. Am I right in understanding that it sounds like um Kathy I think what you were saying is more the current with the current schedule the issue is more that they are taken maybe repeatedly from the same class and where with the new schedule they would they would be able to receive intervention over different

056classes more than it is that they like don't have access to to certain electives. Is that right? So we pretty much have two teachers that provide intervention, a math interventionist and a reading interventionist. And right now the one period that all students for the most part are free is period 8. It's that academic success period. So by moving wind throughout the day, those two teachers will be able to work with kids in four different periods rather than in just that one because now if a kid wants to be, you know, if we want to work with them, give them intervention, they have to be pulled from something else because they all can't get service during period 8. They have to be pulled from language or usually from electives, from music. Um we don't pull kids

057from physical education. We we never take that. Um but they get pulled from from multiple areas. So, um, that's why moving wind throughout the day would help to alleviate some of that pressure. >> Absolutely. Absolutely. So, yeah, I just wanted to to understand that it's not necessarily that they don't have because I think what some folks, my myself at least, were thinking was that it was meaning that they currently don't have choice in the specials. It is that they do, but they often have to get pulled from them because of that eight, right? Because really, they can only be seen in that um that block. Thank you for clarifying that. And then the other question along with that is do you um can you give an an idea of the number of students that would

058be positively impacted right that maybe currently really are taken from you know electives or other classes where there where this schedule you know this proposed new schedule um would be able to alleviate that. >> It's hard to know the exact number but I can tell you that onethird of the students in our school um have a 504 or an IEP. Um, and then on top of that, there's another 40 to 60 kids, it's fluid again, like Kathy kind of said, that get intervention. So, um, you know, any words of upwards of 150 kids could be could be impacted by by opening this up and and giving them more places to be serviced rather than taking them out of an elective. >> Right. Thank you. Yeah. I think you're still muted. >> Sorry. Uh, yeah. So,

059I said Donna Schustster and then Dana. Sorry, Donna. Go ahead. >> Hi. Uh, thank you. Um, so I find it given the teachers union feedback after surveying the teachers, I I would also have difficulty supporting the middle school uh changes and staff. Um, I there is one question I just wanted to clarify. Jen, you said there would be a if um a French teacher was hired 22 student cap. Well, that by contract we can't have class sizes any larger than 22. >> So, you anticipate having one French class in each middle school with uh servicing 44 students >> altogether? Yes. >> Okay. And how and currently there's how many mandarin classes? >> There are four man four Mandarin classes. Correct. >> So, we have four Mandarin classes >> and we would have four four French

060classes. Okay. So, I thought you said one. That's what I was trying to understand. So, it' be 44 students in each school. >> Yes. >> Okay. That Thank you. That was one other thing. And you know, I I wonder because you move digital media out of the elective choice uh for the students who weren't interested in taking music. that is there something else that could be developed without adding headcount like broadcast as you mentioned that might give students another choice or moving an elective option into that that may help while we perhaps to Patrick's point maybe look to find an optimal schedule that our teachers could um get behind and endorse. Well, so you could take any one of the life arts choices and move them opposite PE, but you have to hire or you

061have to have something to off to offer in lie of that life arts choice. Um, so so if you remember when we put digital media in as an elective opposite PE, um that's where general music was um provided to every single student. And if they didn't get into digital media or Mandarin, they had to take band or chorus on top of it. That was when we were having kids with the double music. So then eventually we moved the music into the PE space and gave the digital media to all of the students. Um, but anytime it so you could lift any one of those life arts classes out and put it as an elective, but you would need another life arts to to be there. Um and you know it I mean some people may

062remember this when when we first started that life arts choice was reading. Um we had um every kid had to take a special class that was just extra reading time. Um and it was one of the four life arts and we reduced that position and um and and because we changed our our English curriculum and teaching reading in isolation is is not necessarily best practice. Um, but we we always need to have four life arts as part of the rounds. So, if you lifted digital media out, you would still need to replace it with something. >> Okay. Well, um, how many K how many students currently take digital media? >> All of them. How many students were requesting it prior that you had to um do you know how many students were previously requesting it

063that didn't necessarily get it because of the cap? >> Jason or Kathy, do you remember? It was a lot. >> We had to turn away um a lot of students um because there was no there was no room for there was no room for them. So, you know, we we kind of, you know, had to negotiate a little bit and make sure they got the technology education instead of the digital media. But those are really two very different experiences. Um so it was really you know our goal I think eventually to offer digital media to everyone because again it um helps students across the curriculum. >> Right. No, I've heard different feedback. So, I've heard some people who don't want it and then of course what you were what you were seeing is that um

064you had students who had to to turn away and it might be because they just didn't really want to take music in any way. Um so I I understand that. Okay. Thank you very much. Appreciate it. >> Go ahead, Dana. I just think for me given our last meeting and the representation of uh heads of class and also faculty combination for me it would have been great to see one of those teachers who was on this committee come out and support the change. That would have been really great for me. You know, it's it's hard to get behind this plan not hearing one faculty member come out and support it. So I just, you know, that would have been really that would have been that might have changed things around a little bit for me,

065but I haven't heard that. And and not one faculty has come out to say to myself, hey, listen, you know, that's not how we all feel. We we some of us were on that committee. We we feel this is the the better move. So it's it's really hard to get behind that knowing that. Thank you. >> Thank you, Lena. Kevin, >> I just want to say, you know, there may be a lot of benefit in this schedule change for our children, but just listening to this to this discussion and hearing public comment from some of our teachers, something went wrong in the process, right? So, it it sounds to me that, you know, Dr. buyers has laid out some, you know, reasons why it would be great to make the schedule change, but I agree

066with those who have said that they can't get behind this if we don't have the support from our teachers. Now, I also agree that like we all don't like change, right? But this there seems to be an overwhelming majority of teachers that can't come along. And I think that with anything any type of change this big that requires their 100% I think we have to have them like at least half of them on board with this. So I think I'm sure intentions were good but something wasn't right with the process. And so I think we my recommendation would be that we sort of table this uh schedule change for some other time. The last thing I'll say is um well I have a question. Are kids not pulled from the subject that they need intervention

067in? So like if they're an ELA and the Okay. All right. Thank you J. >> No. >> So >> yeah. So one thing uh before uh I know that some of you have not spoken and uh may have comments to make. Uh just wanted to ask you uh given B's question. uh today we don't have to approve the schedule change that's not our uh role right like know today what we need to do is to approve the but uh you know the the the numbers and uh my question is what's the sentiment around the addition of the two faculty because we need that for uh world languages and things of that nature because that was I think uh going to be important even whether we decide what we what our feelings are about the schedule

068change uh so I just wanted to bring that up And then if there are others who there clearly people on the finance committee who have not spoken. If there are if they have thoughts that they wanted to uh make please go ahead. And if there are others who have comments please do. >> Uh Donna go ahead. >> Um yeah I I can't I'm just going to go back to the schedule. Um I'm I'm excited about um you know folks in the district looking at improving student performance by adjusting schedules so they can maximize their learning. Um and I think I want to like give them credit for looking at that and really working on that and all the people that came together. However, I think that it needs to be tweaked a little bit and

069I would propose like I think uh it's already been said uh to rethink it and maybe uh put it out another time. And I also want to support what Patrick said. I mean, if there's um if we want to really maximize student learning by adding um making a better schedule, maybe we should look at adding the staff to some of those other schedules that um Jen had mentioned that they looked at. Um and the next time around to really do look at um how to get teachers um to buy in a little bit more. And I have to say I wouldn't expect half of the teachers to agree with change, but maybe a little bit more than just uh a few of them. Uh so um because I know that um uh people do resist

070it. People get very comfortable in their routine. So thank you for listening to that. But that's where I'm coming from. >> Donna still. >> Hi. Thank you. So to the point of of change, I actually believe that our educators would uh go along with anything that they believed would support our kids and help them. And I do think we need to definitely rethink this. But to answer your question, sit here, that's why I raised my hand. Um, I I'm not on board with hiring a French teacher at this point because we don't know what the impact of uh language foreign language choice would be with the class sizes for both Spanish and Mandarin. I would say I would support starting slow and looking at what the impact of allowing choice in our current language selection

071and how that looks in the classroom. Um before I could support uh a adding a language to the current selection. >> Oh, go ahead. Uh there's a lot of stuff going on here, but I I want to see if we can get back uh to the budget. Uh one of the things we're looking at, I guess we're looking at is a 1.53 increase uh as was presented to us to examine. uh if the administration and the principles uh of of the schools can develop uh some alternatives that may require uh additional teachers. I don't want to tie their hands and uh we're we're looking to do the best thing for the kids as far as education goes. Uh, one of the comments, not one of the comments, but several of the comments that I've heard,

072uh, and spoken to people about is that they're concerned that we're not providing enough financing for our students uh because all we seem to be doing is trying to get the lowest budget we can. And uh I said it uh uh before uh we need to place our priorities uh at providing the best education we can and be respectful of our taxpayers and what they can truly afford to pay. Uh not just saying we can do better, we can make it lower, we can make it lower. And so what I would what I would like to suggest is uh let's talk about the 1.53 and uh not cutting uh the additional uh uh teachers that were included with that because maybe two weeks from now we can have an adjustment to the schedule. Uh the

073principles can come in and say we've worked with what you have. We still need those extra people, but we can do it uh now in a slightly different manner that would be s uh acceptable to the teachers. So I I I would not support going lower than the 1.53 and removing the teachers because once you do that, you can't put it back really. Uh so uh that that's my position and uh I know there may be a couple of other items that uh some of the people on the uh amni finance committee may have concerns about whether it's a particular line item I or something else but uh that's where I stand. >> Yes. Uh thank you Paul and uh Megan. Uh, I know that Megan was raising her hand and Jen has her hand

074too. So, yeah, go ahead. >> Just on what Patrick said before and then what Paul just mentioned, I don't believe that there is a goal by the AFC or any of the town boards of finance to make our budget as low as it can possibly be. I think the approach of slimming down the budget every year evolves out of the fact that over the last I don't even know how many years we have had a $2.2 million surplus on an annual basis. Um that at the end of the year the board votes to keep 2% and carry over to the next year and then whatever is remaining after that gets sent back to the towns. So if we look back at 2425, it was something like a three and a half% budget surplus that two

075of that got kept and put into our educational reserve fund to be used for this year and then roughly 1 and a.5% is what is being distributed back to the towns now this year. So if we were a finely tuned machine that was not generating these, you know, unused budget portions year in and year out, I don't think there would be the same um, you know, magnifying glass held up and the scrutiny put to it. It is the fact that every year we seem to wind up with a couple million dollars that aren't spent. And so to have people say that we are nitpicking and you know cutting the budget to the quick and things like that, I don't think that that is fair. Um particularly given when the district doesn't spend everything that it's

076given every single year. And so there's this sense that there is this inherent buffer that is built in and then every year we build the budget against the previous year's budget that had that excess built in. And so it just keeps chugging along with this excess built into it. Um and so I think that's where that sentiment comes from. Um I >> we lost you or I don't know whether it was just me who lost you. >> No, she seems to be frozen. Um, but the reason we're talking about the middle school schedule, Paul, is because that is the primary driver of headcount increase right now, and that is a budget consideration. >> So, uh, before I pass it off to Jan, I I have to repeat something that I keep saying about the surplus,

077right? Uh I think and I I hear you Megan and I hear what the folks at the uh Orange Finance Committee uh talks about, but I want and again I I'm all for reducing the surplus, but I I think we make the surplus into something that it is not. it. The rhetoric around the surplus about how it is somehow we are overburdening uh uh taxpayers by $2 million every year is very uh problematic because what is really happening is somebody paid for a little extra this a little thing a long time ago and we continue to keep that same amount and if you were to cut this surplus down by a million or whatever uh you know it could never go below a million because of all the other reasons. And so really, we're talking

078about the discretionary part about a million, right? If we did that, it's going to save us one time the interest rate on that thing. So we're talking about a 30,000, $40,000, whatever that might be. That's the debate that we do it every year to argue about why there is no transparency, why there is this is not, you know, given everything else we are willing to do. If you add one FT, that's about 120,000. We talking about a 40,000 hit or something of that nature for something that's a long time ago some other taxpayers paid. It has been in the budget and every year we go back. And I I just think that this rhetoric has been problematic and it just focuses on the wrong things. And so when Patrick and Paul are talking about it,

079it's not because we think we should not do, but the rhetoric is overheated for what really is the cost to the taxpayer. And I think we've all said this, but I just wanted to say this again. Um, uh, I should pass it on to Jen. >> So, I I am with you, Sadir, about the surplus. Um, and I am one who is always going to be for fully funding and and more full-time um, teachers. But I just I want to point out something that Dr. Bear has put in her presentation which is that the budget will be increasing the next few years. Um this is not a low budget. This budget is low sort of falsely because we have a low debt this year. So I think we need to take that into consideration when

080we're saying that the budget is low. Yes, it's a low percentage increase, but part of that is because the debt is low. So, if we add multiple full-time teachers, we just need to think about that those teachers, assuming, you know, we don't make some major changes, continue into these next few years. So, I I am very much for world language choice. That's something that I think it it sounds great. Um, I do think it would be good if we had some numbers on which kids want to take what. I know that's not always easy to get. Um, so that we could make an informed choice about perhaps reducing something, increasing something. Um, you know, but I just I think that's something we need to keep in mind is that part of the low budget, quote

081unquote, is because of our low debt. Um, and it's not necessarily as low as it looks. We are still funding all the things that we should be funding. Um, which I think is wonderful and those will continue in the next few years if we keep all of those positions. >> Is there anyone else who wants to comment? >> Thanks, Adar. Yes. All right. >> Yes. Uh Christian, please. >> Thank you. Um regarding the uh the middle school proposed changes, um I stayed quiet just to hear everybody else speak. Um but I I I agree with some concern. I don't know that the teachers that are uh reaching out and contacting us uh the officially and otherwise are just afraid of change. I think they have their best interests of their children and the schools uh

082at heart and to the extent that what the other issues may be even in a costbenefit analysis is not perfectly clear I I'm not comfortable you know subscribing to the proposed scheduling change and any budgeted funding that would facilitate that. separately in relation to the the the budget. I know over many years um there have been you know some consternation over what initially was a surplus or an overage but year after year after year after year is no more than it's not a fluke any longer. It's not uh sometimes it happens, sometimes it doesn't. every single year with predictability almost to the point of certainty and purpose uh as opposed to just happen stance at the end of a frugal year. We have within $100,000 either way $2 million surplus every year. So what we're

083talking about may not be uh sad more hey the end justifies the means. What's the big deal? It's only 30 or $40,000 at the end of the day of the taxpayer. I think it's a more fundamental issue than that. I think it's if we're here to budget and do a zero budget analysis as I understand our task is set before us then we are supposed to target a realistic number and are we actually doing that if over the last five six seven years or so we've come up with a $2 million surplus every year I would say no uh I would say that's the product of some excellent budgeting and some frugal spending and some careful allocation and reallocation of funding. Uh so it's not nefarious but the fact of the matter is that through

084our budgeting process we have now built in um a buffer for these contingencies like you said uh city and others. Hey what if we get um you know a special ed need hey what if we have uh the need for another teacher that develops along the way at least we've built a cushion in. Well building cushions is not what we're tasked to do. There's no cushion line item in the budget. Uh and so what I propose is that it's a nonpartisan it's not it's not uh rhetoric really. It's more uh all of us on the board from every town that we're from say, "Look, let's make a concerted effort to send a unified message of solidarity that we're going to cut the budget by an extra half percent as a message to our constituents that

085we're really going to try to take an affirmative measure at not having a $2 million buffer and not essentially overt taxing because that's what we're doing." And I know um again, you could you could analyze it down to the pennies. it it it hits your wallet and my wallet in each town. But as a practical matter, we are now it's not an inadvertent. It's not a mistake. It's not uh sometimes it happens, sometimes it doesn't. It's intentional. And so what our towns are asking us to do is to please stop intentionally overt taxing us a certain amount every year. Now, the correlary to that is what if we do run into a need? What if we do actually have uh an unanticipated catastrophe or extra budgeting need? What our towns are telling us loud and

086clear is they'd rather we come to them and say please give us more than us proactively take more from them without really asking. Yes, that means they'd rather have uh a uh a referendum and the costs that go along with it. I say let's give our constituents and give our towns what they are asking us to give them. And that is a more accurate budget without a $2 million buffer and the understanding that if we need more money, we'll come back to them. Thank you. So let me uh correct the uh issues here right I will say this once more the zerobased budget is not to get to zero right it is to start every year from assuming that no costs are taken and then we have to like explain and justify what the need

087is that's what zerobased is it doesn't mean that we are expected to get to a zero budget and I know this I know you know this Christian so I'm just saying this if there is any misunderstanding I'm not trying to uh tell you this But uh the second part that I will say is this is not repeated taxation of the taxpayer and that is the point that I'm trying to insist. It is like a bank giving you a one-time loan that you keep and you keep holding it. Okay? It is a one-time loan and a loan that was given to the district a long time ago by somebody some taxpayer in the past. If we fix this problem, >> the two million every single year, it's not one time. >> No, no, no, no. >>

088We give back the money to the taxpayer every year. So, it's the same money that the the bank is giving us back. The bank takes back our money and gives back the same money. So, this idea that the the taxpayer is repeatedly being taxed is not true. And so I just want to make it very clear to folks right that this idea that oh we have a $2 million surplus so we overt taxing the taxpayer every year is not true. What it is is somebody gave us a million dollars extra. You cannot go below a million. So the argument really is about that extra million. That million was given a long time ago and if we did this correction that you uh folks think would help it would be a one-time correction. it would be

089a one-time correction that would go back to the taxpayer because every year we giving back that million and they giving it back to us. So it's the same money that is coming back to us. So this I I think you know meaning I'm all for reducing the surplus if we could but I I think it should be based on the correct arguments as to what exactly are the cost we're doing and to me the risk of an extra referendum is far greater than the benefits of giving a one-time tax benefit to the taxpayer of about 30,000 and that's or returning that money that as long as we are all agreed on the the math I am fine with understanding like you know whether we should cut it down further but I think the math is

090not what is being said in the rhetoric and that's what I'm trying to uh correct >> um I just have a quick comment quickly um sir um since the consensus seems like um we're not moving forward with the middle school schedule that's what it sounds like to me um should we get better numbers to vote on um cuz it seems like if we need to extract the four additional FTEEs from the budget, we're looking at different numbers. >> Yes, but I'm not sure if everybody agrees like I know some people said that they do not want the word languages uh uh to be inserted. I am not sure that everyone agrees to that. uh and uh my own view is that this has been an issue for a long time and uh notwithstanding the schedule

091if they had proposed something that would have been separate from the thing I think many of us would have supported it. So I wanted to bring that up before we decided whether the change of the schedule I think and the world languages could be separated >> and and I will confirm that they absolutely could. So I I I think maybe there is a I don't know uh Paul you know the protocol better than I do. Should we try to take more on where people's uh thoughts are on this issue before we move further in terms of the discussion Paul uh you're muted Mr. Davis, you're still muted. >> Oh, you're still muted. >> Paul, you're muted. Uh, so we can't hear you. >> Sorry. >> There you go. >> I apologize. My hearing isn't as

092good as it was 50 years ago. Uh, different different approach, different way of looking at things. Uh, first of all, we have no taxing authority. The towns are the people who are taxing the their residents. when we return the money to them, they have the option of returning it to their taxpayers by using it for next year's budget. Uh if the town does that, then the surplus is benefiting the taxpayers because they are then uh having our education being provided at a lower tax rate. So, you know, you could look at things like that uh and make decisions in very different ways. uh if we didn't have that uh capital fund, we'd be doing the library a little bit differently now. Maybe it would be a bond that would increase the taxes for the communities.

093So, we're using that money that the taxpayers have already paid to build a new uh or to renovate our library. So no matter what we do, no matter how much money the towns collect and give to us, it is either going back to the towns to the benefit of the taxpayers or it is being put away to be used for the education of their children at a lower cost which is also the benefit of the taxpayers. So when people are saying we have a surplus and we're overt taxing, well, I don't look at it as overt taxing. I look at it as we're building a budget. And I I also beg to differ. There's a lot of you are saying there's built-in stuff here. And what I what I see is a budget based on

094what we've looked at as the requirements for our school district for the next year and then doing something that almost no other finance department does. Find ways not to spend the money. Because for years and years and years that I've been in politics and years of working with education, I was told as a teacher, you've got to spend the money because if you don't spend it, they're going to complain that you're not using it and we're overt taxing people. And so there there there are different ways and there are political ways, but I I I do have a couple of questions as far as finance goes. Um, uh, Joe, I know you, uh, are have been directed to vote no higher than a 0.99. Did you guys discuss where that money should come from, uh,

095and why it should be a 0.99 and not not a 1.2 or anything like that? Or was it just uh, you know, a number that the guy selected? >> Yeah. And well, as a well, as a board, we discussed what we were in favor of approving. Uh, and based on all of all all six inputs from all of the members, it came to about a 1% increase. Um, it's not, again, not scientific. Uh, I think we we were we were comfortable with the 1%. Again, the surplus, I mean, I'm hearing both arguments with the surplus. And like I said, I'm I've always been okay with the administration keeping a $1 million part of the surplus every year, 2% to be used to keep the bonding down, which is a good thing. And like you said,

096we it goes back to the town anyway. And you know, I hear both sides of it. And I I and I I understand both sides of it, but at the end of the day, if there's a surplus, keeping keep the million dollars toward education, keeping the cost of bonding down, and returning the rest to the towns. I mean, I think it it's okay. And I and I get it. Are you really overt taxing anybody? Yes. No. It's coming back to us either way. Like you said, it does benefit the taxpayers on the back side. Uh and like Megan was saying, it and Christian, is it built in? There's a there's a surplus that's in there and we have to try to figure that out because that does drive some people crazy with the continuous surplus

097of $2 million every year. But it's going to good use with the million dollars like I always say, but we we as a board came up with the 1% increase looking at all of the factors. you know, we're not looking where to allocate those funds, but it's just a matter of we feel the 1% is reasonable um in the budget based on surpluses and there some monies built in there. And then the other part of this, it sounds like the the new schedule in the middle school is not very popular uh with the teachers and we need their buying in my mind. Uh, no, I was I was all for it because it sounded like the students were wanted this this it was their request, but maybe it wasn't communicated very well to the teachers

098who need to serve the product and to teach the product. Um, so there's definitely a disconnect there which I think we have to fix for sure. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have one other thing and it's a budget thing and it's a little offthe-wall here. uh all of the board members have been receiving uh emails uh from a group group of activist students who are opposed to AI um in the schools uh and uh they are recommending and we don't often get a recommendation from students or teachers or anything as far as a line item goes uh uh reduction of the AI budget and there I think there was $19,000 in there Uh I I don't agree and I don't support that because I I I think they're taking some things out of context.

099For example, uh they're looking at a teacher assigning something using AI as something detrimental to your education. Whereas the teachers are working with the students so they understand how to use AI. uh they also suggested that uh the uh uh data data uh costs of AI are huge and we shouldn't support that by having uh its use in the school which I don't think is uh a good idea either because we're leaving it up to our students to work on that part of it and if we don't work with them on that and using AI properly it'll always be high and we have great science students in our school and I look forward to them working a way to lower the electrical cost of AI. Uh and uh lastly, there were quite a few political

100uh concerns such as where the money that we're spending is going and how it's being used. And uh while we do have some partisan differences, that's not an area that we're supposed to be discussing as to how the company that we buy the materials from it uses it. And uh so uh I would not support that. But as I say, I do commend our students. Uh they become activists. They have u concerns that they're supporting and I just just felt it was important to let them know that we do listen and uh we do take up that that. But I I would not recommend the $19,000 reduction. >> Thank you, Paul. And then >> um so I would like to talk about the AI piece for a second if that's okay. Um I spoke to

101the group um as somebody who's on the technology committee as the board lays on and uh because of my job I was very clear that I don't speak for the board and that I am just listening to their concerns but I will tell you that I have my own concerns based on what I do. Um my the nonprofit that I work for is very technology AI adjacent and I don't know that the budget and I I will I'm comfortable with them knowing this as well. I don't think that the budget is the place that we have this discussion personally. Um I think that class companion is the grading uh product and it we're not paying for that at this point. It seems like only a few teachers are are utilizing that. Um I do think

102however that this is something that policy should take up. I think there should be a very very clear very um as safe as possible policy for both teachers and students related to AI. Um and I think there should be an opt out option for students. Um for multiple reasons I think students should be allowed to opt out. I will tell you from a like worry point of view um in terms of like being liable um I know that these school provided things say that they are safe. These platforms say that they're safe. So do regular AI platforms and they are not. Um children die by suicide because of these AI products and they are exploited and sexual conversations go on. for very very bad things that happen with AI and I know that there are

103school versions that say they are safe and I have a lot of uh concerns about that um that I think we need to really look into especially in terms of policy. Um but I will say that I think that in terms of the budget we are not supporting a tool that is used for grading. Um and I think these perhaps are things that we can address with policy instead of budget. Yeah, my view is similar to James that uh this is not the place and time for the discussion but there is a place and time and we should have that discussion. I think Christian forwarded I think to all of us perhaps uh some of the policies around what other places are doing. Uh we have state uh level discussion on this. Um and again

104like you know there are both sides to this issue and like you know and whether we will be able to completely resolve this because every state every government agency every school is actually trying to look at it and uh for any one of us you know despite all of the knowledge that we might have to be able to come up with something satisfactory that would appeal to a large group of people would be difficult. So in some sense we'll have to go with the best practices that are there subject to some changes that we might have. Uh but clearly that's a different discussion and it definitely does not belong at this point. Uh so while we listening to students we appreciate the fact that they are activist about it and I think raising their voices

105which is wonderful. Uh but yes I agree with you. Anyone any thoughts around the AI part? Okay. So, and I'll uh we'll we'll try to address that in policy uh to the extent that it could be a assistance to the board and to the superintendent. >> Thank you. Okay. Uh so we we uh so should we go for the motion now or should we think about what other options might be? Should we just go with 1.53 and uh uh Oh, Megan. Yes, please go ahead. >> So, I mean this is if we operate under the assumption and realizing this is kind of taking an average. If you assume that a cost of an FTE is $120,000 because when you take into account the total salaries and benefits bucket and divide by the number of people

106we have, that's kind of the implication. I mean, if I had to make a motion as the AFC right now, I would remove the three people that are intended to support the middle school schedule change. And the impact of that by my math is, give me one sec. >> You don't have to do the math. Terry is here. She'll do the actual math for you. >> Okay. Um, but I come up with a.9% budget increase. >> It's actually 1.02. >> Okay. So that may just be knowing the specific amount for those specific people. But >> yeah and I will say that I am not comfortable with uh because of the mingling of the uh uh the teacher uh you know the world languages and the schedule change we are we are postponing something that I

107think we've had uh long discussions about. uh so just because we uh we are uncertain about the schedule change I I don't I'm not sure that it is a good idea to uh there isn't that so if we want to support the world languages change what would that mean for the number of FTES >> so you would reduce to the health and PE teachers and maintain the the special ed teacher and the world language so Terra if you took out the two health and pees what would the percent increase Okay. Just taking out the two PE teachers. The foreign language the world language teacher would be in there. >> Mhm. >> 1.19. So how do we proceed uh in terms of uh the motion? Like does anyone have suggestions about how we might want to

108proceed? >> Are you guys taking you're so you're taking away the PE teacher now? Again, >> these are the two additional PE teachers for the middle school schedule change. Dana, not from the high school. >> Thanks for clarification. Yeah. So, uh do we so we have three numbers 1.53 with the schedule change 1.19 just with FTE for the thing and 1.02 02. So those are three sets of numbers under three options. Uh and uh so which uh so is there a way we want to move forward in terms of uh thinking about it? Uh to me the sentiment in the room is that there is not enough support for the uh schedule at this point. uh and I think uh I personally appreciate a lot of the work that has gone into this and I

109believe this has been done in good faith and I think there are many advantages to this uh thing. Uh it just seems like a timing issue. I wish we had known this a few couple of months ago and we would have had the opportunity to send it back perhaps to get a little bit more communication and uh with the and persuasion of the teachers that would have been great but I guess we had to make a budget decision at this point and it does not seem like there is enough support in the uh for the schedule change. Uh so given that uh maybe this is something that needs to come up in in a following year at least that's how I'm thinking about it and I wanted to and but I do really believe that

110we should take at least you know we should not we should separate out the world languages uh portion of the FTE from the schedule change. >> So I mean as a member of the ASC I would make a motion to support the 1.02% 02% because I think you can you can still rotate academic success without a schedule change versus having it eighth period for everybody right now. You can still offer a language choice of Spanish or Mandarin without adding a third language until you see how class sizes and choices shake out and what you'll actually need to support and whether that you know requires a Spanish teacher reduction, then you're not actually adding an FTE, you're swapping an FTE. Um, so that that's from my perspective, I think that's the prudent way forward. Um, and

111you know, we talked about the committee of teachers. You had six from each school. That's roughly 20% of the staff of each school. So, you would hope when you have something like that that those 20 people or 20% of the staff is involved in the decision-m then go out and markets it to the rest of the staff to have their buy in. And we don't even have 12 people at the schools that are in favor of it. So that's where I'm at. >> Sorry. Can I have clarification? >> Yeah, please go ahead. >> Um, so the 1.02, does that include the special ed teacher for sales or is that not needed? >> That teacher part of sales. Yeah. >> Okay. >> Thank you. Sorry. >> Is this a vote that has to happen tonight? >>

112Yes. Yes, >> by the AFC. The AFC has to vote on this tonight. >> So, one thing is that we can have an upper bound and the board can cut that down in in a later meeting if there is more information that is needed. So, the AFC can take a vote and say, well, we give you this upper limit, but that is not binding. And uh well the upper bound is binding but not the uh that we don't have to go ahead and so this may give us a little bit more flexibility if we believe later uh there is uh some uh opportunity to uh you know uh cut down but if we do not do that and the board later wants to do it I think then it'll become a problem. >> Thank you.

113>> So I guess we only are taking the AFC vote today right? >> Yes that's it. And so so we are only taking the AFC vote. Uh perhaps I think I should just ask the AFC folks if they have any thoughts. Uh Megan has expressed her opinion but uh there are others who have uh thoughts on how we should uh move forward in terms of should we go for the 1.02, 1.19 or the 1.53. Um I I just want clarity on one small thing that's been kind of in my the back of my head kind of bothering me a little bit. So um you had um Dr. Buyers, you had returned the PE teacher back to the high school. Was it the consensus that you didn't need a PE teacher? But then I think you

114said you decided not to go with a STEM and the PE STEM. I guess you decided to keep PE and get get rid of STEM or >> Yes. So, so um following the public comment from the last board meeting >> um and the um the lack of support to reduce um PE at the high school level >> rather than transfer and change the high school PE schedule. Um, we opted to maintain the high school PE schedule exactly as it is, but in order to try to again continue to, you know, be frugal with the budget, we proposed reducing the STEM instructional coach um and and not included in the budget. um and to defer it to another year when hopefully um we would be able to look at consolidating classes and potentially move somebody who

115is currently in a teaching role into that instructional coach role. >> Yeah, I just wanted clarity because you know in a country where our kids are falling behind on math and science, I'm not saying PE is better than math or science. I'm just trying to make sure there's no, you know, there's no pressure for you to add PE and what you think is best for the kids, you know, keep STEM, whatever. But, um, I would be in favor of the 1.02%. That seems like a more reasonable um, number based on what all the discussions that we've been having. I mean 1.19 not much of a difference but um it >> it's a difference between adding another type of world language um at the the middle school. I mean the other thing and again we haven't

116given it consideration but you could also propose to add the STEM instructional coach back in. >> Yeah. We cut it for the purpose of trying to move the middle school schedule forward, but if the middle school schedule isn't moving forward, we do need a STEM instructional coach as we review and revise all of our math and science curriculum. Um, so we were deferring it and you know, and by deferring it, again, I'm saying I'm hoping we could pull it from the ranks of teachers, but we may not be able to. So, you could potentially consider that piece also. Yeah. So I yeah I I feel uncomfortable that like you know we we obviously were choosing this as a compromise to make sure that the middle school curriculum would go and now to uh not have

117the STEM instructional coach uh is like if it can be done with the with the resources we have by all means we should do that. But if we are the the deferral meant that we going to do a patchwork uh in order and then students may not get that like you know I I think it seems to me uh like in a year where we are talking in the some we're in the 1% range and again for good reason this is a year in which uh we do we do not have the bond cost uh we should be thinking a little bit you know from the point of view of what is good for the students and in a year where we have some flexibility. So uh again I would uh you know uh try

118to get a sense from the AFC as to what's the right thing. Yes, we can always go to 1.02 but is that the best thing for the students? >> Yeah, I would like to see the numbers with the STEM uh teacher. I think that's a very important part of the curriculum for for kids especially going into today's environment. Um, >> I think >> would that go to 1.19? >> Would that go to 1.9? >> A little higher than 1.19 because the instructional coach was uh we presumed it would be a a more senior level teacher and probably a higher salary. So, Terry, if there was no if we took out the two health and PE teachers and the world language teacher, but put the instructional coach back in, what would it be? So, no middle

119school teachers, but add in the instructional coach is 1.38. >> So, that would be double the cost of the uh other teacher. So, we going from 1.19 to 1.38. >> So, we took out the world language teacher also. took out the >> took out three teachers at the middle school. So, two PE, one world language. >> Yeah. >> Added back in the um >> instructional coach. >> Okay. Uh let me first I know Donna, you're uh you wanted to speak. I just wanted to get a sense from the AFC folks first because they are the ones who have to take the vote today. Uh but then I'll come back to you, Donna. Uh is there anyone else from the AFC who would like to speak? >> Yes. So dear, I'd like to quickly speak if

120I may. So if we're at 1.38, I have to ask Megan and Christian what their thoughts are. I mean, I have direction at 1%. So the I mean at one um and the 102 was good, but I I want to lean on Megan and Christian and see what your thoughts are on the 138 adding the STEM coach, STEM teacher there. uh if we will be in favor of recommending that to go to the ABOE. What are your thoughts, Megan and Christian? >> Well, Joe, I think Megan is the only one who's on AFC. >> Yep. But thanks for asking, Joe. I appreciate that. So, my thoughts real quick are uh that I look, I would love to have an open check and spend for the welfare of our kids. And I I have a question

121as to whether or not we can't still accomplish uh having the STEM coach uh and just take a uh more conservative approach to what we've done the last 5 years that has led to uh the surplus, however we want to call it. So I still think we can get to STEM and spend a little bit less uh on and have less of a surplus. Uh so we can I think we can have both. It's >> a great point. Yeah, I mean I'm with Christian on that and I would add that the the portion that we kept last year that's in the educational reserve that's currently committed to the library media project at the high school that ultimately is going to be reimbursed by grants. Meaning that we will should still have that money sitting there

122ultimately when all is said and done as well if I'm not incorrect. And just by point of clarification, um we have looked at an internal way to get get the STEM coach and it will require a schedule change. That will likely not be favored. Um just so that you know um that would be what we would potentially be looking at. >> Okay, Autumn and sorry, Donna was uh raising her hand earlier. So, uh, uh, let me go to Donna and then Autumn. Yes, Donna Schustster. Okay. Uh, she's does not seem to be there, but maybe you could speak. >> I think so. >> Okay. Uh, could you speak autumn then? >> Yes. Thanks, Sud. I was just going to say um I I I would be in favor of the world language of of keeping

123that that was um you know that is seems to be an aspect going back to like you know why we're here and supporting something that students want um in terms of increasing their choice. Um so the budget which I think is the 1.1 is that right >> 1.19 >> oh thank you um I would be in support of that. Okay. And Donna Schust you your hand is up. >> Did we lose Donna? >> Well, her hands down now. So that um I think the only person we haven't really heard from yet is is Sally. So, I didn't know if she had anything she wanted to say. Oh, Sally, I think you're muted. >> Okay, you're good. >> I've listening to everyone, I I agree with most of what people are saying. Um, >> you know,

124Bethy's a little bit more unique. We only have one vote, so it really kind of almost doesn't matter what I think. Um, we also don't have industry. So, seeing what the budgets are going to be in the next couple of years, um, is frightening. Our community school is has a huge budget increase this year initially. I don't know whether it's come down or not, >> but um, >> so obviously we would like the lowest budget increase that we could get without you know, impacting services to the kids. >> So, it's kind of like a, you know, listening to >> this teacher know that teacher know, you know, >> kind of depends >> um, you know, on where you're >> in your thoughts are. I mean PE versus world language versus STEM >> it, you know,

125it depends on where you I think >> you actually >> think is more important. >> So I would say that we seem to have all agreed that the PE is going to continue. So it's a question of whether we want to uh make an investment on the world languages or the STEM instructional coach. Uh and that's really the choice before us as we think about what we should do today. >> Mr. Chairman, Mr. Chairman, I'll go with a 1.19 to improve the word language teacher. >> But here, I'm sorry. I was It's Donna. I was having some difficulty um unmuting. So, I did hear you call on me. I apologize. I just wanted to get a little clarity about the role of the STEM instructional coach. Okay. >> So, um, and I'll ask Dr. Carlson

126if she wants to add to it, but the STEM instructional coach is to help teachers with the implementation of all of our newly revised math and then next science curriculum. So, they would serve in a very similar function to our um other curriculum and instructional coach. um her um area of expertise has been more on the humanities side and it's worked out well because that's what we have been revising first. But going forward, we know our um science and math um and technology curricula are getting revised and the instructional coach would be there um to support teachers in that implementation of the curriculum. Dr. Carlson, anything else to to sort of add? Yeah, and just to add on to what Dr. Byer said, um this role is critical really in supporting uh vertical articulation um

127in grades 7 through 12. And as Dr. Buyer said, I mean currently we have one instructional coach. I think all of you have met Mrs. Julie. Um and she supports all academic departments spanning grades 7 through 12. And the single position is responsible for supporting the curriculum development, um classroom coaching, and the instructional alignment across the district. And as you can imagine, and anyone in curriculum um committee can attest to the fact that it's a lot of work um and we have a lot of really great work going on in the district, but we really want to ensure that the written curriculum is being taught. And so this role could really um benefit teaching and learning and classroom practices for both our teachers um and ultimately impact our students. >> I'm gonna tie you to

128this chair. >> All right. So um so so thank you. So, just to um throw the opinion in here, I'm going to say that and I I can support the STEM instructional coach, but I would like to hold off on the French for now just to um get to gauge the overall interest. And if I had to choose, I would definitely choose STEM. So, thank you so much. I appreciate it. >> Thank you. Uh Paul, go ahead. >> Yeah, I'm having a little problem here. Uh it item number one, what we're doing will have absolutely nothing to do with the surplus because eliminating ROA teachers is lowering the budget, not lowering a surplus. Uh secondly, we're we're trying to do the job of our staff, our superintendent. Uh they're the ones who uh set up

129the schedules. They're the ones who select the courses. We don't we don't sit here and judge which teacher we're going to accept and which teacher and which course we're going to do. Uh that's not our purpose. I I would like to and I said it before uh when I brought up the 1.53 and I'm talking about two weeks. I would like to give the administration, our principles an opportunity to work with what they know we've discussed today and uh go for a vote that we will um uh accept a budget uh no higher than five 1.53 and do what we've done in other years. We've lowered it so that they can look at that and understand that we want the budget to be lower if possible. But if they can come up with a plan

130and that plan uh satisfies the needs of our students, that would be something that we should look at. Um I'm not prepared to vote today and I'm going to vote. I'm not prepared to vote uh for a budget that is limiting what they can do. I want to know that they've had the opportunity to do the job that we hired them to do. So uh if it comes to a vote 1.53 is my limit that uh I will not vote below. That's my explanation. >> I just wanted to say >> I'm sorry. I just wanted to say that I support what Paul just said. I think that we've talked a lot about all different pieces of this and I would like to see the administration uh go back and work based on everything we've said

131and see what they come up with if possible. >> Uh I am with Paul and Donna on this because I feel like you know one two two reasons. One is of course there the board of education can actually come back and uh change this if we give them a upper bound. Uh and second I do agree that like you know meaning here there seems to be some communication gap whatever the reasons might be you know this was done in good faith and there was a lot of work that was done uh and if they can go ahead and like you know convince us that there is the possibility of moving ahead with the curriculum in a way that I think brings the the staff forward we might be open to it and keeping that flexibility

132alive seems to be like a good thing uh because the board will definitely have another opportunity to take a stab at this. So I I am with Paul and Donna on uh this >> to keep preserve the flexibility to preserve the flexibility. >> As a member of the AFC, I don't think that like my job by the end of this month is to give a recommendation to the board. And given everything that I know right now, my recommendation isn't to give a maximum blank check for them to figure out if they can spend it. My recommendation is based on all the information that I know as of right now and at this point my recommendation would be the 1.02%. >> Great. >> I'm not going to vote in favor of a 1.53%. If that's >>

133what we'd have to do tonight. I think ultimately we we probably need somebody to make a motion around something >> um and um and have the members of the AFC vote on it and if it succeeds that becomes the recommendation coming out of AFC and if it fails then you can make another motion >> and see if that succeeds. >> Okay. Thank you. So I think we pro we've had enough discussion. Everybody has had a chance to I think express their opinions. So I think that was a fairly robust and good discussion. Thank you everybody. So let's go ahead with the motion. Uh so do I read that motion and then ask for a >> uh Okay. So I'm going to read the motion. >> Hold on. Hold on. >> Yep. So just so that

134everybody knows um there is a motion in the AFC packet that is the 1.53. So that's the the original proposal. Um and so and then again anything can be changed if it does not pass successfully. >> Yes. So I'm I'm just going to read that once and ask for a motion to uh so let me read that. The amity finance committee moves to recommend the I am board of education approve the superintendent's proposed budget for fiscal year 2627 in the gross amount of 58997700 and the net amount of 57450358 a 1.53% increase over the 2025 2026 budget. So do we have a motion? probably use your your electric thing when we get back out here. >> Sorry, I I somebody's speaking. >> Okay. >> Do we have a motion? Uh from uh and a second.

135I've been in both. So, uh are we getting any autumn? Autumn is uh and is there a second? Okay, Paul, did you >> second? >> Somebody should mute. >> I think it's Mr. Davis. So, um >> Okay. So, we have a motion. Uh so should we take a call? >> If there's if there's if there's no second then you really don't have a motion and so >> right so >> the motion would at that point fail. >> Now you can also >> you can also second the motion um Dr. Karina Kuran if you wish to. >> Well uh I will second it just so that we can have a uh a sense of the room. So I will second it and uh it it the fact that there is no second suggests that uh that

136there is an issue here. So but I will uh just so that we have a clarity on where folks are. Uh so I will second it >> from procedural standpoint. Again it's a roll call vote. Um, so just uh for Miss Allesk's sake, the members of the AFC are Sudir, Megan, um, Autumn, Joe, Sally, and Donovan. All right, ready to roll. >> Dr. Kumaron >> and Paul and Paul. >> Exit. Yeah. >> Yeah. Yes. >> Uh, Miss Cloud Ingram. >> Yes. Who's that? >> Miss Huser. >> No. >> Mr. Lofters? >> No. >> Mr. Nuzzo? >> No. >> Miss Rebuse? >> No. >> Motion fails. >> Okay. So, we go to the next motion. Uh, so in this one, I know there were several uh options here. Uh, there was I heard a few people

137speak in support of the STEM court >> get lost. >> Uh and uh so should I >> so is there a sense in the room that we should proceed with that or >> let you go. So I think that um the the way I look at it is if if you made a motion at the 1.38 then it would allow further discussion over whether or not there was an additional whether we added the STEM coach but it would also give the option to add the world language teacher. Um so I think from perspective of the board and also what um what we can do from admins like I to me it's it's sort of they're they're that the 1.38 would cover both of those possibilities. Um it would be a another teacher um and we

138would have sort of two weeks on our end from an administrative team and a board to decide which one is most beneficial to our students. Um Terry could Could I just ask is there a way that you might be able to move things around where you could do both as well? >> That's it. >> Um, not without changing again going back to looking at schedule changes at this point. Um, okay. >> But again, I I >> I that is possible going forward in probably with with either scenario in just subsequent school years. >> Okay. Uh, thank you. Uh, Paul, did you have a comment? >> Yeah, I wasn't sure I heard that last motion correctly. Was that a motion to uh do the superintendent but the superintendent's budget uh at 1.5? >> Yes, the 1.53.

139Yes, that was >> it did not include a motion to uh pass or recommend to the board uh maximum of 1.53. Is that correct? >> That is correct. >> Well, that was Yeah, we did not say maximum, but uh >> No, that not the It's not the same motion. >> Yeah. So, I think we can take the motion again, but uh my sentiment of the room is that it's not where we are. But I could do that if uh Paul, you think uh we should >> I'll make that motion. >> Okay. Uh so now there is a slight change in the motion that we are uh asking it's like the max of 1.53 which gives the uh the uh the board of education the ability to kind of p it down etc given the information

140that we have. >> Uh so do we want to uh do we have a second for that autumn seconds again? Seconds and okay so can we have a roll call? >> Yep. Dr. Kunacron. Yes, >> Miss Cloud Ingram. >> Yes, >> Miss Huser. >> Um, >> what? >> Oops. Wrong. Oops, Sally, you went quiet. Yeah, I'm sorry. >> Um, >> this is for the motion of a max 1.53%, Sally. >> So that we the board might choose to actually bring it down. Yeah. All right, I'm gonna say yes then. >> Mr. Thank you, Mr. Loftters. >> Um, no. That seems like we're trying to squeeze the schedule. We're in there kind of. No. No. >> Mr. Nuzzle. >> No, >> Miss Reubus. >> No, >> Mr. Davis. >> Yes. >> Right. That's four yeses and

141three nos >> with Mr. Davis. >> So the motion would carry. >> Motion carries. >> Tomorrow night when you hear this man lying to them as somebody should mute. Uh okay. Uh so the motion then carries and uh >> and I guess we are done with the business for the day for the uh AFC. So, >> should I take an I should I adjourn? >> Uh, yes, you can adjourn the AFC and um Joe, Sally, and Donovan can all exit the Zoom and we can finish the board meeting and well, Mr. Davis can pull us out of recess and we can finish the board meeting. >> Okay. So, the AFC's are journ. Thank you. Okay, we'll give everyone in the AFC an opportunity to get themselves together and uh we'll uh uh come out of

142recess in a couple minutes. >> All right, it looks like they are all gone. A lot of people gone. >> Mr. Davis, you're you're set. You can uh I think we're we're everybody is is out who is leaving. >> That was a very robust FC meeting. Thanks to our board. Thank you guys. All right, we we are back from recess and we have our student reports. So, uh Janet, you want to go first? Uh yeah, sounds good. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Davis. Um good, uh good evening everyone. I hope that everybody is staying warm uh in the winter storm. Um, in my report tonight, I'm excited to report on the accomplishments of our students as we move into the second half of the year. To start, um, we have eight AMD seniors who have

143been named National Merit um, finalists. So, this puts them in the top 1% of high school seniors nationwide. It's really remarkable that we have eight um, in our class this year. Um, in addition, the AMD math team has finished a really awesome regular season. and they finished first place um among public high schools in the greater New Haven area and third place overall. So they will be heading to states next. Um and uh in addition, the Math Honor Society also stepped in as volunteers for math night at Beer Road School. Um sharing their love of math for the next generation of math wizes. Um to welcome the year of the horse, the National Chinese Honor Society hosted its annual Lunar New Year celebration on Friday at the high school. Um there were performances from um

144our own Amity Chinese class students as well as community members um displaying singing, dancing um as well as traditional food catered from local partners. Um and best of all, the event was completely studentled and organized. Um in addition, our juniors have been working on their portion of the graduate portfolios. We had um in the past week 12 of them uh volunteer to give their presentations early um to set an example for their peers as well as to provide invaluable feedback um for the rest of their junior class after break. Um, finally, um, in the athletics department, we had AMD's boy, AMD boys hockey, um, win 40 at the state playoffs, and senior Isabella Aldi from the girls indoor track and field team recently broke the school record for the 55 meter hurdles, um, which was

145what uh, set previously in 1994. Um, so, thank you so much for your attention and I will return my report over to Australia to share about the middle schools. Hi everyone. Um I was going to just start with Amity Middle School Bethany. So earlier this month, this school welcomed several local elected officials um into the building and during the visit, students acted as tour guides and ambassadors. So they led guests through classrooms, explained their learning, and answered questions about their experience at the school. Um in addition, February also included a lot of reflection on the importance of relationships within the school community. So um teachers, students, and families continue to support one another um as they navigate middle school. So the staff have reported seeing a lot of examples of encouragement, collaboration, and respect among

146students, which is something that's always good to hear. Um so as many of you know students and staff participated in the winter recess from February 13th through February 17th um which provided some time for rest before continuing the academic term. And um after coming back, the eighth grade students are now entering course requests for the 2026 to 2027 school year in power school um and reviewing selections for their courses in high school with their families um ahead of the submission deadline which is later this month. Looking to the future, um AMSB is preparing for the Solen Ensemble Concert, which is scheduled for February 26, which will feature student musicians. Um at AMD Middle School, Orange, um there's been continued student effort throughout the month. Students have continued demonstrating perseverance and engagement in academic work. Um

147and the staff here noticed that there's a lot of steady effort and pride in learning during the weeks leading into the break. Um, so as the school moves through February, planning continues for the upcoming student opportunities later in the year, including activities, performances, field trips, and preparation for the 8th grade moving up ceremony. A PTSO meeting is scheduled for February 24th, which provides an opportunity for families and school leadership to remain connected and informed about like the future school initiatives. >> That's Thank you. so much. Any any questions? Okay, we go on next to the superintendent report. >> So, that was actually going to be a handout. Um, and since I am not there to hand it out to you, what I will do instead is include it in the March uh packet for information.

148>> Okay. Uh uh to your knowledge, does anybody signed up for public comment? >> Uh no, they had not. Um, not I checked with Miss Alleski and they didn't. >> Okay. Uh, then, uh, the next item, uh, if there's any items for the, uh, next, uh, regular meeting, uh, please have that, uh, to us by the end of the week, I guess. Um, which and the meeting is on March 9th. Uh, >> yes. >> Yeah. Just just a a comment. Um, I thought that workshop was outstanding. uh the feedback that the administration got uh I think gave them a little bit more background as to how the board feels uh when it comes to the additional um uh full-time employees and where uh we should be going. Um my my concern was rather than and

149I I I said it rather than telling the superintendent what should be done we were telling them what they shouldn't be doing and uh that I guess gives us a guideline uh I I think it's important that the work that they do is for the benefit of the students as you all do. I know I know that to be true. Uh and now we've given uh our administration a basic guideline of where the budget should fall, what the board expects from them, and what may be something better than we had in our discussion today. So with that, I thank you. I hope you all had fun with the snow. Uh I know uh I know our students probably they could stay up a little later tonight. Uh Jen, you have a question. >> Um based

150on the number of emails uh from multiple students and the public comments we received last board meeting, um would it be possible to put a discussion about AI and a potential policy on the uh agenda for next month >> or the next meeting? >> Yeah, I or maybe the one that's after the budget. >> I don't know if next next one, but whichever one makes sense. I think the way to uh go with that and um I had spoken to Dr. Buyers already about concern about the clarity of grading techniques as far as AI goes. Uh I think that should be handed over to the uh policy committee. When the policy committee meets, people could suggest to them what should go into the policy if there is going to be one and then uh they

151would bring it back to the board. uh if they have a plan and then people could comment on that plan rather than just talking about it uh with us and then having the policy committee go through exactly the same thing. So uh I I I think that would work more beneficially if uh the policy committee is okay with that. We'll talk to the chair, superintendent and see if uh that uh is something we could do and uh then if uh there's concern that we're not addressing it properly, we'll bring it back to the board. Okay. >> I guess my suggestion would be that it should be a joint policy perhaps created with the AI council, the policy committee and maybe even student input. Oh, >> so I I think we have pieces in place um

152where AI council can be part of the process. I my my hunch and my feeling from having looked at the few AI policies that are out there is what is really being requested are the regulations that would go with it which we would develop through the AI council. the policy would be much broader and probably not quite as um explicit as what I think some of the um communications we've been receiving would be looking for that that they're they're truly looking for the regulation piece. I believe. >> Okay. >> Sorry. Go ahead. >> We're not going to uh discuss this at this particular time. Uh there is nothing on our agenda that permits us to discuss something uh other than uh a question or two. Uh so we're going to hold off on that. Donna,

153you have uh something. >> I just had a comment. I think being on the policy committee, I would like to hear um also the board's concerns um so that we're making sure that you know we could do all this work that we're addressing some of those concerns ahead of time. So what would be some of those concerns that um board members would have or what they hear people have? Uh our our right our standard >> our standard procedures our standard procedures are not to bring something be to the before to the board before we send it to policy. Uh the way we handled it is if you have a comment or suggestion for the policy committee, you bring it to the policy committee and then the board is brought back with what this is going

154to be that the policy uh and then the board could comment it and accept it or reject it. But no matter how uh we look at that, everybody gets their opportunity to discuss it. I just think that uh the the way we've always handled it is that uh it goes to the policy committee and then comes back to the board. Okay. All right. I thank you very much for this evening and uh if there is no objection we are adjourned at uh 8:16.