001Going back. If you are online and would like to speak, raise your hand. Seeing none. Okay. It's just not on there. It just didn't >> I grabbed I grabbed this from the town board website. I grabbed this agenda. So I don't know if that was >> I don't know I don't know what the difference is. I know that some people have been out so published it. What I would suggest you still have it on the agenda you can still make a motion to >> so then let me uh go to that. I will entertain a motion for the approval of the July 28th. >> Yeah. >> Special meeting. >> So move. >> I'll second that with a question. I don't feel I want to make sure people have an opportunity to if they didn't get
002a chance before now to approve that because it wasn't on the document they reviewing. Should could we approve these minutes the next meeting is that I know it's not a huge deal but it's it's it's you know just being consistent having the materials. >> It's on mine. >> What do you do? >> It's available online but if everybody had >> Yeah, it's on mine. The only thing is it's just not explicitly stated as July. >> But it does have on the agenda itself. >> The agenda it does give you the item. >> I tell you what, let's go ahead with the vote. People don't feel comfortable obviously staying mot. >> Fair enough. Uh if the motion fails, then we'll >> you still want to say? >> No, you're good. Yes, I'll second. Okay. Thank you
003for clarifying. Perfectly understood. Discussion. >> We just had it. >> I I was just I did when I read through it, I was a little regarding the solar contract. I thought I and I don't know maybe the wording is fine, but I I thought it was a little more pointed that we wanted to include when Dr. went to town about, you know, getting some of that money back. And I don't I maybe I'm not maybe I'm missing it. I didn't see it as explicitly as what I felt like I said. Um so that that we wanted the board of ed to to get credit for, you know, kind of taking on this capital project. first of all saving the town $1.5 million on the roof and secondly that then it was going to kind of
004come to us to have pay for so we wanted the town to credit us back that in some way I I I don't know maybe it's here it >> I I didn't kind of get it in there so I >> it is in there really and I after you and I talked about that I went back and looked >> okay >> and it's on page five Okay. >> And it says a brief discussion took place regarding if they could leverage the savings in the capital plan recognized by including the ths roof in the project for the board of ed. >> Okay. >> So that kind of that kind of >> was the was the sentence encompassing our discussion. Okay. >> Um I would agree with you. I don't think it >> fully encompasses how adamant
005we were that we should see something Right. I guess that's what I'm saying. >> That we should see something, but I'm not sure, you know, that that is necessarily necessary at this point because we have no idea if if we can or if the town will even acknowledge that. >> But we do have it noted. >> But it is noted. It'll be documented there as well as today's. Okay. All right. Okay. Good. Good. I'm good with that. Other discussion. All right. Seeing none. Let's vote. Reie >> I. >> Brian. >> Abstain. >> Bill. >> Hi. >> I Jaden. >> Hi. >> Katie. >> Hi. >> Dana. >> I Jen. I >> and abstate >> passes and thank you for getting them. I appreciate you're welcome. >> All right, correspondence. We had two emails come in
006the last few weeks. One of them was uh concerning the process to get old records of of school attendance that uh the superintendent has taken care of. And the other was a question concerning the drama stipen and what the price per child for the drama program would be and if they could start fundraising now and and again Dr. Willlet was addressing that. >> Right. So it's good points of information. Would anybody from the board like to speak? All right. Seeing none, committee and liaison reports cricket. >> Nothing communication. >> Uh we have an agenda. We have a meeting next Wednesday. >> Next Wednesday. >> Wednesday. Okay. 20th. >> All right. FFC. >> We'll also be in meeting next week. Nothing to report. >> That policy. >> Uh or we'll continue the rounds of nothing to
007report. >> Consistency. All right. Negotiations. >> Negotiations with the administrators are ongoing. >> Copy. Thank you. Right. I have no chair report for today. Dr. Willlet. Item K1 monthly financial report. So as this is the first report of fiscal year for the end of year typically we wrap it up to June. We did not have a meeting in June. We haven't had one since. So this this communication gives you the end of year um bal balance June 30th as of this moment in time. Usually we do an update on this in September again because there are still some things that may clear um you know that were encumbered and so on. But as of this report, you know, at the moment in time that we did it, um the balance was 330,342, which is 75%
008of uh our budget uh for the year. So, you know, we ended under 1% of the budget for the year. Uh just as a friendly reminder that out of that 330, 188 is going to be utilized for the TMS auditorium seating. Uh so really that's something more like what would be remaining in um you know ERF is something more like 142 or something from this. So um you know as it goes on to state that 72,000 there is is potentially encumbered. So we're waiting for that to clear. So that's kind of where we are as of this moment in time. Um, the sheet that we included is our standard sheet for the monthly reports. I don't think I can get that any bigger, unfortunately. See if I can that up. Yeah. Yeah. Just so those
009people at home might actually be able to see it bigger than we see it. Um it's also you know uh it's it's just reflecting the same thing. This this is actually for the lunch reflects the 330 342 and just know that there is still some money encumbered there and that number will adjust probably not a lot but some maybe to the tune of that 70 and it'll uh be you know re reissued in September just as an update. But that's how we ended the year and this is how the first opportunity had to kind of report on the end of the year piece. Um and the object summary report for the new year is also included. Um there's not much to say about the object report for the new year because it there's not a
010lot of spending that has occurred yet. Um so I mean some basic things here code you know 130 um you know stipens all of these things that you're generally very familiar with um I for to say something is over budget at the moment doesn't make any sense because you know so the overunders there's really not much to talk about for um you know for our first month over the school year um and the close of last month was you know the 3:30 um I can talk a little bit about kind of how it ended. Um, you know, overtime was over a bit. Um, stipens was still kind of were a little bit balanced out. Um, employee benefits were kind of what we expected within 10,000. Um, health, life insurance, um, you know, we knew that
011was going to be a little over and it was. So, the year ended more or less where we expected it to land. Uh, and that's a not a bad, you know, given all that we were concerned about, it's not a bad way to end. We also wanted to make sure we had the 188. So, between the two reports to get a sense of, you know, and they are included in the packet, where we ended, and what the first month's month has in it, >> Billy. >> Yeah. Um, if I remember correctly on the 2526 budget, we included a lot of pre-purchases. Um, where would that 330 number be if we wouldn't have had to do those pre-purchases? >> Um, approximately >> I would probably put it from a material pre-purchase point of view. We also
012did a lot of energy offset, you know, that type of thing. And we had um 330 out of the UISF fund and there's a whole bunch of movement that happened there in a 100 maybe >> about 100 >> I would say or material you know materials. >> Yeah. >> Now if you that would put us approximately 430. So if we take that 430 number where historically is that about where we are normally about 1%. >> I would say that it's generally average is probably a little lower than that. Um but it's not crazy for you know um from year to year it's not an insane amount to have you know um and we we didn't go overboard. I mean 1022 at the end of the year you should and can expend on a bunch of
013things. We didn't do that. We did that in a very modest and controlled way because we wanted to make sure we'd have the 188 to cover the capital. So we actually didn't spend on everything we might have, you know, because we wanted to make sure we had the 188. We were being kind of conservative. So we did some free purchasing, but you know, we were being conservative about it. I would say that this has it's been higher than this and it's been lower than this and the average is probably a little lower than this and it was probably not as low as our average because we just wanted to make sure we didn't come short of the 188 because we committed that as part of our budget season. You know, we um flip-flop the gaps
014and we had to commit that. So, you know, we were making sure that that could was available. Plus uh you'll still see this fluctuate in among as those incumbrancers are either cleared or worldwide about 70,000 of them 72,000. >> Anybody? >> So just in case if my math is off according to this if we if we had 330 left over we have 72 in incumbrances and we have to pay 188. I'm coming up with that leaves roughly $70,000 on >> if the 72 comes out of this. >> Yeah. If the 72 goes we don't have >> So you're about 70,000. >> We would not have Yeah. Yes. For >> for ERF and ERF it would be somewhere in that range >> in that. Okay. Just wanted >> if we're lucky it'd be a little bit
015more. >> Okay. So, great. So, I'm just going to kind of piggy back just on a little bit of what Bill was saying about the uh pre- purchases. Are these falling under the instructional supplies and materials or >> Well, they fell under a lot. I'd have to go back to it's online right now. Those things some of the stuff that um that we decided during the budget process that was listed there. We'd have to go back through that and say, you know, for me to give you the full articulation of it. But I would say, yeah, I mean, if it was going to be in things like that, paper, uh, supplies, you know, something that wouldn't go bad, >> you know, um, and and the thing about that is when you do it, you know,
016it then kind of lowers your budget for the coming year. So, you might end up needing to do it again. You know, it's it's this cycle. Once that's done, we've been kind of in that slightly um of having to make it up. But yeah, I mean, if you go across the board of eds uh budgets across the state being in the range we're in um roughly and I would say 3 depending on how you look at it with the encumbrances and the TMS auditorium seating and all that, you're looking at a 37 to a 75. And if you even if you throw in some of the pre- purchasing maybe even you know a little less than one that's not crazy for a board of education budget you know to be anywhere in that range of.3
017to 1% is not a um ridiculous thing to have be the case for boards of >> that's fine for thanks >> anybody else so Dr. One question just based on what you saw last year in the next couple past couple years looking forward are there any of the areas where you're not necessarily freezing now but you're watching pretty closely expecting they have to >> yeah in legal we have to watch with extremely close I think it's going to be very tight because um we really uh lowalled that one well below what we are typically spending Um so as I said I I'm doing everything I can not to engage um with and use a lot of the knowledge we have. Um I would say that um I think energy is going to go to be
018a rising hit for us. There seems to be more signaling additional fees uh that you know seem to be getting considered right now which they seem to be able to do with impunity. I don't, you know, I don't think Pete and I were looking at like not understanding how it can just, you know, happen like that. So there be maybe increased fees and things like that that they add on to the electric bills and so on which might impacts and and pounds. Um I would say that you know the way we budgeted was very very tight. So we're going to be looking at everything very carefully. Um that's the that's the best answer I can give but I would say legal is in the top of my head. Um anything energy is in the top
019of my head. Um obviously insurance I hope we have a good year with that but um the way we structure it the state is making a lot of changes. Uh it's going to be an interesting year across the whole state with respect to how um you know insurance is handled within districts. I think people are going to be uh trying to draw place districts and towns to the state plan and there's a lot of information about that why that can be pretty risky too. Um so yeah I think it's going to be an interesting year. Anybody else? Seeing none, back with an item K2, tuition rates. So, every year we report uh the tuition rates to the board of education. Uh and the tuition rate tuition rates are calculated uh basically on our costs um
020with with some additional uh funding added to the tuition rate to cover anything that might you know be necessary for a student who might tuition into the district. So these tuition rates are higher than the per pupil expenditure rates that we have. Um, but that's purposeful and districts do that because you're charging basically a service fee for coming to the district and there can be things that might be necessary for a student that comes from out of town that may not be necessary for a student from in town. So we set these rates based on um you know our PPE plus you know certain amount considering those things and um and each year it's pretty much in a close ballpark to where it was before although it's been rising over the years as the PPE
021has been rising pupil expenditure. >> Okay. >> Any questions or comments? you know what the percentage increase is from last year's rates this year's rates or >> off the top of my head um to compare this whether these are good bad or not >> yeah I can give that to you in a minute if >> yeah that'd be great thanks >> you might want to you might want to I would say we're generalized and I can give you one I have to go get the race from last year to do that but I would say that it's within just >> in general and is there a number off topic that how many people are paying this tuition rate in in the district >> there's there's no one tuitioning in right now >> oh zero >>
022zero I mean this is different than open choice this is if someone, you know, wanted to just for whatever reason come here other than South Windsor, you know, or somewhere else. Um, I would say it's somewhere in the zone of maybe 08.08% something like that. >> No, of increase. Do you think with all the costs that we we are incurring in the district that having less than a 1% raise uh and tuition rate is the right approach? I mean was looking at all you're talking about increase from last year to this year. That's >> Yeah. Well, I'm also looking at I mean, look at the cost of increase just in salaries alone or the trash pickup or computers or whatever we're buying and using. It's well more than uh 8%. >> But it's that's not
023the difference between the PPE and our charge. It's just the difference maybe in the K2 from one year to the next. For instance, our per pupil expenditure is about $5,000 less than that than the than the birch grow number. So it's based on actuals, you know, how much it would cost from last year to this year and then adding a certain buffer and that's so there's a $5,000 difference between what you're technically spending and what you're getting. say to you >> if somebody came in >> paid to example, you're you are going to get more money than what they're putting out. >> Okay. All right. Thank you. >> But we're currently at zero doing this. >> We are because it's rare. What some districts are doing now is they are actually allowing their staff to
024have their own children come to the district, but they're not charging them something like that. It's I think it's either there's no charge or it's in the zone of 0 to 5,000. And the reason they do that is I think it helps increase their enrollment and that type of thing. Uh but the this kind of thing is is rare. I mean this is kind of you may get one one child or two children in a span of a year or two or few years. It's not a it's not coming into a program, you know. So it's not um you're not going to get 10 kids coming in. and it's going to be one here or there. And it might be um maybe a child had an experience in a neighboring district that was very very
025unfavorable and we make a call from that district saying look this student really needs a reset. We'd like to have the student come to your district rather than our district because, you know, there might have been something or maybe negative that happened with interaction with other kids and that district may pay our district money to have the child. And that's that's how this happens. Sometimes on a one-off kind of case, there' be kids that maybe would be better off not in the place they're in because of things that happen. And they're not like expulsion situations, they're life complexity situations. And so districts will sometimes send a child to another place, but they'll usually pay a rate like that. >> All right. Thank you. I understand a lot better. And I think anybody >> Yeah, I
026got a question. Please. >> Where when would a special education tuition rate kick in? >> If a student came uh to be part of our LEAP program. >> Okay. And we have had that happen, but we're not um a lot of districts are having started their own programs. And um you know, we also don't uh we hire pretty much exactly what we need for the program. If we were going to expand that program, we would have to hire staff in advance of the expansion because you have you can't, you know, have children show up and have no one to help. So you have to make an investment to expand it first and then then you start really recruiting. Right now our program isn't designed to recruit. It's designed to manage the number of kids. have
027some once in a while we'll get one, you know, from another place for a little while, but it's not usually it has to do more with legal things and residency and different things like that that get resolved and the child's back to wherever they all have to steal that life complexity situations. All right. >> It was then so many different >> so many feels like that umbrella is is why. All right. Moving on to board action and one policy 5402. >> So if you have read this already or had some experience with it already, um we're just updating the uh 5402 meal charging language. It's essentially an update to shipwin's model policy. Um, the updated policy has language in it now that refers very directly to the USDA's food and nutrition services programming. There's a
028paragraph that Shipwin felt like should be added to their policy. So, we added the paragraph. Um, the rest of it is the same. So, it's just um updating the policy as per Shiplin's advice of adisement and there was a paragraph in there that you know they recommended they put in. Dana does policy here. Any comments? >> Can you hear me? >> Um, no. Dr. Willlet pretty much hit most of it. A lot of it was um just necessary updates. So, it was a it was pretty quick and cut and dry. >> Any discussion? >> My phone just told or my watch just told me I'm stressed. Oh, lucky I get these breathe deeply. >> That's very concerning over me. That's why I don't wear the watch. >> I will entertain a motion. >> Motion to
029authorize the superintendent to update policy 5402 with the changes presented in the June 11, 2025 meeting. Second >> discussion. All right. Hearing none. Reinie. >> Hi. >> Brian. >> Hi. >> Bill. >> Hi. Jaden. >> Hi. >> Katie. >> Hi. >> Dana. >> Hi. >> Jen. >> Hi. >> And Dan. >> Hi. >> Excellent. Will the policy passes? and amend two policy 9120 conflict of interest. >> Uh this one was also uh presented earlier and um this is the second readmote to action. Uh as you may recall there were four items that used to be part of the conflict of interest um policy. There was no member of the board of education shall be employed by the board in any position of school system. There. Number two was if any member of the board is
030employed contrary to the provisions of the bylaw, the office to which he or she was elected or appointed shall be gone bacon. Um those are recommended to remain in shipwin's advisement. However, three and four were not part of what shipwin had as their model policy. So three is the immediate family, spouse, parents, children of an active member of the board of education, town council. Um the superintendent schools in the town manager shall not be appointed for permanent employment in the school district or kind of a small district. And some of you might have a child at some point that either is going to work in a school or a spouse. So it's unnecessary. It's not part of Shipman's advised, you know, advisement and you don't have to have it. So that was why it was
031brought up originally. It's, you know, it's not inconceivable that some people might not actually run if they thought they would impact their child's ability to, you know, get something um or or spouse. And then the other one is board members are encouraged to resign from the board. A member of their immediate family, spouse, parent, children wishes to apply for a permanent position. Again, it's it's not necessary if if it ever came out or came up that one of you had a child, say that became a teacher or maybe a spouse that became a teacher or significant other, um if we ever did have to have proceedings with respect to that person, which we never would, um you would just recuse yourself, you know. So, and Jessica would tell you to recuse yourself. Um, but that's
032how you can handle it. You don't have to prohibit it. So, >> would that be a requirement to recuse yourself? >> Jessica would probably say that yes, you compromising. The only other alternative she'd say either, you know, either Mr. Jones recuses himself or the whole board will have to have we'll have to have a independent um you know uh council review it or independent parties review it like an arbitration force. >> Dan, any comments? again, you were just streamlining it. Um, making it a little bit, you know, like I said, the partnership with Shipment and Goodwin and just trying to keep it as streamlined as possible and up to date. So, again, Dr. Willlet pretty much, it was too wordy. So, no, I don't have anything else to add, Tony. I can see you giggling
033over that. So, I'm good over here. >> All right. Any other discussion? Do we open ourselves up to for this recusal of not putting some language in here regarding that? cuz I I'm not saying that it ever would happen, but like Bill's saying like, you know, if you did have some some situation where they didn't want to or weren't required to recuse themsel, then you end up getting into whether it's more legal fees or bigger issues. If somebody feels they need to be involved in whatever family member it might be, if they feel like they're being slighted or a family member is being slighted, they might say, "I'm not recusing myself because they want to stand up for their son or whatever it might be." >> Well, it's possible. I mean technically though um something
034like recusal you already are in that circumstance in that if your children are in the system and there was ever an expulsion not there ever would be but if a board member's children are in the system you would have to recuse yourself from a hearing on that too. Like there's things that come up that you may in the course of your actions as board members have to if a business like um when we add the bid and then there's the two you know athletic bids. If you were somehow involved with that, you might have to, you know, not vote or abstain or recuse. So you could you can add extra language. Shipwin um shipwin's language is those two and only those two. It probably does that because it considers recusal as a regular thing that
035is typically expected board member. >> But Jessica's Jessica's Jessica's recommendation was to streamline it, Dr. because having it too wordy is I don't know they Jessica specifically said to stream well I don't know if it was Jessica but Shipman specifically said to streamline would be would it behoove us? >> Yeah I we can do those two should be sufficient because you you would be in that situation in a number of different ways as a board member. >> All right Dan. >> Yeah. Yeah. No, I was just going to say I I don't disagree, Brian, that having something in there as a requirement to recuse yourself isn't the worst idea. Um, you know, my brother applied to become a I think it was an assistant principal um over the last like 3 four months or so.
036I think I think that was a role Dr. Willlet, but like I would have felt horrible if I if I recuseed myself and he was like, "Oh, thanks for the vote." Um, so I don't I don't know how I would have wanted to handle that, but uh I mean it doesn't matter. So, but I just wanted to provide my two cents there. It's it wouldn't be a bad idea. Brad, >> I kind of agree. I mean, it's it's all well and fine to assume that everyone's going to have a good intent, but you know, sometimes when emotions get involved and family members, whatever, whoever they might be, it's not that hard to put a one sentence in there that if you do have a spouse of whatever, you would have to recuse yourself if you're
037on a board bet. >> Agreed. >> That's not particularly wordy or difficult. >> No, I would agree that it is easy to add the sentence. I just think I mean we're pretty consistent with the state model. You could be a state representative, state senator and make decisions about state police, right? You could make decisions about fire. So I don't think we're following anything that in Connecticut is not normal or regular. So I I I I think the simplicity of this just follows sort of where we are in the state as well. And I I I think it's easy to understand in my opinion. >> So what we could say is we can add a number three. We can approve it with the addition of a third item that states a board member is required to
038recuse themselves from any vote pertaining to the permanent employment of immediate >> of spouse, parents or children, you know, I don't know. There's no spices but of a spouse, parent or child. Yeah. To be clear, I'll support that. I I I just I'd rather trust the advisement of Shipment and Goodwin than add a sentence in when again that sentence is not used at a state level so peculiar uh so specifically and so regular. So I I you know I'm fine with adding that's it in but if we're being advised to keep one and two you know I have never gone against the the the legal analysis in the last four years of being on the board of ed and I could go either way but I think maybe what it eventually does is um if
039we don't have it in there and something comes up and a board member member refuses to recuse themselves or and we have to go to an independent council as Dr. Willis said, what does that cost us? >> I think said earlier >> I think just adding that third bullet point in there even if it's again yeah even if it's a even if it's not something that Shipman and and Goodwin um say is necessary think it just saves us whatever that money would be by just adding a third bullet point in there. I don't think it does anything bad. >> How much good does it do? I don't know either, right? >> How much bad does it do? I I think it just saves us that potential. >> No, I'm not disagreeing with any of the
040points you're making here. I'm I'm all I'm simply saying is >> we're seeing the model in other places and and and its effectiveness and we're seeing exactly what was recommended to us. So, I could again to your point, I could go either way on this regardless, but but again, the last four years I've gone with what Shipment Goodwin has has has has told us um as pretty good legal advice, you know, because I don't have a law degree. And so, I I I I just tend to side with, okay, what do you recommend? And if we have a thousand questions, we have a thousand questions about that recommendation. But, um just sort of signify sort of why I stand where I stand with the addition. I I'm fine with adding what again I'm fine with
041adding that stipulation, but we're being told it's not necessary. You know, Katie, >> so I bear with me. I'm going to try to articulate this as well as I can. Um I think that with so with a policy like this, I think we better we're better off having it be less specific so that there's less to argue against if there were to be a problem. So nobody could come in for instance and say well you said spouse parents and children and I don't quite fall into those categories and then we have to argue about whether >> you you went on mute >> sorry something popped up in the corner of the screen and I clicked it and apparently it muted me. Um, but so I I think that less specific allows for a broader interpretation
042of what this means and doesn't pigeon hole the board into um, you know, arguments around whether or not we we we cited what the thing is somebody thinks they are and they're on the board. Hopefully that made some sort of sense. Sorry. Thanks. It did. It did. Any other comments? All right, I will entertain a motion with or without the sentence. But please be clear. >> One one other option. You have a board member is required to recuse themselves or abstain from any vote pertaining to the um permanent employment of a spouse, parent or child. You could also say a board member will not be permitted to vote on the permanent employment of a spouse, parent or child. entertain a motion. >> Oh, hold on. Can I >> Go ahead. Sorry. >> I mean, you're
043speaking about employment, but before like you use an example of like expulsion or you were talking about like a sports contract earlier, so it's like those wouldn't count yet you still might have a conflict of interest in the policy, >> but this particular policy is about employment. >> It's only them. >> Oh, okay. I apologize. >> Yeah, >> because I heard the uh >> Yeah, when it example, he group it. Maybe I'm looking. I I I was had the wrong policy pulled up there when I just scroll. >> It's 9120. >> I like how we articulate that. >> Yeah, I do too. >> Yeah. 9120. >> I'll motion I'll make a motion to >> I just want you said this is regarding employment, correct? 9120. >> Number one, no. >> This says regard conflict of
044interest. It is but the conflict of interest policy in the 9000 series typically refers to in its language employment. So you can see number one no member of the board of education shall be employed by a board member in any position in the school system. Number two, if any member of the board is employed contrary to the provisions of this, >> it's usually this series is about employment immediate spouse members active member you know etc etc etc. Um shall not be appointed for permanent employment. Should we change the title of this policy then? >> Remember there's a whole bunch of things but this is particular to your hiring you know and it's meant to uh prevent nepotism in hiring. >> Did you want to cover? I was just saying it you're saying that there's this
045is a conflict of interest about employment and then are there other conflict of interest things about >> yeah there's role of board members there's other places where things are discussed but this is pretty explicit about you know your hiring your employment um that's just how this particular 9120 has always been it's the 9000 series has a certain bend towards you know that type of stuff this is employment the the board uh the shipwing policy only has the first two that are highlighted there in their model policy. That's what they have for this one. All right. Uh I will go back. I I probably one person, but I just I feel like we should if the policy is regarding employment, it should be somewhere in the title of this to be very clear that this is
046regarding employment. That's just my opinion and I feel whether it's been done. >> Dr. Willlet, can you just scroll to number one? It says no member of the board of education shall be employed by the board by any position within the school system. If any member of the board is employed contrary to pro provisions by this bylaw the office would which he or she is elected appointing shall become bigot. It says employed in both things. The whole point of it is a conflict of interest policy and then within that it says employment. >> I understood and I think if I'm understanding Brian's point though is if the body of it is all about employment then maybe the title should >> Yes. Yes. I'm not disputing one and two. Absolutely. I understand it's about employment now.
047I'm just saying I I feel like we should have that, but if you guys don't want to and gals, then that's fine. I mean that but to me it just seems odd that we don't have that in the I'm saying 40 years ago was done that way that we should still be doing that today. It probably has to do with the series it's in. I have to go back and look at there's each series is aligned to like an integer of a,000 2,000 3,000 4,000. I have to look at what the the main because we use shipwin. >> Yes. >> The the 9000 series is has a certain bend to it. So I just you know I'd have to look a little deeper to find out why they didn't know why conflict of interest here
048is listed the way it is. Um but you have other provisions and policies about what board members can and can't do especially in board roles. So I you know it's just where they plot it and it's just what they call it. We can change the name to anything you want it to be. You're the board. You can make it anything. Fine. But um I don't know why they didn't say in their point. >> Give me a motion. >> What? >> Come on now. >> Um motion to approve um policy 9120 with adding a just put some wording there. Oh, >> I do want one of these two. You're going to add a item. >> Um, yeah. Motion to approve uh policy 9120 um as it's shown, but with the addition of the first option wording
049for a third bullet point that Dr. Willlet has typed up there. >> Can you read it? A board member will not be permitted to vote on the permanent employment of a spouse, parent, or child. >> So moved. >> Dan, that's a second. >> Second. >> Okay. Discussion. >> I just I just again I I hope we feel this way at all levels, not just the board of that's all. Right. >> Just one thing and I don't want to too much more confusion I already have but I apologize but I will piggy back what Jaden said under his breath earlier. What if it's an aunt or an uncle or a cousin or a ne next door neighbor or you know >> you got to draw the line somewhere. >> Yeah. But I think that goes back
050to Katie's point about keeping it gentle. >> Yeah specific. But the more I'm talking, the less I'll come to. >> Well, in in contracts these days, like bereavement, they used to say of a, you know, spouse that now they just don't say anything because an aunt can have raised a child and be >> closer to them than the mother was. And yes, that's why they don't usually put specifics anymore. But that's all I need to say. Any other discussion? I hear you inhale now. Oh, no. I'm good. All right, then we'll vote. Re >> Brian. >> Hi, Bill. >> Hi, I Jaden. >> Hi, >> Katie. >> Hi, >> Dana. >> Hi, >> Jen. >> Hi, >> Dan. I >> will motion passes uh with the addition. >> All right. Public participation two-minute time limit.
051Comments limited to the items on this agenda. Anybody in the room make yourself known online? Raise your Zoom hand and be called upon. All right. Seeing nobody in either place. Points of information. Anybody from the board like to speak? I am curious. I am curious if we can get some sort of answer on on that. You know it, you know, now that it's in our policy, what happens if it is a custo? You know, you know, I'd just be curious if if if >> by technicality husband, >> right? So that's it's as black and white as that. >> Yeah. I mean, do you basically the only prohibit, you know, the only thing that is prohibited for them or for a board to vote on would be spouse or parent or child. So cousin would not
052be something they would be barred from voting on. Always updated. >> But but that doesn't mean that a person couldn't come forward and say, "Hey, this is my cousin. I mean, I think that that's what >> the other the other folks in the in the you know, >> right? But I think that that's what the intent before was is that well, you're going to come forward and say that on your own. >> Assuming that with the exception of we're specifically saying these three groups are out, you know, definitely not if you don't come forward. I I don't know. I get what you're saying. You can't eliminate it's my next door neighbor. It's my people that I live next door to 10 years ago. I the list could get very long after >> right that's where
053you know >> and I think there's got to be some level of it's up to the person's conscience and hopefully that they'll be honest and forthcoming >> but I guess anyone outside of that would fall under Jessica saying you need to recruit yourself or we're going to go to independent counsel but >> wouldn't she say that >> anyway because now she doesn't have to for those three specifics Okay, that's fair. >> I don't know. >> Has this ever happened, Dr. Willlet? >> What do we have? We we we look over what? >> Principles, vice principles, right? And the superintendent. >> Your your hiring is really for administrative, >> right? Well, right. So, >> but employment covers termination, too. So what might happen is because the term employment is broad is it doesn't say just hiring.
054Um that means that if a hearing comes up and let's say I I move to terminate an employee and that employee can accept that termination or they can come to you and they can contest it. If they come to contest it and they're related as a spouse, right? They you you can't vote one way or the other for Employment is all matters pertaining to employ I don't think this hurts us in any way Jaden >> but this has not come up in the time that I've been here I haven't had any kid advocate this for this to expand anyone >> that's what I >> all right any other any other points of information all right so I will entertain a motion to enter an executive session for the purpose of the superintendent's evaluation. >> So
055moved. >> Inviting Mr. >> Oh yeah. >> I guess we have to propose or motion to enter into executive session with Dr. Willlet. >> You don't have >> at this time. >> I'm just letting you know you you could do it. And then >> we're gonna have a party. Dr. Willlet, I want you to join us. That's I'm always happy if you said J second. Any discussion right? >> Hi >> Brian. >> Hi. >> Bill. Hi. Hi. Jaden. Hi Katie. >> Hi Jana. >> Hi. >> Jen. Hi >> Dan. Hi. All right, take a few minutes. We're entering into executive session. We'll take a few minutes. Allow Lisa time back. >> All right. >> Motion to adjurnn. >> So moved. >> Second. >> Hi. >> All right. Any discussion? Reie. >> Hi. >> Brian. >>
056Hi. >> Bill. >> Hi. Hi. >> Jaden. Hi >> Katie. Hi. >> Dana. >> Hi Ken. >> Hi. and Dan. >> Hi. Thank you all.