5/20/2026 - Special Board of Education Meeting

001Good evening. It is now 6:30 and I would like to call a special meeting of Board of Education to order. Please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance. Before I move to the first agenda item, I'd like to invite uh Mike Reynolds to say a few things. He asked me if he could address the board. And I pledge allegiance. All right. Thank you, Chair, for allowing me to speak. When the Board of Education was first presented to the public, sorry, when the Board of Education budget was first presented to the public, it naturally raised a lot of questions. And understandably so. But tonight, after weeks of dialogue, deep analysis, and collaboration, the answers we need are right in front of us. We're no longer looking at uncertainty. We're looking at a clear, responsible path forward for

002our schools in our city. It's an absolute privilege to stand before this board and say we have a mayor who's not afraid to lead. Who's shown the political courage to do what is right and what is best for the future of this community. When the Board of Education laid out the real resources needed to propel our schools forward, the mayor didn't look for excuses. She met the moment. That is the kind of leadership that builds a stronger city. It's also an absolute privilege to stand before this board and say we have a superintendent who put forth a real honest budget. She stood before this community and told the hard truth refusing to lie rely on the smoke and mirrors that only serve to kick the can down the road and pass the larger deficit onto

003the next fiscal year. Rather than playing the blame game, she focused entirely on finding solutions. Thank you to the Board of Finance and the City Council for following the mayor's lead and collaborating so productively with the Board of Education. When our city leadership works hand-in-hand with our schools, the entire community wins. Their willingness to come to the table, listen to the data, prioritize our students has brought us to a resolution that keeps our city moving moving forward. I'd also like to thank this Board of Education for consistently standing up for, championing, and fighting for our students, our teachers, and our schools. In times of uncertainty, your unwavering advocacy gives our educators the support they need to succeed and ensures our students remain the top priority. You have proven that investing in public education isn't just

004a budget line item. It is an investment in the very fabric of our community. The path forward has already been paved by the collaborative leadership of our mayor and superintendent. The only question left is whether this body will continue to follow that lead and protect our students or allow partisanship to compromise our schools. Our community is watching and they're counting on your vote. Thank you. Thank you. So, tonight feels like progress and that is worth recognizing. It has been a long and difficult budget season, but tonight reflects what can happen when people choose collaboration, understanding, and shared responsibility. Over the last year, we have made meaningful progress in strengthening relationships and creating more productive conversations across leadership in our community. Public education works best when we recognize that supporting students is a shared responsibility. For

005too long, there were barriers and narratives that unfairly framed the Board of Education as the primary driver of taxes and financial pressures without fully recognizing the realities of public education and the responsibility districts carry under state and federal requirements to provide every student with a free and equitable education. Those responsibilities do not lessen when resources are constrained and neither does our commitment to our students. We are grateful for the work that has been done to build understanding around those responsibilities and create a path forward focused on solutions rather than blame because when we work together, students benefit. At the same time, progress does not mean every need was met. We are disappointed that we were not able to fund new positions requested by our building administrators and district leadership. Those requests came from leaders who

006spend every day making difficult decisions, filling in gaps, and finding ways to meet student needs with limited resources. They know where additional support is needed because they are the ones showing up every day and doing extraordinary work to ensure our students continue to receive opportunities, support, and care despite limited resources. At the same time, we want to be clear that not funding these positions this year does not mean those needs no longer exist and it doesn't mean we stop advocating for them. District leadership has shared plans to continue restructuring and realigning existing resources to provide schools with additional support directly within their buildings and we appreciate their willingness to think creatively about how to best meet student and staff needs. But we should also recognize that restructuring is not a suitable a substitute for investment.

007And we remain committed to continuing to advocate for additional funding opportunities in future budgets to support the positions our school leaders have identified as necessary to strengthen services for students. Every day our principals, teachers, paraeducators, social workers, school psychologists, school counselors, support staff, security guards, cafeteria workers, custodians, bus drivers, crossing guards, and administrators are asked to do something extraordinary. They are expected to meet growing academic, behavioral, operational, and compliance demands while continuing to provide every student with the opportunities, support, care, and sense of belonging they deserve. And they do this work in buildings that in many cases are in urgent need of investment. Some are managing leaky roofs, aging infrastructures, and learning environments without air conditioning, where just today temperatures reached levels that created real concerns about the health and safety of our staff and

008the students and required us to close early for the second day in a row. Those conditions are not the result of lack of effort by our staff or school leadership. They are the result of years of limited resources, difficult decisions, and competing priorities. And every day they continue delivering for students even when the resources behind them do not fully match the expectations placed upon them. They fill gaps, they solve problems, they support one another, they step in where needed, and continue creating opportunities for students. That does not mean we stop advocating for what our students and staff need, but it does mean we should pause and recognize the incredible work happening inside our buildings despite those challenges. That is why tonight we are proud and genuinely grateful for the funding approved by the city and

009for the work that made this budget possible. We want to thank Mayor Allen Sapo Sasu, the members of the Board of Finance and City Council, and the Comptroller for taking the time to understand the needs of the district and the realities our schools face every day. Their willingness to engage in thoughtful conversations helped create a path forward that supports students and recognizes our shared responsibility to sustain public education. We also want to thank Superintendent White, Deputy Superintendent Hawk, Ms. Bond, and the entire cabinet for bringing forward a budget that preserves our current level of academic and athletic supports for students and avoids taking another step backward. We know firsthand the amount of work, difficult decisions, and constant balancing that went into getting us to this point. And if the board approves this budget tonight, we

010have been informed that Mr. Grabowski's office will begin recalling non-renewal notices as early as tomorrow. I almost wish the process included reading all 137 names out loud in celebration of this moment. Although in fairness, I'm not sure Commissioner Simmons would agree, since she was the one tasked with reading every single name during the non-renewal process. But behind each of those names is a person who chose this work because they care deeply about students. And tonight it feels worth celebrating that those educators can continue the work they love, and our students can continue benefiting from the people who know and support them every day. There was a shared commitment throughout this process to protect student opportunities and maintain support for our schools, and together this budget accomplishes that goal. There is still work ahead of us.

011There are needs that remain unmet and opportunities we must continue to preserve. And as the mayor said, the work for the 2028 budget starts now, and I plan to remind her she said that publicly. But tonight, we are grateful for the progress progress we have made, proud of the collaboration that got us here, and hopeful about what we can continue to accomplish together. So, the next item on the agenda is the discussion and possible action of the budget, and I will turn it over to Superintendent White. Thank you very much, Chair Bonds, for your remarks. I'll save my remarks for after because I think everyone's anxious to get into the budget update. So, it's my pleasure to call up to the podium our Director of Finance, Jody Bond, who will walk us through the update

012based on the Board of Finance vote Monday night, and then walk us through my recommended reductions to get us to the to the number needed. Ms. Bond. Thank you. Good evening. I was going to offer some thank yous, but you did plenty for me, so >> [laughter] >> Thank you, everyone. This really was a huge collaboration, and since this was my first official budget season, I really can't thank everyone enough, so I greatly appreciate it. Um I'm just going to quickly recap. Our fiscal year 2026 budget is 137,061,815. The original budget that we put forward, the Superintendent's budget, was 154,649,443. The budget that was approved on Monday night's joint board meeting was 148,825,885. This means we have to make reductions of 5,823,558. And while this does seem like a large amount of money, um this

013is truly a maintenance budget that we are able to put forward, and again, we're we're just extremely grateful for that. Um so, on the next slide, I've just broken out the budget into a couple different sections. I have on the far hand on the far right, you could see the general ed budget and the special education budget. And you could see with the special education budget, we requested 51 million 033 263. That budget does include all of the increases that Dr. Martino needs to budget for for next year, including tuitions, all of her just regular special education expenditures, as well as the new special education positions, the newly requested positions. There were paraprofessionals, I think a couple of special education teachers, BCBA, some of those positions were in there. So, that is remaining as is.

014So, special education will see an increase of 5 million 222 560. That number is not changing. We're not taking any reductions off of that. And that will be the budget for next year. So, up above that on the general education side, the general education side, our originally proposed budget was 103 616 180. When you deduct out the 5 million 823 558, those are the reductions we need to make and we're going to reduce all of those expenses from the general ed side. That leaves the general ed side with an increase of 6 million 541 510. And then on the next slide are the proposed reductions. So, some of these are, you know, proposed reductions and some of them are reductions that we are able to to make thanks to the city and some contributions that

015they are contributing to next year's budget. So, we are we're the first line, 2 million 126 522, and the second line, 811 043. Those are all of the newly requested um additional positions that were asked for on the general ed side. Those are the salaries, and those are the benefits associated with those positions. Um we cannot fund any of those new positions in the new fiscal year. The $275,000 insurance reserve and $240,000 workers comp offset, those are um amounts that the city is giving us from the insurance reserve, so we can reduce our budget by those two amounts in those two particular lines in our health benefits and in our workers comp line. $484,243, that number represents health benefits for the newly requested special education positions. The city we originally had to add that dollar

016amount into our health benefits, but the city is going to fund that amount from the $990,000 that they are receiving in the extra state revenue that just was announced. So, that is coming out of that. We'll have to just be mindful that next year that amount will need to be added into the budget, but for this year we are able to reduce it from our budget. The next line, $119,488, that is maintaining middle school sports at Northeast and Chippens. We're just going to go down to one sport per team per school. Right now they've got two sports per two teams per sport. They'll go down to one team per sport. Um it does not include Bains sports, which were originally budgeted in and intramurals, so by removing those, we can remove we can deduct $119,488

017from their um from middle school sports. It maintains transportation. That's in a separate line, so they can they have transportation to transport them to other schools and everything. Um the next line, CIS software, that is in our um teaching and learning department, their Lexia software. They are going to reduce the number of years that this renewal was for, so they can reduce that particular software by $100,000. Uh facilities, equipment, and site improvements, we're going to have to pretty much wipe them out again. They were wiped out this year pretty much. Um however, we do have the drip funds, 411,000, that they will have um accessible next year, plus whatever carryover they have from this year. We just received this year's funding of 411,000. So, whatever we don't use to offset this year's expenses, um can

018be carried over into next year. So, they'll have that. There's also 68,454 that does remain um in that line. So, they'll have some funding. The next two lines, Smart Notebook and ID metrics, these are two softwares that our technology department has determined we no longer need, so I can take those right out of the budget. Yondr pouches could be removed from budget. We can fund this if they are if it passed by it has to pass through the board of ed first. So, if it did happen to pass, we could fund that through the alliance grant. So, it was budgeted here on the general fund side, so we can remove that. Uh 350,000 is the savings. That's what I had budgeted in the budget for the GMAT lease. That includes the lease, the monthly lease,

019the monthly property management fee to DeMatteo, along with the monthly utilities that we have to pay. And also if we stayed over in Gemmato next year, we would have to pay to store all of all of their furniture and everything. Currently it's being housed in Edgewood school. Obviously we have to once they move it back to Gemmato and then at the end of the summer we would have to pay to store it somewhere else. So that does save us 350,000. And the last line, the retirement savings, these are retirement savings that we sort of factor in and budget for every year. This is the savings that we know of as of right now. So for example, when teachers and administrators retire, they tend to retire at very high steps. When we replace them, we replace

020them usually with lower step positions. So we budget in for lower so we can have a retirement savings. Which tends to usually grow as we get closer to the end of the year. I'm sure we'll still have some more retirements. But as of right now, that's all we truly know of. Um and these reductions get us to the 5,823,558 which would balance our budget. That was a lot. Any questions? Mr. Chair. Yeah. So for the middle school sports, will the Bame students have a chance to go to either Northeast or Chippens? I yes. And that that's what they have been doing. And so I think they were going to change it for next year and have them just at Bame. So this is removing that. Yes. It was an it was an add for next

021year. Ma'am. Um so feeding up the the middle school sports, um I seen in the Harper current along with most parents saying in Bristol that um middle school sports was saved and that we might even be able to add wrestling. So we We we had four middle schools, right? Mhm. And now we're going down to two middle schools. So, if we're doing one team per sport, that means the girls basketball team is going to play the same team every game. No, so transportation is still included and included in that for the next year is transportation to surrounding towns. So, they're not just playing each other. They're not just going to Chippens and Northeast every week. They'll be going to Plainville, Southington area area towns. Okay. Because we never did that. We played >> within. So,

022I figured I thought we were adding a team. No, wrestling and cheer is added in. Well, I mean I meant like adding So, like if Bristol if if Chippens had two teams, that we were adding a third team and then they were able So, we're really taking a lot of opportunity away from the middle schools. That's really unfortunate, especially after everyone was told middle school sports was saved. Um So, I That one's That one's going to upset a lot of parents. So, this is what you can vote on tonight. So, that saves 119,000. So, you can always add that back in to save it as is, which would be the two teams per It was just the way it was written in the budget was just two teams per sport. So, it was two teams

023at Chippens, two teams at Northeast. She did not add in a third team at Chippens. It was two and two. So, that would bring it up by 119,000. We'll just have to find You have to make another reduction somewhere of 119. Wouldn't it be cheaper if they played within Bristol and we had one middle school >> it out of transportation. Then they wouldn't be able to travel to any other surrounding team. So, that town. So, you would still be just playing the same teams. Well, if you had three Say not all sports have more than one team, right? But say >> think so. Like cross country is just one team. And I would assume Go ahead. Go ahead. Yes, you have girls basketball, you have girls uh boys basketball, girls soccer, boys soccer, volleyball. Um

024so, if Chipman so, some of them had two teams, most of them had one team, but so I like it sounded like Chipman said two, they'd pick up a team cuz we have a lot more middle schoolers there. So, there'd be three teams for girls basketball. And then if you had two or three teams at Northeast, There would only be two. The way it was written into the budget with the stipends was only two teams at Chipman's, two teams at Northeast. So, they're not picking up teams. Right. Right. Through the chair? Yeah. Um I taught at Chipman's 30 years ago, and we had 1,100 students, and we had two teams, and the kids were well represented. Um and we only played Northeast. I was But I figured if we played within town, if you have

025I don't have teams rather than trans, you know, having the kids go to Fayetteville, surrounding towns would increase the transportation. And so then we're adding some. Maybe what we could do is have um Sierra tell us what it would cost to add a team if we need to based on interest and sport at the time, and see if there is availability in the budget at the time, and talk because it's a free save on transportation. based on retirements. If there is the need, right? If if enough students demonstrate need and there's the need for another team, and we have the funding, we can revisit. Is that I think that would be fair. I think you would have the interest, and then if you just, you know, even if Chipman still blue they the blue and

026the white team, I think. Right? So, even if the blue team played the white team, then they don't have to travel that day, and then the blue team plays Northeast, uh then you're not traveling out of town, and they're still having you're still including students, and uh they're still playing more than one team. Kind of like a JV varsity. Is that the blue and That could be Maybe that varsity team the higher team travels and the lower team gets practice with the other team or something. Maybe there could be some creative way so we could still have kids participating. Yeah. So, I think those conversations are worth having. So, I appreciate you bringing it up. You have you have a lot of upset. You know. Yeah, I think we don't want to No, but sports

027are important. Cuz a lot of them, too, they don't they don't have an introduction to it before this. You know. Yep. For the chair. Yes, Commissioner Nason Calloway had raised her hand online. Sure. Hi, can you guys hear me? Can you hear me okay? Yes, yes. Okay. I'm sorry. Um yeah, I just wanted to make sure that I was understanding it correctly, especially with Northeast going live soon and having more students there because I know as of right now for instance, basketball, they have one team. They don't have like Chipman's the you know, the blue and the white team. Um with more students coming on and if we only have one team, that's less students that have the opportunity to play. So, I agree with >> think it would be a hundred thousand to add

028a few teams. Mhm. It would be the cost of the stipends and some things. So, maybe we can find out. >> Yeah, and if I'm sure like I said, that retirement savings number very well could grow. So, I would think we probably Thank you. I don't appreciate that. I think I think a lot of parents would, too. And like I said, even if we didn't We've never traveled since I've been here. No, that would be exactly. >> I think we could have savings. It would be an offset. We have Commissioner G. Antonio. Yes. Uh thank you through the chair. I I have a few questions. I'll just try to limit them cuz I can't really see well um who else might want to speak. But my question is um directed towards Superintendent White. And this

029is more of a a general sort of concern as a commissioner. Um this is now the second special meeting where we were told that we would be given materials in advance of the meeting so that we could have some time to ask questions especially about the proposed reductions. When it didn't happen in the first special session, I understood the explanation to be that there was still so much uncertainty with how much we were going to get from the city that really didn't want to sort of put all the things out there although we had to to notice the teachers. So, I understood that. But again, today um a special meeting was scheduled. I know that myself and at least three other colleagues were not contacted to even see if we were available today. Um and

030that's just a courtesy. I would you know, and this has been the practice as of all of this year. Um we do take these things seriously and as much as we can >> G. Antonio, I'm sorry. I'm going to call point of order. We don't um hum- try to embarrass people in public. That's one of our bylaws. So, what I would like right now is to redirect you. If you have a specific question, please answer it or we will move on. The Okay. I'm trying to participate as a duly elected official in an open public meeting. >> but I can I I did point of order. I asked you if you had a specific question. You do not have the floor unless you have a specific question. I did ask my question. I said, "How

031come we weren't provided the materials in advance so that we could have straightened out some of these questions about these categories? We were told we would get the materials Okay. >> and it didn't materialize. That is my question. So, my understanding is Chair Ponce, you did send a message out to the commissioners regarding tonight's meeting. Is that >> Oh, yesterday I sent a message saying that we wouldn't get that Well, yesterday I said we were going to get or 2 days ago we were going to get the numbers from the city on Monday and that the district would do its best in a short amount of time to share information previous to the meeting. I I don't have a problem that we got the information all together at once because we got great information. We

032got great news. >> the information before. We keep getting informed last minute coming to a meeting with new information being put in front of us. So, it would be appropriate for all of us to get the information in advance rather than I I'm having to look at this spreadsheet for the first time. And you have >> time to ask questions. I I apologize. I didn't get these I don't have the slides. I don't have Through the chair, just to clarify for everybody on this board, um none of us all of us got the same information. None of us were privy to this information until just now. So >> Okay, so I just a follow-up to my same thing about the timing. I have in my possession because it's public information an email that was drafted

033by Mayor Ellen Zappulla Sasso outlining some of the budget cuts that were recommended and they were listed on here and sent out on Thursday, May 14th because there was ongoing meetings to do this work between the city and the Board of Ed. Some of what was written in here says the BOE staff and board have been working diligently to reduce costs and find savings, which we all recognize this evening especially in the opening comments. Some examples of this include terminating the pre-K lease at Chiomenti, which is listed on the slide, and moving classrooms to Green Hills until Edgewood is completed. Consolidating positions, which is my second question. Actualizing savings due to retirements of teachers at the top step, which we see that on the slide. Elimination of some central office positions, I do not see

034that on the slide. Modifying middle school sports, we do see that on the slide. So that there is still something available something available. And assessing positions that could be shifted to grants. So why was Mayor Ellens Apple able to send this email out to all Board of Finance Commissioners on Thursday prior to the Board of Finance meeting and indicating that this is coming from a meeting that that the superintendent and the chair of this board had with them in advance, but we're getting this information now. It would have been >> I can answer your question. I can answer your question and I would ask that we acknowledge that the reasons why are because we don't want to share information until it's finalized and conversations on how we would get to a zero budget are ongoing

035daily all day long for the Board of Education employees in this in in that capacity that work in that capacity, Kristen. And actualizing the retirement savings of thousand and change is something that happened in real time. And so being able not to lay people off was the goal. And it's a great thing that we don't have to lay off anyone in central office or anyone in any schools right now. And so I don't understand why it's about when you receive the information and not that the information is great that they were able to close the gap. So, I want to redirect the conversation to questions about the budget at hand that we are going to move forward and not talk about when the timing was of board members because there are a lot of people

036here and it's not just about us and when we get the information. It's about the budget. This is a budget meeting. We did receive questions from the public because this went out. So, that's why timing >> out from the Board of Education. If it went out to another board from another leader, then those questions can be asked to that leader. But in this capacity, we didn't nothing was sent out that said we were laying off anybody because we didn't know. So, at this point, let's move forward with what was presented and if there's questions about what is presented or concerns, we can talk about that. Otherwise, we're going to move forward with a vote. >> Wait, wait, you need to let me ask the questions. So, the question I have is is there any consolidation

037of positions that is currently being considered right now in this reduction plan? No, there's not. Is there any elimination of some central office staff positions being considered in this reduction plan? No, there's not. And with the with the adjustments to middle school sports, I will only add that knowing how much of a trigger point that was to schedule this in a special meeting, but also not put public comment on for special meeting, then we we didn't give the the the public the opportunity to continue to comment on middle school sports. So, we I am grateful that others here have brought it up and although I can understand 30 years ago something was done to accommodate a bunch of kids, I I think that that's the expectation now. So, my purpose here is to be because

038I am only a conduit to the people who elected me and put me in that chair. It's to ask the questions from a public standpoint when I get asked about concerns about things that they >> have any other questions? So, I don't think it was a great idea not to have public comment at this meeting. >> Okay. So, that's no, no other questions? Not regarding this matter, no. Thank you. Any other board members have questions? Mr. Chair? Yes. Um so, I am um grateful that our youngest of learners are exiting Giamatti. Um I don't I was told though at one of the board meetings when I asked about uh getting out of there and redistributing the kids into our beautiful pre-K schools, that it would cost us $300,000 to break the lease. It's only a

0391-month penalty. There's a 1-month penalty. >> It was a 1-month Okay. >> It's $15,000. Okay. So, it wasn't the $300,000 that I was told in in one of our public meetings. No. No. So, that's good cuz I was going to say in the winter they shut off the water to half the building. And that's not really great for our little learners in the winter. And so, I thought maybe there was really a $300,000 which that um that could um be brought up. And I hope that in the future we're going to re-use those classrooms when those children go back into Edgewood. That will make some changes and um I don't think that's right. Ring Hills and West Broad schools. And I do think um just following up on uh Commissioner DeTullio's um comments, it is

040good practice to inform the board in advance when things are coming before the board and there's a vote. And it has It's many of times and I that it does not enter Any other board members? Without any other conversation, discussion, can I have a motion to approve? Could I have one other quick question and that's just about NBR? Um after the vote, it has nothing to do with the vote, but sure, you're going to ask another question about the NBR. So, can I have a motion? Motion to approve the proposed reductions for the 2026-2027 budget. And adopt. We have to say and adopt, but And adopt the proposed reductions of the 2026-2027 budget. Second. Yeah, we have to say um a motion to approve the 2026-2027 budget as presented. We're approving the budget. >> Okay,

041motion to approve the 2026-2027 budget as presented. Second. Motion's been made and seconded. Uh I will do a roll call vote because we have people online. Uh Commissioner Tedesco. Tedesco. Chair Chair Pons, yes. I'm so sorry, this is Commissioner Simmons online. Um just a quick question um because I know that the motion is to adopt the budget as presented um and you know, there was some feedback from commissioners and also from the public about the middle school sports and consideration to maybe uh forego having out-of-town travel and allowing there to be more teams. If we approve the budget as presented, would we still be able to make adjustments should the district decide to increase the teams keep okay thank you so much. >> so those kinds of if if money is available through additional retirement

042we don't vote again we're just voting on the number that we received and the reductions in front of us. Thank you so much. Thank you Commissioner Simmons cuz that makes my vote an I. Yes. >> worried about that part. Thank you. >> Actually in in discussion I too would before we go adding additional new sports in middle school I would hope that we would make sure that we are able to accommodate the students that already do play and and are you know anticipating joining middle school sports as they start the middle school year. Commissioner Ledger. I. Commissioner Fitzsimmons-Beeler. I. Commissioner Lenguador. I. And online Commissioner Diantonio. Yes. Commissioner Usenkaski. Yes. Commissioner Parenti. Yes. And Commissioner Simmons. Yes. And I'm abstaining. Passes unanimously. Okay. Um next item on the agenda is the many board policies that

043we have to vote on tonight. Oh no first I'm sorry yes no we're going right to board policies right yes okay so moving this to Commissioner Beeler. Okay so we're going to hop in but I do I do just want to say thank you to everyone who has worked on this and read the policies offered feedback and input. It's a huge task and it's policy is so important. So, I think just thank you to everyone. Um and we can try and go through them as effectively and efficiently as possible. Uh so, our first uh one up for review and discussion it's 2.2, bylaw 9132.8, school board liaison to local school. So, our current bylaw is 9133. 9132.8 is a Cave bylaw number. And to align with Cave and the revisions that were proposed from Cave

044on May 20 May of 2025, um it was recommended to the full board with the revision on the following with the including the following language changes. And in our policies that we're reviewing tonight, you will see the language changes. The red is things that we are removing, and the blue is additions. So, the recommendation that came out of committee was to add under uh number uh number two, that first No, I'm sorry. Number three, 1.B, consideration shall be given to board members' interests, geographic proximity, prior school relationships to avoid conflicts of interest, and experience to foster positive relationships and collaborate. Any questions or discussion? What do you want What do you want to talk about? This is a like a brand new policy, right? So We have Yeah, we had a It's under a different

045number. So we currently have it under bylaw 9133. The recommendation was to adopt a new bylaw and it has a different number. So it's 9132. So if we do decide to adopt 9132.89, our next item we will need to rescind 9133. So in the 9133, in addition to liaisons to school, it also included like other liaison positions. Let's see. So with There be further changes to include those? Let's see. The chairperson shall from its members appoint representatives from the board to liaison committees such as, but not limited to, Capital Region Education Council, Medical Association support and I don't know that we have liaisons for any of these. So if those are null and void or do we need any of that language? For the chair. Yes. That is encompassed in bylaw 9140. Thank you. And

046that's it's a good good discussion point because we did It did come up in committee and we did talk through that. And in committee, and please commissioners who are on the committee, feel free to jump in at any point if I'm missing something. When we talked about it, we were comfortable because it was encompassed in another bylaw. So confusing to have so many bylaws. And then I guess my only other question is this is um just a key model policy? It's It's a key recommended model policy, correct. Um and committee, um with the exception of that line that the committee felt important to incorporate. So, that was going to be my last final question. So, the um stipulation and experience. So, what experience is that um I mean, that could be kind of vague. What

047What experience is that in this context? So, it would encompass It's It's pretty broad, but uh you know, if a board commissioner had specific experience with an employee at that school. Facilities, yeah. Really, the the thought process around this and the goal for this is to really foster those collaborations, really build connections between the the board and the the school and the commissioners we're liaising with stronger and more collaborative and open those lines of Okay, I appreciate that cuz I just thought experience could be I don't know if um I don't know if I peaceful experience or peaceful, you know, so uh so, I appreciate that. Good question. Through the chair? >> [clears throat] >> Yes. I'm so sorry. No worries. You can be the chair. >> No, thank you. So, that this policy was

048reviewed at policy committee on May 13th, correct? Last week? Check. I'm so sorry. I We have reviewed many of policy. Uh Yes, this one was reviewed. Through the chair? This one was tabled. This one was tabled. From the May 3rd So, it So, it was reviewed prior to the prior >> one, it was on our last board agenda and then it got tabled. Okay. So, it was two two policy committee meetings ago. Okay. So, I do think I'll just finish my question even though it's we have a long list to get through and it'll be quick. Was there any consideration cuz there are some policies on this agenda from the 513 meeting. Which means there was no public comment on 513 and there's no public comment tonight and it's a week later. We don't usually

049change policies or bylaws without an opportunity for public comment. Yeah. So, that's my only concern from the 513 policies that are included on this agenda. Yeah, I know. Thank you so much for for pointing that out and bringing that up and it it's a good it's a good catch to kind of clarify that. So, public comment was before we tabled it from our last board meeting. So, there was an opportunity for the public in the committees and at our last board meeting for the public to be able to speak on behalf of these policies. Uh and they had a couple different opportunities to you know, to to be notified and made aware of it. I don't know, does that help clarify >> one, yeah, for this one I agree. Like cuz we had to do

050it already um but this one like you said wasn't just on last Wednesday's uh meeting. So, my question would be more for like the regular Board of Education time, place, and notice of meeting. There was public comment availability in the subcommittee. Mhm. Um Technically, yes, but I think it's been our practice and I'm just raising this because >> We're going to move on to if you have a question about the policy revision, we'd be happy to >> have a question about the practice and making sure that we are engaging the public when we have possible Most of the public doesn't attend our committee meetings. So I do think that it is important and I need to raise the issue because if I don't raise it and it doesn't get considered, it can happen again. So

051I do think it's important that when we change policies >> the point. We understand what you're raising and thank you. Does anyone else have any questions about the cutting me off, but I'm going to keep asking the questions. Okay, but Kristen, we're going to stay focused on the content. We have a lot of policies. If our bylaws say to bring these questions and concerns, whenever possible, forward before the meeting and also to not call people out like you're doing during board meetings. We are trying to maintain decorum and we are trying to move forward with the work of the board. So I would appreciate it if you could move these things >> Do you realize that you sent me an email from Monday? Do you realize that you sent me an email from Monday? Do

052you realize that you sent me an email from Monday? from Monday. I sent you an email and you did not reply. You sent So are you talking to Who Who are you >> I sent Sheryl Bonds an email with questions on Monday. Cuz I had sent you an email as well, but I I did just checking in to see if there's any questions or concerns at the beginning of the week and I never got a response, either. So I just want to make sure that Because we got nothing missed. We received This is This is why I'm raising this. This is why it's always better if we're going to have a special meeting, could we please just either send a text, send a quick email By the way, we have to have this meeting. We

053have and we can We find out when the public finds out. And I don't find that to be appropriate. So it compiles now because now I have to >> [clears throat] >> go I didn't realize that we would be doing all of these policies at the same time. Thankfully, I did attend the committee meetings on 5/13. I'm just raising this because we shouldn't not follow our regular processes because it's not appropriate. So, we can move on, but I am going to raise the issue because my emails are ignored and every time I try to speak publicly >> Mr. G Antonio, you sent me an email and asked me what was being proposed for the revised 2026 BOE calendar. It is not on the agenda and I don't have that information to respond to you. The

054time, place, and notice of meeting is 2.4 on this agenda. The Okay, I misunderstood. I misunderstood and apologize. I did not realize that it was on the committee. I I did not understand that your question was relevant to this meeting and I didn't have the answer or the time to get you the answer. I apologize. Can we move on to the policies, please? This is really something. I got to say. It's not a Okay, it is it's we're going to keep with the work of the board. If you would like to discuss what you're upset about, we can talk about it outside of the meeting. That is not what the meeting is for. The meet There is two agenda items. >> Okay, Kristen, you do not have the floor. Next. Does anybody else have any

055discussion or questions about the policy or should we put the policy to a vote? Um I make a motion to approve the bylaw for school board liaison to local school. Second. Motion's been made and seconded. All in favor? I. I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries. Just a reminder, we need to do a roll call vote when we have people online. Only if it's not unanimous, Kristen. And it's it's actually we we're going to cover it in one of our policies tonight. It was in our policy tonight. Well, there was no opposed. There was no opposed. Um so, now that 9132.8 has been adopted by the board, we need to rescind bylaw special committee. May I have a motion to rescind? So moved. To res- Oh, sorry. Second. Motion's been made and seconded. Any further discussion

056or questions? All those in favor? I. I. I. I. Opposed? Motion carries. Okay. So, that brings us to GG. We need to revise bylaw 9321 time, place, and notice of meeting based off CAPE model we currently have in place. It was last updated July of 2004. The blue are the revi- revisions. Red is language that will be removed. CAPE model bylaw was revised in April of 2026. Any discussion before we move to a motion? Mr. I have a conflict in paragraph one under electric partici- electronic participation. The last sentence of paragraph one says in the blue writing, which I'm to understand is the new language, "All votes at a meeting in which members are attending by teleconference shall be taken by roll call." In paragraph second to the last in the meeting where also in

057blue, it says, "In the meeting where at least one member participates by electronic means, all votes shall be taken by roll call unless the vote is unanimous." Those two statements conflict with each other. So, for this policy, I found the policy manual that came had put out really helpful in understanding and going through. It really outlines the revisions and why the revisions have been made. Um and the way that I understood it and the way that it was explained in the Cape Cod, like it's I think a policy update policy brief. Um so that I can summarize the the main changes if you'd find that helpful. Um it really like the key updates are those that are virtual are considered present for quorum purposes. Um they have full voting rights as long as they can

058be heard by all participants and the public. To ensure transparency, they clarified public access in a specific notice requirement, clear public access instructions. Um it requires that all votes be taken by roll call unless unanimous. I think what she was saying is the electronic participation, the last sentence is kind of in conflict with that because it states all votes at a meeting in which members are attending by teleconference unless that's the the variance shall be taken by roll call. Where specifically are you looking? I just want to make It's in blue and so under electronic participation in blue. Commissioner B It's a bank order is seeking. So it's right it says notice of meetings and then in blue electronic participation and then it's the last sentence in that paragraph. I'm looking at forward book. I

059don't know if it's any different than Can I come over and you Yeah, of course. electronic participation Oh. So that's why those two are in conflict. So if you want if we want to amend the policy removing this line the last line in the electronic submission portion I'm not sure. same sir Um I just have one further question. Was there consideration at the policy committee meeting about how you implement the unless unanimous cuz you'll find like when there's a bunch of us online everybody's kind of voting at at same time and then if somebody wasn't in a unanimous vote, you're you're saying it after the fact. And then you're So, you didn't know So, now you have to go back and roll through the >> roll call, right? That is That's exactly what the the

060policy uh and the law requires. So, you say all in favor, and if everyone says I, and anyone opposed, and no one's is opposed, you don't have to go through the roll call. But, if you go everyone in favor, I, and somebody says no, then you do the roll call. Okay. Yeah, they're both They're um I can see you Hold on for a sec. I could see how it could be perceived as being in conflict. You could just We could put a motion on the floor to amend it and strike that last sentence. Cuz you'll have the electronic participation, which would include teleconference, already covered in the bottom paragraph. Unless you want to be redundant and include in the last sentence, unless unanimous. Either way. >> [snorts] >> So, I would My suggestion would be

061to remove the under electronic participation, all votes at a meeting in which members are attending by teleconference shall be taken by roll call. I feel like if it's unanimous, I'm I I feel like one of those can be can be We could strike out. For further clarification. Someone needs to make a motion to amend to approve with an amendment. I would say this is one policy, though, that I thought, since it was done at the meeting prior to the full board meeting where the public does come sometimes and participate and there's public comment. I thought of all the policies the other ones are kind of Is there anyone here or online who would like to speak publicly about this? Well, they didn't have any notice. In the public notice. Okay, we're not going to hold

062it up. We can say Well, I make a motion to table policy 9321. Second. Motion's been made and seconded. I will do a roll call vote. Barbara. I'll I'll I would like to table it. I would like to table Cara. No. I'm voting no because we did have public comment at our committee meeting and I feel like it did provide enough for the the community to speak on this and >> It's legal. We Yeah, we it's a legal process. I'm voting no. So I >> And I'd like to ask Commissioner Simmons. I'll vote no to tabling. Commissioner Parenti. No to tabling. Commissioner Osikaski. No. Commissioner Van Worder, you already voted yes. Okay, so motion passes. Could I vote please on the roll call vote? >> Oh, I thought you said Oh, I'm sorry. You didn't

063vote yes. Commissioner D'Antonio. No votes yes to table. Okay, motion passes that we are or the motion fails. We are not tabling it. So can we have a motion to amend removing the language and passing. I make a motion to amend the language in policy 9321 and then passing. I would also I guess second this just to move it along, but I'd also like to amend the the policy to not remove the language of the 1/5 of each month beginning at 7:00. So, that that was a you know Thank you for bringing that up because I was a discussion at our committee meeting. Um it did end up moving out of committee, um but I welcome, you know, all committee members or anyone who has perspectives on this to hop into the conversation. My rationale

064behind passing it through was that if it's that specific in a policy we potentially could be in violation of our bylaw if, for example, for the year as we we submit our calendar dates and times to the city for a full year and I believe it's we have to give 30 days notice if there was any change, right? I remember correctly. I think it was you have to give the city 30 days notice. For what? Changing the entire calendar? For changing a a portion of the calendar. I believe that it was that they just said it would be brought to you to to the board and voted on. It was a 30 days, but it was you couldn't have a meeting until 30 days so that they had the opportunity to review our calendar. Right.

065So, I just think it makes it confusing, right? The public knows that our meetings are Wednesday at 7:00 on p.m. And so, when we do do these schedule a year in advance by January 31st, it would be really difficult, right, for us to go I guess in February we'll do it at 7:00 and March we'll do it at 6:30. You know, I don't know, April we'll do it at 7:00 again where it's just on just the the public's used to Wednesday 7:00 instead of big regular Board of Ed. This proposal Yes. I was on the board I do believe you were too when we set this in the policy with intention. Um I think it was right probably 2019 because we needed to provide some consistency for the staff, the public, commissioners who work, other

066people who work. Um and there was an expectation that they that they knew that at least you know, you could you could get home, arrange things and still be online for 7:00. I realized at the last full board meeting because we had a rather lengthy agenda that is not usually typical of our meetings. We you had you and the superintendent have the ability to control the agenda for any given month and we also made a decision at that at that meeting to to reduce some of the agenda items so we could close at 10:00. This hasn't been a persistent problem. My concern is that it could introduce unintended things like tonight getting you know, special meetings and they're scheduled earlier and they're I mean we've had a an exceptional amount of special meetings. I'm not

067laying blame. It's just what has happened as fact and it's a lot and you know, the the public should come to expect that at least there's a board with a consistent date and time because prior to that there were some meetings that were on Tuesdays, there were some meetings on Wednesdays and I just want to say it was done with a specific intent to be very upfront and transparent with the public, set an expectation that there wouldn't be variability, and that people wouldn't miss things. Well, how come it's 6:30 this night, and how come it's 7:00 that night? I I do think it's important that it's included. So, thank you. I understand your um your point, and I think that everyone has different feelings about this, and we respect that we probably have different opinions

068on this. Um we brought it forward because there was a concern that meetings were going very late. Um we usually have our meetings on the first Monday, but sometimes we have them on the on the first Wednesday, but sometimes we have them on the second Wednesday. Um we pivot. We have to kind of adjust as things change, and we do have long meetings because we have a lot of policies and and business that we need to get through. Um so, I appreciate your perspective, and does anybody else have any comment about Through the chair? Yes. It was it's my understanding, and this was what we discussed in the policy committee, um because we have to submit to the town clerk's office 1 year in advance the meeting dates for our I'll just use our regular

069board meetings. We submit those, and historically they've been the first Wednesday of the month at 7:00. Um and in order for us to make any changes to that, we would need to revise the policy to allow us to do that because the policy is really specific um delineating the first Wednesday of the month at 7:00. Um I I thought the spirit of this change was to still keep a consistent date and time, but just that it would um go from the first Wednesday of the month at 7:00 to the first Wednesday of the month at 6:00. Is that I mean but that's what we're going to be >> a couple examples where we have to do it on the second Wednesday of the month. Okay. One time I think we have to start at 7:00.

070We would have to keep um obviously June 3rd at 7:00 p.m. as well as the two dates that have the security committee beforehand because we would have to change those if but if we are willing to keep those two at 7:00 p.m. which would be September and December. Okay, so so I I do see where the variability I can see where the variability could cause a little bit of confusion but it's also it's because we had decided to make our safety committee meetings precede our regular board meeting and is the concern now that because we've established the safety committee meetings on those days that we would maintain the board meeting the first Wednesday at 7:00 because the safety committee meeting preceded that. So only on the days where there's the safety committee meeting? Yes. And

071to your point Commissioner Simmons, the the whole from this policy we you know and and what the at the heart of it was is to maintain consistent and predictable meetings and submit those to the city for that full year while not putting ourselves in violation of our bylaw. For you know, for example even last year when we would meet on the second Wednesday we're technically in violation of our bylaw and that was a concern >> Right. that had come up. Right. >> to change the language Because we're the this is to change the time of the meeting. That's that's the vote. Okay. So, it doesn't Well, we're not putting the time and we're moving to have that opportunity. Okay. Any other question? >> I threw the chair. Can you explain to me how we would

072be in violation of our bylaw with the word that was already in there that said customarily? That we we have been posting the years worth of meetings with differing dates for certain months of the year so that we could, you know, accommodate either holidays or the beginning of the school year so the staff can get people going. We've been doing that for years and never been in violation of this paragraph cuz it says customarily. Okay. You can vote against the the that you can vote against it if you don't like it. It's not it's not a policy term. Customarily isn't typically The work that happened in the subcommittee went through all of that. They've discussed this. So, if you have a concern, we want to hear it and you can vote in opposition. Okay. One

073other question. Through the chair, I do have a question. There was public comment. Okay. Well, we put it out. It's in public. It's online. Everyone has access to it and they have access to us. And so, I don't feel that we're doing anything outside of our duty to pass policies. But, thank you. We're going to move on to if anybody has any other discussion items that hasn't weighed in, but you're Okay. So, let's >> a I do have a question just about the time cuz I didn't ask that yet through the chair. They because it wasn't That's why I sent you the email on Monday cuz if you were changing the time, was there consideration for >> that. by the committee if that you would consult with >> send um Commissioner all the commissioners the

074times that will be proposed when we get to that policy? It's a different policy. Oh, I'm sorry. It's 2.5 is when we'll get to that. Is that next? >> Mhm. Yeah. So, let's have >> We did not get in advance. So, I've not been able to review 2.5. We can table that if that's I mean, I I don't have any kind of >> So, you you all have the information on >> I don't have the information. Something. But, I don't I don't think rather counterparts do. Through the chair, I I do think this is a is a fair concern. I don't think I That's fine. That's fine. I do think Oh, sorry. Sorry, chair. We can table the dis- the the vote on them on the calendar. Okay. If I received it and didn't share

075it, it's because I didn't know that I received it. So, I apologize. I will look through my emails. But, we can table. Still on You can. >> Still on the one we're We're still on 2.4, technically. Okay. So, can someone make a motion for 2.4? I think it's already on the table and seconded. Motion's been made and seconded. All in favor? I. >> I. I. No. No. Okay, real close vote. Commissioner Diantonio. No. Commissioner Simmons. Yes. Commissioner Parenti. Yes. Commissioner Ruszkowski. No. Commissioner Tedesco. Yes. Commissioner Ledger. Yes. Mr. Blue. Yes. Yes. No. Motion passes. Next policy. Oh, next item on the agenda. No table. And I have a motion to table. So moved. Second. Motion's been made to table and seconded. All in favor. I. I. I. I. I. Motion's tabled. Next item on the

076agenda. So this is a revision policy 0521 equal opportunity non-discrimination. It is a mandated policy for our audit. We need to We needed to add or update our legal add and update our legal references. Same like before, blue are the revisions, red is the language that's being removed. Um this sample was last approved December 7th, I make a motion to approve the bylaw um change to 0521. Second. >> Second. Okay, all those in Are any further discussion or questions? Through the chair. Yeah. I just was Through the secretary. Through the secretary. I just had a question about why the Boy Scouts were specifically mentioned. If we know. I don't know. I do not know that one. That's the answer to that. I mean it says other designated youth groups, so it's like all encompassing, but

077I just wanted to know. Any questions, discussion? Or any any answers to that question? That's our key model policy language. Correct. And these revisions were recommended through our audit that took the policy audit. Theory, any other Last chance. Any other questions, discussions? Okay, hearing none, all those in favor? I. >> I. I. I. Opposed? Motion passes. Okay. So, our next policy is 6159 individualized education program IEPs. It's a mandated policy. Um Cape samples um that were So, we're adopting the Cape samples um and it was mandated as of July 1st, 2025. I make a motion to adopt policy 6159. Second the motion. Um and just to to highlight one thing um in our committee meeting, we really talked a lot and we we noticed that it speaks a lot um to parents' rights through the

078process. And we thought that that was really important. So, we have a motion and a second. Any further discussion, questions? Hearing none, all those in favor? I. I. I. I. Opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Second motion. No. Our next one is another mandated policy. It's we're on 2.8. It's policy 6171 special education program and evaluation. Uh and we are retaining and adopting. It was recommended to review and adopt the sample policies that were mandated in July 1st of 2025. I make a motion to adopt policy 6171. I'll second the motion. So just for discussion, this is a mandated Are they mandated ones? Yeah, it's a mandated policy. Any other discussion or questions? I do have one question. So I'm trying to find the page though, but it's um 6171D. I don't know page numbers, but um

079it says that the superintendent shall ensure that each student's IEP is reviewed periodically at least annually. And I know this is a mandated, but I just was you know questioning like is there a deadline for that for them to say like no changes are needed or yes, we will. And does that 45-day come into play after that? Cuz in the beginning of the policy it says they have like 45 days to do all of that. Dr. Martino, would you like to come up to the podium to respond? Sure. Uh thank you for the question. There actually is nothing new within this policy, but it's really that the superintendent is overseeing and ensuring that all the student federal laws are in compliance as we're normally required to meet one time per year. You would be out

080of compliance if that point, which she would do herself too. Uh the only difference in this one is the call up for specific learning disability that we can no longer use a discrepancy model. That was the only change in this one. Okay. Thank you. Any further discussion or questions? Hearing none, all those in favor? I. I. I. Opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Next is um another mandated uh policy 5112, Ages of Attendance, Admissions, and Placement. Uh our previous policy was based on plate model. We needed to uh according to our audit, we needed to add or update our legal references. Um specifically, we needed to change also January to September the in the first paragraph, January to September. Okay. Any of the motion to approve policy 5112? Second. Any discussion or questions? I have a question

081to the chair. Yes. The um this the state mandate that went into effect in 2027, we did receive some public comment asking us why we didn't consider this one additional year for exception admissions. Could somebody speak to the reason why? Because it's an unfunded mandate and we don't have any money. All right, help me understand. So, if a if they're currently in the pre-K now and they were thinking they were moving to kindergarten, they're going to stay back in the pre-K, which already has a bigger wait list, does it not? That is a That is a mandated program. So, if they are in a program where they're not paying for pre-K, there's they're meeting a man There's a mandate in place that is requiring those supports. What she's saying is why did we um as

082uh uh district move the um kindergarten requirement age requirement >> I understand the question. I understand. So, she said, "If we are not allowing early entry anymore because the law will no longer give us that ability next year, and this year almost every town has already complied with the new law, and the exceptions being made are for additional spots in our classrooms, and if we stop and follow what the law is going to require us to do anyway a year earlier then we're not adding additional students to classrooms in this upcoming year. And so, the question was then, "But if they're already in pre-K, then would we have to pay for another year of pre-K?" And the answer is for those that are currently in pre-K by mandate then yes, they would stay. And it's

083a mandated cost. So, what if there's a student that is a peer and is already in the pre-K program and not mandated to receive special services, but they're they're as a peer, do they get Did they get kicked out for 4 months? Why would they be kicked out? >> Through the chair. I I understand what she's saying because although this doesn't and another year would be a moot point anyway because the law is not going to allow us to do this. So, it only behoove us behoove us to do that for those parents for this particular year. But what but to your point, this is something that's been on my mind. Um and I think it's something similar to may maybe what you're thinking is what where we're doing a disservice now with this policy.

084Not us in particular, but this whole policy is now you get those kids and unless there's some kind of adopt adoption of different ages for the pre-K Mhm. >> the kids who can not enter kindergarten but could previously now have nowhere Now they have to pay for a program for this year the year coming up. Is that what you're saying? Because they're not She's saying that we have to pay for them to stay in pre-K, but that's only if we're paying for them. Well, then they're getting a gap year. So, they're not welcomed in pre-K four and they're not welcomed in kindergarten. Where Next year, we won't have to worry about a gap year. >> Correct. I mean I guess I wasn't sure um Commissioner D'Antonio if your concern was for the >> That's exactly

085what I'm saying is what you're I think you and I are on the same page that we might >> right. That those four you know, to just put it bluntly, those four parents and four kids now have to they can't go to kindergarten. So, now they need to provide either if they want to continue their child's education in the meantime or daycare purposes, whatever it's for. Um now that's a hurdle they have to face. So, I think you know, maybe at some point when there is that universal pre-K and if it's a I know, someday in the future, but it's not going to help them now. But those are the those are the questions um that they have to really address so it doesn't become like This is the only tricky year. This is the

086only tricky year. This is the tricky year. So if we kept it in place for the one more year, didn't cut it early, then we wouldn't have our little learners with a gap year. >> Right. But they I don't understand >> I don't understand Yeah, they always will. I Changing it from January to September is going to be hard in the first year because people had that option previously, but no matter when we change it from January to December, we're still going to have the same issue. And I think Kristen, just if I could just finish this point, I think if we were to have allowed it this year, I think the state put um was specific about what districts had to do. They actually had to be like a published policy. We have to

087have early admit in um screening process. Yeah, so I think a lot of districts did steer away from that because that was just putting another burden on on people to figure that part out. >> Right. And so it it is, you know, one of those things that if we had all of the money in the world and we could do all of these things, we'd absolutely want to help every family, but at this point, the law is changing, we don't have the system in place or the resources, so this policy change um is necessary for us to vote on. Mr. Chair. Yes. Just so you know, that Communicant actually changed the kindergarten entry to September back in 2024-2025. So our policy just did not reflect that. So it is not something that changed this year.

088Right. >> It goes into effect next year. Well, right. They But we had the option to allow it outside of the law until Right. But they did recommend it, but they gave us time to and we and we gave an additional year. or two. two. So, is there if we adopt this policy, is there any operational latitude within the discretion of the superintendent to look at a case-by-case basis for those students that would fall out of the gap. I don't know that we have that many. We know of at least one. I'm saying me. Amy Dr. Martino is coming up to the microphone to respond. Um currently we have 35 students that would be on the waiting list and all of our special education needs filled. The benefit of us being in Green Hills is

089that should we be able to open additional classrooms, we can take those 35 students off and continue to grow. So, the state is willing to give us more seats for which we can fully sustain that. Thank you. Yes. Yes. Oh, she The question's question if I'm not incorrect is about kindergarten. How many students are facing the gap year where they normally would have been able to start >> Oh, I That I don't know. We have 35 students in pre-K 4 that are on the waiting list. I'd have to find out how many of them would have been previously eligible. Through the chair, um Dr. Martino. So, if my child was 4 years old and in your 4-year program, right? And on Decem- November 1st, they turn 5, did you ask them to leave this pre-K

0904 program? No. Okay. So, if there's a child who is 4 years old on September 2nd, they have access to your pre-K 4 program. >> Yes. Okay. I'm sorry. I was just unclear on on the conversation. I didn't understand. Thank you. I appreciate you. Yeah, so I have questions on the policy 5112. For >> [clears throat] >> policy 5111 the admission one is that something we're going to be rescinding cuz okay. If if if the board decides to adopt 5112. Big question. Any other questions on the motion? I believe there's a motion on the floor already. I just have one question. So in paragraph in enrollment paragraph 1 2 If the parents or guardians of any children are unable to pay for such immunizations and or physicals, the expense of such immunizations and or physicals

091shall on the recommendation of the board be paid for by the town. I had the same question. Do we normally pay for I believe that the Burlington Health District has asked us to send people to them if they're unable to pay for a physical. Yeah, it is city supported. Yeah. The through the chair the Department of Public Health is actually a state agency assigned to this region. It's a regional and I it is my understanding that they do provide >> goes through the city budget is what we're saying. It doesn't come through the Board of Ed budget. But what I'm saying is why would this be any action by the board? They already have access to the free immunization through BPH, Bristol Public Health, or yeah, the um You know what I'm saying? The the

092>> Because it's CABE recommended policy language, so it's there the purpose of having it in there is so that we could support that if for any reason we had to. I don't imagine that we would, but it protects families and gives them opportunities. And it's knowledge. It's It's written. So I have a question with the wording. The wording says, "By approval of the board." I should not ever know the immunization status of any student. So I How do we implement that? >> Well, it's the approval of this policy. >> Let me read the language. It says, "Um shall on the recommendation of the board >> of the board be paid by the town." So it's not I I don't read it as us approving or knowing of a child that needs an immunization. I I

093don't I No, that's Are you asking if we As long as that's the case, I don't We shouldn't. You know, I'm in agreement. And And if that's not the interpretation, but I I find the language to be unnecessary because we already provide this without having to put it in a board of ed policy or muddy the waters with the board has some type of approval over it. We would never deny somebody this. They already have access to it at at the Bristol Public Health District. And why this would even be within our scope, it's just It's odd to me. I don't think it belongs. It's not to try to prevent anybody from doing anything. We already have it. We already have this available. Thank you. Thank you for your input. Any we're physicals, could that

094be any type of physical? Including if I Um right. Were any of these questions presented ahead of time so they could be shared back to Gabe? Because these are questions that These are >> taken up on 5/13. It's policy. Um this was taken up on our last policy committee meeting. 5/13. Yes. Today's is the 20th. Right. And it's a special meeting. Look, did you attend the sub committee meeting or watch the video? I attended the sub committee meeting and not knowing the details in advance cuz I'm attending the meeting to hear it, it's already after public comment. So, that's why when we squished these >> an email on Monday asking if you attended the meeting and had the question and I sent the email saying if anybody has any questions, please send them to Commissioner

095Buelow before so that we can get responses for you. We We tried to do I'm going to say to you exactly what you say to me. We tried to do these things. I can't be at a beck and call on Monday sometimes either. So, we got notice we didn't know there was going to be a special meeting until we saw the calendar invite and then a subsequent email came Monday night. I would love to be able to drop everything in my life and go back and reread policy so I could be prepared for a meeting I didn't know we were going to have 2 days later in 4 >> Okay, understood. Thank you. Understood. Okay. >> the reason why I brought it up, but if you want me to go into more detail, I'm happy

096to. Nope, I'm absolutely sure I don't want you to go into more detail. We can move to the next >> Would you like to silence voices? We can move to the to the next if there's an issue, we can move to the next um topic in the policy or we can put it to a vote. Would like to make a motion to amend and strike the language about the board approving an immunization through the city. We don't need it. Exactly. Especially this. So, it says we recommend I'm sorry through the I'm sorry through the chair. Um when we discussed the um policy in regards to free and reduced lunch, we had a very similar conversation um which we've already approved that policy and the conversation was one in which if we have this in our

097policy and should a federal decision be made that we no longer offer a free immunization or a free um physical, we have in our um policy a safeguard to help the most vulnerable people. We did the same thing with free and reduced lunch. If all of a sudden they changed and we could no longer provide free and reduced lunch, we have a safeguard in our policy so that kids would not have to um not eat if they didn't pay their uh lunch fee from the day before. So, I see this as a very crucial policy um that we keep in place because we can't predict what federal laws are going to change and how that's going to affect us as a community. Well, maybe I don't know if I don't know if you're aware, but

098there was um statutory language that passed this session that the state has already provided for this. Yeah, but the point is Kristen that the policies live more than 1 year. So, if state legislation changes next year, we have a policy in place that supports the current legislation, but protects us if it doesn't get funded in the future. So, you have every right to vote no, but the motion's been made to strike. It's been seconded. Is Is there any other discussion? Um I actually have a question. Um So, we have Wheeler Clinic in some of our schools. Do they Do they attend here? Who's still here? So, the motion on the floor is to strike. Um We can take a roll call vote. Do Do people want to strike or do they want to move forward

099with policy as is? So, the question is uh yes or no to striking the language out. Byra? Um no, no need. Here and no strike. No strike. No strike. Commissioner McBrearty? Um yes. Commissioner Diantonio? Yes. Commissioner Osinkosky? No. Commissioner Parenti? No. Commissioner Simmons? No. Motion to strike fails. So, now we move to a motion to pass as is. There's already been a motion to second. Motion's been made and seconded. All in favor? I. I. >> I. I. Opposed? Up. And you voted yes. Did Commissioner Diantonio vote? Yes. Okay. Motion passes unanimously. Um next policy on the agenda. After we sent policy 5111 admission, um the reason this to be rescinded is because it's a contest in policy 5112. Motion to rescind policy 5111. Second. Discussion questions? Hearing none, all those in favor? Aye. Aye. Aye.

100Passes. Next item is policy 5113. Attendance excuses dismissal is mandated. Our previous policy was based on model for our audit. We needed to add in more up-to-date RV students. This um leaves sample was last approved September 2017. I make a motion to approve policy 5113. Second. Discussion and questions? Through the chair. I do I do have a question about um the half days. So, I believe it is on the first page. Um so a student third paragraph, student is considered to be in attendance if present at his or her assigned school or an activity, etc., for at least half of the regular school day. So, later on it says, you know, they have to be in school 10% of the time. So, does that math add up with, you know, how many half days are

101allowed? Like, what if someone just is dismissed every day? So, is there um some sort of account of the half days? So, this is the current policy. Um we [clears throat] do do attendance reviews every month. And we do have an attendance committee that calls in the families if somebody is uh uh exceeding a lot of half days. Um and actually she was here earlier, but Erica Triani really tracks that and she'll also send representatives out to their home if it's still an issue. Um the only change from this policy to the one that we're asking you to adopt is that list in the back that has what legal references we used. There's no change to the actual policy. Mr. Chair. Um page uh two, school chronic absenteeism rate, letter C. So, it says absence

102resulting from a student enrolled in grades K-12, 8 through 12, taking two mental health days during the school year. Such absence is to permit is to permit the student to attend his or her emotional or psychological well-being in lieu of attending school. The student shall not be required to present documentation or rental guardian consent. So, my concern is with the language of um uh parent or guardian consent. I understand not wanting to maybe um state why the student um needed a mental health day or that they were um whatever, but it the way it's written, my kindergartner could go to school tomorrow and just say, "I didn't come in yesterday cuz I had a mental health day." And having no notice from the parent or guardian. I can I can respond to that. So, whenever

103a student is absent from K through 12, uh an automated uh message goes out to the families to let them know that their child is not in attendance. And they ask if you can inform the school on the reason for your child not being in attendance. So the the caveat with the mental health day is you just say it's a mental health day. However, if it is a illness, they may say can I have a doctor's note, can you verify X Y and Z. But with mental health days, there's no more clarification than just it's a mental health day. So the I'll go ahead. Through the chair, the language says no documentation which I don't have an issue with. Um, but if you're saying if you're pointing out K through 12 and then saying no

104not be required to have parental guardian consent. I don't agree with that. I think if we just figured out some language where uh uh uh parental guardian uh it's the consent. That's what. Uh just just an explanation no further than it was a mental health day or uh I don't really know how to fix the language, but uh to me it's just yes, they >> I think it's my recommendation would be um and and I'll I'll put the motion on the floor, but just for purpose of discussion, I think that the the student shall not be required to present documentation. Um for purpose of the school year limitation subs as such absence shall be identified as a mental health day, but I don't think that we should have or parental consent in here because you

105have K through five in here. Maybe that's okay at I don't know, 17 or 18 years old because they do have some medical autonomy at that age, but the language that you have in first paragraph C says K through 12. So I think I would recommend that this board consider just striking or parental guardian consent from that sentence and leave it as no documentation necessary. They only need to say it's a mental health and mental health wellness day. This was the CABE model policy. Um I don't know if you looked at the legislation and you've done a comparison to see if this language is exactly in the legislation and that's why it's in CABE model policy. Um but at this point That's not really my role, right? Isn't that the policy committee to check or

106in our policy days? >> No, they did, but you're you're having a problem with the policy. So I'm saying if have you checked to see because having an objection of language that may be required is what I'm asking. Like do So it's a model policy. >> act. It's under public act which is quoted in the policy. Is it more the it's it's through the chair. Sorry, this is Commissioner Simmons. Um you know is it more like the language the language of consent if it was is the spirit of what is being presented that it parental verification or because I I when my child is absent, I have to kind of quote unquote excuse it by acknowledging the absence. Is it the verification that my child was absent? Is that the spirit of this language? But

107the word consent was used, which is almost implying that a student can not have a parent even know about it. Correct. That's what it This is how I interpret the language. >> I I see I can see what that interpretation is. Yeah, that's And that's why I'm trying to get to the core of it cuz it that's It could appear that way to me, too. My child is 15 and is absent, but he says it's a mental health day, and as a parent, I don't have to consent to that because it's a mental health day. Is that kind of where it's Yes. concerning? Okay. But don't they get called home anyway? I'm pulling up the public looking at the public act right now. That's good. Thank you. >> Have Yeah, have you checked it out?

108Do you have specific questions around the public act? I I can just tell you that I can't, in good conscience, say and agree to a policy that removes parental consent for a kindergartner through age 17. I I cannot do that. That That I don't know why we would. It doesn't state that you are not allowing them to go to school or come to school. It's the reason. So, you can either be absent. You can be unverified absent. Absent excused. And now they're adding mental health. So, the parent is notified that the child is not in school. If they choose to say mental health, they don't need to give any details. Why Why are we letting a kindergartner Because it's a state statute, I believe. What if we did um no parent or guardian shall be

109required Ah, no. Well, I think making sure that any proposed change that we would have doesn't um contradict the language of the statute. So, is the spirit of the statutory language or is the purpose of the statutory language to indicate that students can take two mental health days cuz we did talk about this a little saying that the student does not need parental consent documentation as a condition of the absence being treated as a mental health wellness day under the provision. So, it's saying Mhm. we don't need a document that the parent calls it mental health. The parent can say they're not coming and I don't have to tell you why. And I don't have to >> And then we would have the option to do that. But the parent has to notify They're notifying

110you that they're absent. They don't have to give you the reason and they don't have to say that it is mental health in order for the district to say the parent is excusing it or giving you a reason but without giving you the reason. And that's two of those days per year, correct? >> Correct and they can't be consecutive. Right. So, that's why I had I figured that was um the the the point was the documentation piece. Um and that's why I was saying we should just strike the fact that it says um without parental consent because if you stop it just the did the it's the second paragraph under state. The student shall not be required to present documentation or parental guardian consent for purposes of school year limitation such absence shall be identified

111as a mental health day. If you struck what I was saying, it would then read the student shall not be required to present documentation for purposes of school year limitation such absence shall be identified as a mental health wellness day. I think that makes sure that you know, parents are still going to get called if the student isn't there so that they're notified and they also it covers them that they don't have to provide the documentation. I think it was centered around the documentation piece. Um but that's not how this sentence reads. I make a motion to um strike the language in paragraph three um for parental guardian consent. Second. There's discussion. So if the intent is to make mental health wellness days acceptable, that language helps prevent schools from creating informal hurdles. Doctors' notes,

112counseling verification, written explanations, etc. That undermines the purpose of the law. If the statute already grants the absence without conditions including the language in local policy can make implementation more consistent and reduce inconsistent interpretation in across schools. If omitted, districts may still comply with the statute, but individual schools could interpret procedures differently and ask for more than intended. So the reason why it says that you don't need the parental guardian consent phrase is based on the family knowing that they don't have to go through that process. Right. Or or provide the documents. So, it's >> So, that's why it's in there. But I it was my understanding and I thought we discussed it at the committee as well that if you have these two mental health days that it the parent when they notify the

113school of the absence that it did have to be indicated that it was a mental health day because you only receive two of those. Right. That's how I thought so, too. Okay. I just want the parent to consent with the child has a mental health day that they're consenting to the development. They have to do that. Yeah. That that That That's the guardian consent. That's They're not They don't have to present documentation of guardian consent. They can do it on the phone. Is there a you know, are we open? Is there a way to make the language a little more clear so that there is no confusion that the way consent can be interpreted? Like is there language that is either directly from the statute or something I don't I don't have it right in

114front of me. I I know it was somebody read something. I just I Because I can understand the consent piece when it was I I didn't think of it that way in committee. Um but I I can see where it can be a little confusing. It can say, "A student shall not be required to provide supporting documentation to utilize the mental health wellness day. District attendance notification requirements remain in effect." I'm going to have Yeah. Actually, it sounded really good. It's drawn my amendment. Do you have that? You want me [laughter] to copy and paste it? I'll copy and paste it. We still have to do the motion to amend to Shelby's recommended language. I'll put a motion on the floor to amend to the to striking the parental guardian consent and adding the language

115that Shelby just read. A student shall not be required to provide supporting documentation to utilize the mental health wellness day. District attendance notification requirements remain in effect. Yes. Second. Yeah, that was good. Yeah. Any further discussion or questions? Hearing none, all those in favor. I. I. I. Motion passes. Coming your way, Sid. Okay, so uh revision to policy 5113.2 truancy. It's an amended policy. This uh ours was previously EPS. This was previously based on the lead model. For our audit, we need to add current legal references. Um we need to review the regulations to ensure compliance with updated statutes. Um and it was last approved in 2017. Make a motion to approve policy 5113.2. Second motion. Discussion and question. Hearing none, all those in favor. I. I. I. I. Motion passes. Oh, I'm sorry. Any

116abstentions? Motion passes. That brings us to a revision for policy 5114, suspension and expulsion due process. It's a mandated policy. The asses was previously based on paid model for our audit. We need to add and update our legal references, modify and add or update our regulations due to legislative changes. That is It was last approved in 2018. I make a motion to approve policy 5114. Second. Um I had a question about the um Oops, sorry. Go ahead. Can you say um I know in committee we had discussed that you um administration had reached out to building developers And can I just kind of read very briefly recapping and sharing that? I think it'd be helpful for everybody to hear that. Sure. Um Gabe had shared with us that because of the large uh climate policy

117that had gone through the legislation uh this new policy mirrors that um policy making not making the suspension expulsion um in line with that that language such as the restorative practices and offering um students a an opportunity should they be expelled to still engage in a school day of learning um focusing on wellness and on academics. Thank you. You're welcome. It's a long policy. I realize it's 67 pages. There's a lot of redundancy. Took me forever to read. I do have a question on um So, when they cross off a paragraph, but it's blue, are we we're keeping that, just removing the red lines? Okay, so here it says um page four. So, it says um any weapon, including a starter gun, that will is designed to or may readily be readily converted to expel

118a projectile by action, the term firearm does not include an antique firearm. I was wondering what antique firearm Believe that is part of the state legislation language. A lot of this is from um There are things that you need to go to uh expulsion for, like, you don't even have the option. Um and then there are things that the district is able to make their own decision um based on the evidence that they have. So, I would think the antique one could be if a kid brought something in in elementary school that their grandfather gave them. Um that that we wouldn't have to go to expel a first grader for that. Um but if it's a actual firearm that's brought into school, it's mandated expulsion hearing. Further discussion or question? Now? >> Yes. Yes. Any

119other discussion or questions? All those in favor? Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Abstain. Um up opposed. Um after this I because I miss I didn't I couldn't hear you and I know I missed the window for a question, but could somebody um just provide us additional information later about what that uh um the length of the the school day for the expulsion. I know that was talked about in committee. So, what would it look like? I know there was some question about whether or not what we were providing was enough, but what would it look like because if you have one-on-one support, I don't know that it needs to mirror exactly the amount of hours that you would spend in a group classroom, but there was some concern with a more minimalistic approach that maybe we

120had had in the past. So, if if um operationally somebody could follow up with the board and just let us know what kind of changes they were going to do to make it a more meaningful day and what the cost impact was going to be to the budget cuz I think they also mentioned that there would be a finance a financial impact. So, if there's any information that could be shared after the meeting, it would be appreciated. A lot of shaking houses heads say yes. Um thank you. Um and I didn't hear any opposed. Motion passes. Revision to policy 5141.4 child abuse and neglect is a mandated policy. This was previously based off a cave model. Our audit had indicated that we needed to modify due to public act 2287. Below are the revisions. Red

121is taking out and blank. Make a motion to approve policy 5141.4. Second the motion. Discussion questions. Are there any other I didn't get to really spend too much time reviewing this. I was reading for 60 hours. Are there any like major changes? Um well, they took out a lot under reporting of child abuse, but they also added a lot. Um it's it's in line with our require like what we're required by law. So more airing on the side of child safety. Mhm. Any other questions and discussion? Hearing none, all those in favor? Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Revision policy 5131.81 and regulation use of private technology devices by students. To recommend it was recommended. Ours was previously based on Kate model. We used uh So this was the one where we

122had used the Madison policy and we really liked the Madison language. Um and updated that to uh the Kate sample. And updated the device language. Make a motion to approve policy 5131- .81. Second the motion. So we currently had one question on this one and I and I believe it was this policy so let me see that very well. There I don't Is this the policy where they talked about searching a device? The search of privately owned technology devices is on page two. Thank you. So, um my question would be who who does the search? May be search the device is on board property or in student's possession at school sponsored activity and if there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that search will turn up evidence that the search has violated or any search shall

123be reasonably related to the objectives of the search and will not be excessively intrusive in light of the age and size of the student and nature fraction. Is it Should we put in anything in there that it's admin or security staff? Mr. Telkey, would you like to respond? Yes, absolutely. That's a great question. So, historically the process has been typically performed by administrative staff at the school. This would also allow this would also allow us to encompass the ability to have eventually depending on the nature of what the concern is, what warrants that that search, other entities as well. It wouldn't necessarily be it wouldn't be a teacher or anything like that. It would be exclusively administration as has been the practice historically. So, it would be okay to add language in there that it

124would be a search done by administrative staff? Would be but that's a bad idea? I would add administrative staff or technology department staff because not all of them are seen as administrate or at the administrative level? Does that make sense? That is that is correct. There are times where um a school's technology person or uh the director of technology would be called upon to assist uh with a search if um there's a specific um app or something just to be able to navigate through the technology device. I have a question to piggyback on that. Is that something that would be outlined in school like the the handbook or like how it's operationalized or a normal search policy? Yeah, but that's okay like it just to play devil's advocate. I mean, it's a great question. It

125sounds like that's something that really does need to be clarified. Take up a rabbit down the policy side. Keeping the policy broader but how it's implemented more focused and more guiding step-by-step. Like how it's being another procedure like that. We would have our um search policy. To the chair, I can't quite hear all the conversation but were you were you saying we should we be referencing our already documented search policy in accordance with that policy so that we're not repeating it here? That sounds like it could be a good option. Our um our search policy is much broader. It talks about lockers and things like that. This is specific to technology. Okay. >> it would make sense to say an administrator would um would oversee the search and that a member of the tech department

126may be called for support. But the administrator would oversee it with tech support. Would there ever be a need to include language for um safety and security climate officer as well? I don't think so um because we're just trying to get some evidence at that point. Once we have the evidence, then the um safety and security uh officer would be called to review the evidence, but we're talking about gathering the evidence off of technology. Okay. We have to amend it. I know. Um So there is a current motion on the floor. I'd like to amend that the language would under So it would be under Search of pilot owned technology devices in our previous school policy to be as Mary said. All right. All searches will be supervised by an administrator in the building and

127may be supported by a tech. An administrator and administrator. And supported by maybe supported by a technology team of the When through the chair when you said um search will be conducted by an administrator in the building. Is that meant building administrator or administrator but the search has to be done in the building? We We actually changed that to just an administrator. >> Okay, got >> Because we do have special education administrators and physical education administrator. Yeah, check. >> What would we call your technology person? Or a technology Um information technology employee. I like team member better. >> [laughter] >> Thank you for that suggestion. I'll send it to you. All super All searches shall be supervised by an administrator and maybe supported by an information technology employee. That's what we're inserting. Second. So amendment's

128been made. Second. All in favor. Aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Opposed. Motion carries unanimously. Next, policy. We voted on the policy first and then That's already in the pool. Motion will be needed. We vote on the amendment then we vote on the policy. Okay. I thought we voted on the amendment with the addition of the then policy with the addition of the amendment. I can't see my motion. I think it's the I know we're still figuring out how to word it that way, but it's but I think we're good. Next policy 6141. Revision to policy 6141 which is instruction bring your own device and protocol for the use of personal technology in the schools. It's recommended and we needed to change device paragraph to align with the same language that we utilized for the 5000 series.

129Make a motion to approve policy 6141.328. Second motion. Discussion and questions? People that have questions speak now. Who wants to go first? You're the chair. Um it's mentioned or referenced um that the students can only use the school's Wi-Fi. I'm just questioning like is that really possibly enforceable? Is it just I used to talking. They can yeah um it is enforceable in so far as uh the if the student is seen using a different network than the school Wi-Fi network. Um in case that they should be directed not to use it. Um and then the the rules of the policy go down. It is I will be honest though it is difficult to um track that especially since a lot of people have cell phone hotspots these days um and the networks don't show up

130on this channel on these devices. But it is sort of a a catch all to write it. So in if anything were to arise that goes cover the student strings that number then. Through the chair, I think I think I heard some of what he said. It was a little bit hard to hear, so I'm sorry. I think it the intent I remember asking a question a while ago. It was that, you know, if if another student if you have a second phone, you can use your second phone as a hotspot and bypass, you know, the restrictions in the in the network. I mean, you you might bring up a good point. You'd have to be caught doing that, but it you know, it is possible and um if we if we did catch them

131doing that, then they'd be in violation of our policy by trying to hotspot and get a get around network. I think that was the intent. And is that correct? Yes. That's the intent. Mr. Telkey shaking his head. Commissioner Woody, do you have a question? >> I did. All right, so um in operating principles for use of personal devices on school campus I'm not sure which page it is. I wrote it down there. Number three. Students are not permitted to transmit or post photographic images, videos of any person on campus on public and or social networking sites. And um seeing some of the other policies that we have um in the past I thought we should include the language without which because there's other areas where they're allowed to take students are allowed to take pictures

132of other people, students staff members in um in the school so long as they have permission. The first thing that's coming up for me is for like the for example, like the the trip the the trips abroad and we do the the the journaling and the photographs. Are there permission slips that usually associated with that where you have to like a parent or guardian has to sign that the photos are able to be used. Um we do have a permission slip for uh public posting of photos that parents sign off on. Um but I'm not opposed to putting with this one without people's permission. I think that um historically we uh always encourage students not to take pictures in classes and not to take pictures on the bus and because it causes um more problems

133than it helps. Um but nowadays I think that kids do take pictures uh even of that with the request of the teacher. So if we want to add to it without, you know, the permission that we have on the other language that would just fine. Align the language, that's fine. I would think. So does that mean technically you can't help you can't post selfie of you and your girlfriend at school, boyfriend, whatever? Technically yes. It says students are not permitted to tran- transmit or post photographic images, videos of any person on campus. Everyone's not allowed to take personal You talking about prom pictures and all that cuz we have a lot of people in violation. That's the case. Well, and I I think that's why that that language is really important to just say without

134their permission. So let me add that. With the amendment added. So it's number three if you found it at the It's on the bottom. Second to last page. It was adding without permission. Got it. So, um sorry, so it's part of the regulation already? There's other spots in in other policies, too, where it says In the regulation >> under operating principles. >> Yeah. Yeah. Number three, collapse. >> Yep. So, it's not part of the policy, it's part of the regulation. So, we don't even we just say in an amendment we can just change it. Thank you. Any other discussion or questions? Hearing none, all those in favor? I. I. I. I. I. I. I. Opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Okay. All the policies we need to do are done. One-to-one. Oh, we have to do the

135one-to-one device. That's the last one. I'm sorry, guys. I thought we had we were done. We have one more. Policy 6141.3291, one-to-one device. Make a motion to pass policy 6141.3291. Second. I have no questions. Questions for me? Any other questions? Discussion? Comments? Hearing none, all those in favor? I. I. I. I. I. Opposed? >> I. Motion passes unanimously. Thank Thank you, Meeting's adjourned. Goodnight. Thank you. Goodnight. Bye. Goodnight. Goodnight. Bye.