001I would like to call the meeting to order at 7:05. Um, can I ask people to stand and say the pledge of allegiance? So, I I apologize for starting a little late and um just wanted to I know this isn't a typical board meeting, but I I was just going to acknowledge that we had the um distinguished teachers award ceremony uh earlier this afternoon and it was an exceptionally lovely event where we had the opportunity really to highlight and honor and recognize some of our stupendous and superior like like not superior but our stupendous educators um in a year that you So, there are probably a lot of options to have out there. And it's not just those six that we highlighted today, and I'll talk about this at our actual meeting. Um, it's all
002of our educators who really make make Greenwich Public School so special, which makes it that much harder to go into the discussions we're we're having now as we're starting teacher appreciation week. So, um, I just sort of wanted to acknowledge that and just thank uh thank all of our educators who are probably logged on uh and watching and all of our incredible staff and administrators who are also here as well. um for all you guys do. Um and with that um I know that our budget committee uh part of our budget committee at least has been hard at work and uh if it's okay with you uh I would be very happy to turn this over because I know you had some additional discussions on things. Would that be okay with you Kathleen? That would
003be fine. I'm actually I is Cody's not online and No. So I but otherwise I would defer to him. Um, no, no, that's the only He's not online, so Okay, sure. Sounds um So, I know that um let's see. Um let me I I think that we have something. Can we actually Something was just shared with the board. Um and I think we should probably share it on the screen. Um, let me see. Would you like me to forward this to Michael Tanasio to share it on the screen or you have it up right now? Um, oh, can you share it, Tony, or can someone share it? Unfortunately, I'm just like driving off my phone. The board was I can go ahead and share it. Thank you, Ben. Thank you. So, okay, that'd be helpful.
004Um, I was just going to say just as a start, is this being if it's not posted, it will be posted. It'll be posted later. I just want to make sure for those who are watching from home and can't find this, this is a document that we're sharing now and it will be posted to board docs. Yes. So, um, let me just start off with this is so hard. Um, this is obviously not what I want to be doing. I have to say I was quite stressed out all day. Um, and because this is obviously not what the board wanted. Um, I'll stop with the theatric shortly because it's just we we have a job to do. Um, and it's important that we are good stewards and that we start the year off um, not
005in the red. And that's what we have to do. That's been the edict. And um, as much as it pains me, it's the financially mature thing to do. And um and I I feel compelled as a result to to work in that direction. Um and I think one more thing, this is obviously not at all rehearsed. Um not only our teachers and um obviously administrators and everyone, parents talking about this, but our kids are talking about this. And you would think that that wouldn't have be a huge deal recognizing I have two kids in high school, but it's my seventh grader who I'm actually hearing a lot from. And the fact that a seventh grader that this is what they're talking about at the lunch table is like a little bit too much for me.
006And um at the same time, I've actually been impressed with some of her responses. Um, so I think that we need to bring this to conclusion in the interest of allowing all of our students and parents in the community and teachers and administrators to move forward. So that's it for my opening and then well I was going to add on not only are our students and people here talking about it but our private schools are talking about it and utilizing this and I think this is exceptionally important to note that the private schools are taking note of this as well and sending out uh recruitment mail emails and things to people all through Greenwich talking about how the public school funding is being reduced and we should start looking you know you should start looking
007at our private school programs because uh we will support your kids. It's uh really disheartening to to see that that that's uh the communications that are that are going out based on this. Okay. So with that um let me start with the easy stuff and for me that's the non-personnel. So I'm going to kind of jump down to that line. Um and Dr. Jones I'm going to at times punt it back over to you so you could explain things a little bit more. Um but I think we all know what schooly software is at this point right? Um, does anyone on the board have a question about that and the reasoning behind that? I don't have a question, but I think it would just at least be helpful to acknowledge for many that have been
008using and and parents that are aware of what Schooly is is that the majority of our staff has transitioned over to goo to Google workplace. Um, correct Google materials. I just so so I think this would be a helpful uh discussion and I think I know there was some concern about uh transition of materials that are housed in schooly. Um so we are able to have that all transitioned over correct we believe that we are but we also would not do this until we do a deeper dive as well. Um so because it is only 32,000 we have a little bit more control if we get in and find an issue because we really need to get a little bit more feedback. I feel we feel good about it. Um but I just say that
009it's not a $600,000 item, so we can we're okay. Okay. All right. The the next um one is a little bit controversial, right? The per pupil amount. And so could you explain this to me because I think this is kind of what gives the principal some real control over right over the domain. So two different things. The per pupil amount, we take the per pupil amount and depending on the grade level, it's you know 400 students times x amount of dollars. That's to put it just very basic. About three years ago, it was cut way back. The last kind of two years, we were able to start restoring it where it should be. So, this is kind of reverting us back a year or so. Basically, what's um proposed on here is the um it's
010the Sorry, I just lost my line here. Uh is the reduction of $15 per student. And that's at all elementaryaries, all middle schools except for the title one schools. Um, and keep in mind they also lost title one funding this year at the federal level. And then at the high school, although high school is technically not a title one school, we we're only doing $10 per student there and acknowledging that a third of the high school as in 15 a third is actually it is title one. So they have a lesser reduction than our non-title one schools in K8. All right, that that's helpful. You guys have any questions on that? Well, I have a it's not a question, but it's more of a statement and I see John Fischer looking at the screen. Um
011I I assume that if we have to make this reduction just for this year, well, I'll say this overall in regards to every reduction we're making. Um I think it's exceptionally important that when we make these reductions that it's clear that when we vote on it, we make a statement also that towards BET that when they are going in to look at line items and looking at our budget next year that it should not be based on the budget this year with the reductions. It should be where we were and where we needed to be. But um if we're reducing some of the per pupil uh funding, I assume that things like that things that there may be some areas where the PTAs could hopefully help uh support some of the programs uh all school
012programs or things like that if we have to do this. Any thoughts? Personally, I never count on the PTA to offset operating budget. They do a tremendous amount for us already and support us. Um, but I think we have to look at the operating budget as this is our budget and when we go into next year, we'll be building our budget from whatever base we end up with this year. Okay, moving on. Um, I think we talked about a lot last week, the curriculum and instructional materials that was just a basically shaving a bit, right? And making that a little bit more efficient. Is that fair? Yes, we're trying to make sure that we can are still moving forward with our curriculum management plan which is part of the strategic plan of the board so
013that we don't have as you heard at our last meeting meeting before um textbooks that were 20 years old with the VHS tapes in them. Um so we do want to say we feel like a 100,000 is fine and we will make that work. All right. Um the next one is new I believe. Right. So can you explain this one Dr. Jones? the middle school and high school learning facilitator. And this is again just looking at uh learning facilitators, middle school, high school. It it does away with all of the stipens um for this coming year. Um and and it's a bigger number. It's 1622,000. Um so we have to look at support, you know, for the high school and how that will look. But um again, this is another these are all suggestions, by
014the way, from people all over the community and different groups. So we when we ran the numbers on it, that's what it is. 162 So, so what is that? What is that role? Learning, there's actually I want to say is it program administrator or program associates? Is it associate? Thank you. We do have program associates. We also have learning facilitators. And you know, they can be supporting other teachers. You might have a new teacher. Um they're helping them learn the curriculum. They're supporting them. They could be even helping a house administrator or an administrator in general. Anything from scheduling to I mean it's a wide variety. But they're basically it's it's kind of a leadership role within a department. And I will say, you know, in some buildings, like in middle school, we have a
015building where we struggle to fill them. So it's, you know, it's different across building to building um how they're filled and whether or not, you know, the departments all have them and use them in the same way. No further questions. Okay. Um, and then lastly, again, last week I think we talked about this, but there's been lots of talks about consultants and how we use them. And so I think you felt comfortable with reducing 100,000 here, but I think you should probably expand on that since there's been a lot of talk about that. Yeah, there's a lot of misinformation about that line because it's called consultant and to the point that we even received a letter from one of our organizations who think that that's one person for that one line item. The consultancy is
016what we use again for implementing not only the strategic plan but anything that we're doing new. So a prime example this year um we are implementing we will be our brand new writing units and you don't want to just throw the materials out there. We need somebody to help teach us how to use the writing units. Once we actually go through this year then we are um our leaders, our curriculum leaders, coordinators would lead on that. But we've got to roll it out correctly. We have another um item that's in here which is our MTSS software. We have a as you know we've redone the whole MTSS process which is our intervention process all the way through high school. Um and we're rolling out new software because the software we're using is not doing what
017we need it to do. So you purchase the software. We need the training and the consultant to come out and teach us how to actually utilize the software. Once they've done that, then we own that at the district level and and they will do the training after that. But it's stuff like that that's on that line. So, we're happy to make it work with eliminating a 100,000 and we can we can make it work. Any questions on that? Okay. So I what I think we should do recognizing we have most of us but not all of us is that I'm going to try to take um votes which will just give us a sense maybe for where we're headed at least. Um go ahead Michael. Yeah I was going to I was going to suggest
018the same thing. I think it's important that we um there's a lot of people watching. There's a lot of people in limbo and I think it it's very important that we uh take some votes and make some decisions. Um if we I just did the math here. So, this is probably the one of the the probably the one of the easier decisions because it doesn't really affect people or kids directly. If we uh took a motion to cut those five items, um I think it's equals 494,617. Um so, so that's that's going to that's going to that's going to start to get there. Yeah. I it's 49457, I believe, but that's fine. Yeah. But let's have check. Yeah. Um, if Ben I have Patrick running it. Patrick, can you confirm the subtotal for lines 13
019through 17? Uh, I have $494,457. If you want to make that motion, MJ, I'm happy to second it. with that. I would like to make the motion to strike uh items 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 as presented from the 2526 operating budget. I'm happy to second that. Okay. Um could I make a motion to amend? Okay, you can put forward a motion to amend. I'm fine with everything but line 14. That's PBA. That's the per pupil allocation. Um, I'll second that if you guys want to just to put it on the table to have a discussion for reducing that. Do you want to pull it out just for this vote? Yeah. discuss it later in the evening. The particular line item, I just don't want to impact the classroom. I'm trying to keep the cuts
020that we're making away from the um the classroom. That's my only um request. Do we take a motion on the table as it stands or the motion to amend first? We'd have to take a motion on the amend to the motion to amend first. Okay. Does anybody else have anything that they would want to say in that regard? Otherwise, I'll call the vote on the the motion to amend. Yep. Okay. Um, all in favor of the motion to amend uh to to pull out number 14, the PPA from the virtual motion. All in favor? Okay. All [Music] opposed. Okay. And uh I'll abstain on that one. So that passes. So we are back to the original motion. That fails. I'm sorry. Yes, that fails. Sorry. That's what I meant. Uh so we're back to the
021original motion to reduce schooly software $15 per pupil. allocation curriculum instructional materials MS middle school and high school learning facilitator siphon and eliminate district level uh PD for a total of 49457 all in favor okay all opposed okay and there's no one else here to abstain so that motion passes uh five five one zero, I think. Yep. Yep. Okay. All right. Now, let's go um to new investments. I think it's probably the next best place to go. Um so, I'm actually going to start with the easier one for a second, and I don't know if it's easier, but Hamilton Avenue, Dr. Jones, um we all think that there's some barrier to this program. Um, is there grant money or anything like that that we could keep this moving forward but or do we just simply
022have to delay a year? It's kind of a little bit of both. The alliance and I see Julie sitting out there has been very supportive at hemab of kind of power tutoring after school and things of that nature. So, we we are doing a lot. Um, this is the third year I think it's the third year in a row we've brought this uh on the budget and we just we really haven't been able to fund it. Um, so you know, it it's the lesser of of what's probably on here because it doesn't exist yet. My assumption is this this is not a reduction. This is um putting a pin in it uh to give it more time to be built so that we can put it back in next year. All right, there Jonas Brothers.
023Yeah, I mean I remain adamantly opposed to this for the reasons I mentioned last time. I think as a board we have a public responsibility to um support um all the students in the district particularly those that are um um underachieving and are at you know and are below grade level. Um this particular program is designed to support those students at our lowest performing high school, lowest performing elementary school. Um that are lowest po performing primarily for socioeconomic reasons. Um and I think it is would be a um horrific statement on uh what we value as a board and what we value as a community if we were to um cut this program over over other things. Laura I think because we're unsure of the uptake and how it would be rolled out. Is it
024one classroom per grade level? Is it the whole all grade levels? I think for that reason, it's still in the formative stage and it's not um staffed yet. So, it's not anybody's um job on the line, but that's that's that's making the decision for adult decisions. They um I understand that with other decisions that are adults on the line, but that's not our job. Our job is to protect the students. we were perfectly confident about this job when we put it in the budget in the first place. And to say suddenly now that um we don't think we're confident in it because oh well we're still putting it together and maybe we can cut it is disingenuous. The um this is a this is a vital program for the poorest kids in town and I
025think it is horrific. I'll repeat it that we would even consider it over other things on the list. Okay. Well, first of all we that's not exactly true. I think when we put this budget together, everything we put in there, including this program, we were very supportive of and our hands are tied and we are making decisions based on financial reasons, not what we believe to be the best programs for the students, because if that were the case, I would walk away from this table not making any of these reductions. Um, that's one. two, we just reduced $15 per pupil allocation which is impacting all of our students, every school, every student. So to then say that we don't that we don't hold education and supporting those of our neediest of students possibly uh as
026a as our board value. I also would say it's sort of a disingenuous thing. I mean, we we are we have discussions that took years and years and years to plan school start time changes that are on the table tonight. Um, which that was backed by science and hundreds and hundreds of hours of research and study by the board and by others in town. You know, I I don't think this is our I don't know what the word is I'm looking for. We're not making judgment on on the particular program. We're just saying we don't have enough details. You know, it wasn't fully fleshed out and I think it might give it a better, you know, chance of being successful in a year. We have to make cuts, you know, and we're not going to
027agree on all of them and no matter what we do, it's going to impact the education the educational programs in the in town and our students in some way or another. Um, and there's no agreement. I got hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of emails and there was no alignment on on support for one thing versus another. Absolutely. That is why that's our job. It's it's our job to when making these funding decisions to make um to make funding priorities. Um this should not be the priority. This is this is probably one of the things that we should value um most most importantly. It's certainly the progressive thing to do. Um and I'll do you one better. They um I don't want to go there, but it's also, you know, our it's a minority majority. It's
028our minority m minority majority elementary school. We were talking about um not only socioeconomic issues, but students that are primarily black and brown and to make this cut um to to that community um is not the priority we should be doing. And you know what? We didn't get as many emails about that. And the reason why we didn't get the many emails about that is because people in that community are working. Um, and that's no reason and all the more reason why we have to look out for the entire public good. And the entire public good means those are the students that are below grade level that need more time in the classroom, need extra time. That's clearly what the research says. So that we can get them to grade level and move forward. That
029should be our priority as a board. That's what we should value as Greenwich is to make bring those students up to grade level and we should look for cuts elsewhere. Sophie, then Kathleen. Yeah, very sympathetic to your argument. Um, but I do want to note you we have we have more than one title one school, right? Um, we have a lot of lowincome and income constrained students throughout our entire school district and and many many at the high school, right? So, it's all of these cuts are going to be hurting lowincome income constrained families. Every single one of these cuts. So, I I hear you and I'm very sympathetic. And again, I'm not, you know, I don't think we want to repeat this all night long, but every single one of these cuts, we could
030say, "Oh, this is going to hurt kids and this is going to hit hurt low-income kids." So, it's, you know, I think at some point we have to just acknowledge that it's that it's terrible and really negative and we're dealing I don't know why this these cuts are being made, but they're forced upon us and so we're just going to have to do it. That's our job to deliver a balanced budget. This one is not forced upon us. We can find $200,000 in many other places. So, can can I suggest something? I I appreciate the robust conversation, and you're right. Um on many levels, you're both right. Could we split the difference? Could we actually just reduce it by 100,000 recognizing the Greenidge Alliance is um helping fund some of this and still move this
031program forward? Dr. Jones, is that possible? I know this is ridiculous. I know I'm splitting hairs, but this is like kind of where we are. extended school day uh for the year. No. Could they do could we do something else with the the money if there was money left, you know, in this line item, but it is not going to be an extended day, extended, you know, year either one of those for 100,000. I was also going to say maybe there's opportunity for HAMAB to follow the model that New Lebanon incredible uh principle there put into place that are seeing a lot of positive results um in during the year and if we see the need halfway through the year we have funds or grant money that we could sort of start to work with
032to move towards this for the following year is my theory. I mean, I you know, that's just a I don't want to cut anything, but you know, our hands kind of are tied. It's not a specific line item, but it's a whole and you know, we if we argue over every $100,000, we're not going to be able to make make the cuts to $4 million. We should be making tough decisions. This isn't the tough decision we should be making. So, why don't Okay, why don't we I'm not going to make the motion on this one. So, I hear I hear you question. So you guys feel free to make a motion, but I'm not going to make a motion on this one. I'm happy to call the question if you have a motion. She saying
033I'm not going to make the motion on Hamilton Avenue at all. No. Okay, I understand. So no. Um, I'll make a motion to reduce the Hamilton Hamilton Avenue extended day year program by $200,000 uh to give it more time to come to fruition over the next year. Karen, shame on you, Karen. Shame on you. Thank you for the theatrics, but we kind of have to do this. I'm happy to say that about every line item, but I'm putting it forward because it's here for discussion. We don't have to necessarily vote to support it. Do I have a second? Okay, I'm happy to take a vote on it. All those in favor of this reduction, raise hands. All those Okay. So, if you did you Okay. All those against this motion. Three. All those who are
034abstaining. Oh, which I don't know where you Okay, so the motion does not pass as it stands. Okay, so um that was harder than I thought. So now we're going to go to um the positive pathways program. Um I do think that this is worthy of a discussion. I guess let me put it on the table. Um although I'm not really in favor of it. I'll make a motion to cut the positive pathways program by $343,034. Do I have a second? Okay. Does anyone want to second it? Well, there you go. We have to have a discussion. I don't think we need to have a discussion. It's not on the table then. All right. All right. Um, so so far we have um now we're going to get to the hard stuff. Okay. So, we're
035going to go to programming. Um, I'll make a motion to reduce PE on the condition that elementary school PE remains at 120 minutes. Do I have a second? So, Dr. Jones, what I learned going to the RTM meetings this week is that um we've done a lot in our core curriculum to sort of improve the schedule and make things more efficient. Um and we had discussed this last year and I think that this community spoke loud very clearly that they want to keep the elementary minutes exactly where they are. Um which we recognize is more than our sort of our peers. Um but it was something that was important to Grenage. Um so is it possible to maintain um the 120 minutes while reducing the PE by two FTEEs. We have been refining and cutting
036in the core. We have not done this to PE but yes we could make that work. Dr. Bud and I would have to go in and look carefully where that would happen. But it may mean you have, you know, 27 students in a class instead of 24 for PE or something of that nature. But yes, we could we could figure it out. All right. Any more discussion on this item? So, does that maintain existing minutes? Okay. Yes, I think that was a question that somebody had asked early on because I don't get all your emails, but apparently you have quite a few about minutes and parents that are concerned at elementary about shaving those back and their kids not having that activity time. So, somebody asked, is there another way to do it? And we
037would approach it like we've done just other core subject areas and we have to go across and and look like K12 sectionbased instead of minutes-based. and we can make that work. All right. So, the motion's on the table. Would you like to call the question Karen? Uh, sure. I'm sorry. I had people that are watching on home have been reaching out saying we need to they can't see our votes, so they'd like us to need to do it verbally. So, I'll just I I was just responding to someone to to say sure. So all those in favor of the reduction to PE, right? The condition with the condition that the time the schedule will not change. Uh all in favor Kathine Stow. Yes. Sophie Coven. Yes. No. Going down there. Jen, yes. Mike McCarthy. Yes.
038And I'm Well, Karen Hers is a yes. So that passes. What is that? 51. Okay. Um the next one I'm I was put on the I'm not going to make this motion. Um if anybody else is willing to have at it, but I'm going to skip this one otherwise which um cutting grade three world language. Yeah. No, three worldanguage. I'm saying I think we need to be verbal and saying what I'll make the motion and then we can turn it down. Fine. Okay, I'll make a motion. Which is why I think if we just I'm going to interrupt for one second. I think especially which is partially what I did wanted to do with Ham a to put it on the table even if we get a second then we have the opportunity to have
039a discussion and we then vote and say we're not in favor of that at this time making this reduction at this time. I think it's cleaner. That's fair. That's fair. And you know it might not all get done tonight and so be it. Right. Okay. We're going to do as much as we can. Fair enough. And again, since we're missing two colleagues, it's probably only we only go a certain distance. Um, okay. Can we uh I'd like to make a motion to cut grade three world language by two FTEES. Do I have a second? I'll second it just to put it on the table. Discussion. So, Dr. Jones, you want to you remind us what um world language looks like in third grade? I actually I don't have our current minutes. Somebody out there may
040have it. Mr. De Mo, if you can in third grade, do you have our minutes where you can pull them up? I actually brought the minutes for all the other surrounding districts in the um is it it's fair to say our surrounding districts all have third grade foreign language instruction? So, yes. So if I look at Darian, New Kanan, Reading, um you know, Weston, Westport, Wilton, those we compare ourselves to, but keep in mind a lot of them are small districts. So they don't have the volume of the program. They have K5, but I think last year the board made the decision to cut out some of the lower level so that we could have more time for reading and math and we were okay with that and that's it's working well. Um I think
041the other thing is uh just as a reminder and again this comes from lots of conversations with different people asking questions uh was a reminder that we have three magnet schools. We have ham ISD and new lab where it is K5 still and you can magnet into those and we also offer French and Spanish at JC which most of our surrounding districts only offer Spanish. So is JC offering French because it is the school for world language because ISD is you know they're supposed to they part of the IB program is world language. Well JC is not an IB program. No I know that's why I was asking based on languages. So they that's why they offer French and Spanish. Right. So that's part of their magnet. Yes. That's why I was just making that
042confirmation. Uh, I did a little research and it I would say not only do our peer districts in Connecticut, but those also in Westchester and everything, a lot of them start second language in kindergarten. So, um, even for us starting in grade three is is a little little different than those in our surrounding peer district. So, and it is two times 30 minutes a week. Is there any more discussion or would we like to vote? Michael, you ready to vote? Because you're Yeah. A second. Um I'm I'm reminded of of a couple things. I remember our our conversation. It was um it was um I think it was a split vote um last time. This is not on the list. They uh um around world language. And um it's kind of a it's kind of
043a curiosity. We had the question a couple years ago of whether or not we should keep um K2 world language um in in the magnet schools the uh which might be another interesting way to look at this um because those schools the um I think the question on our I think the question before us if I don't if I remember correctly um I think what the question was to remove K2 in the title one schools I think we were considering keeping it at JC at the JC Magnet. I think that was our question. I think that was what was do you remember what what what the debate was a couple years ago, Dr. Jones? I don't want to Well, part of it is if they are in IB school and they have the primary program,
044they must have it in K5. So then that takes New Lebanon off the table. Um and then at JC because their whole magnet theme is world languages, that's why it starts in kindergarten. So as we went through that whole conversation, that's why we didn't move forward with ISD, JC, and New Lab. in HMAB we did, but it wasn't part of their magnet. They they're not an IB school and the school was supportive of it to have more literacy time. Any more discussion? Do we want to call the question? Anything? Do you have any other No. Okay. Okay. Then I will call the question. Uh the motion was to uh cut grade three uh foreign language. All those I I'll call on each member individually. All those in favor? I'll start with that. No. Anyone in
045favor on this side of the table? Anyone in favor on that table? All those opposed? I'm I'm a yes. You're a yes. You're in favor of this. Okay. Michael Joseph is in favor. All those uh not in support of this, Kathleen, Sophie, Laura, Jen, and myself. So that is a five to one to five. Uh and that motion fails. Okay. I'm going to make a motion to um reduce the central middle school cross team by two FTEES. Who's you're seconding that, Michael? Okay. Um, okay. Dr. Jones, can you explain because I know we team at all the schools, but I think there's various sizes and it's helpful to hear about it. So, the size of a team is usually you we don't want to go higher than 120. Um, right now Central has lower numbers
046where they have about 77 on a team, 75 77. So they're it's too many students to have one team but they have two small teams. Now I will say in in some discussion um you know if they don't want it to look at the teaming model there are other things and and areas they perhaps could consolidate like in world language for instance. It's easier to cross team in world language than it is literacy or math. the 2.0. Well, it it that really is working with Tom Healey who's the principal and if he doesn't want it to impact the literacy in the math, it's impacting somewhere else within the school to actually consolidate. Um we have looked at the the master schedules quite a bit uh over the last couple of weeks. Um definitely in world
047language, there's an area where we could consolidate. Um, when I say consolidate, if you think about how high school operates, they'll have a couple different sections in one class so that your numbers uh are a little higher. And because they have the French program and it's the only building that has the French program, we tend to run really low numbers in the class because if you only have six or seven students who need that and we've made the commitment in elementary and then they move to middle school, you're running very very small sections and our world language teachers are masters at having different levels within and differentiating. So definitely in world language there's room to consolidate and so there's already some cross teaming going on is that with like a French teacher I guess. Yes
048I suppose. Yes. And I'm sorry. So and would so would this affect um instruction or um time on time time kids have in the classroom I guess? No. Jen, with the the cross teaming model, it would also go across grade levels. Correct. So there's not not just language levels, but actual grade levels, right? So that could impact the team and the continuity for kids as well, right? If there's a couple of I think we're talking about 2.0 you know, and it's that's really pretty minimal for a school to be able to go in and look at your master schedule and then figure out where that's going to come from. And again, it I think if you ask the staff, and we've had a couple emails, they would like it not to be ELA or math,
049one of those core areas, but there are other areas where we could do this without feeling like you're messing up the whole teaming schedule. Is this something, and I'm just This is for the members. I I that we might I mean, I think this is new. We're not 100% sure where that FTE would come in. And I mean, we're still going to you're still going to keep the teaming. Um, you know, I I'm not sure if if this is some I mean, I assume it's been vetted with this and I know you just said it's been vetted with the staff. I just I think it's really important to say that it was staff inside that building that are teachers that actually shared this with us. Okay, that was kind of where I was going with
050that. That's helpful. That does make a difference. Okay. Again, th this was actually suggested from GA inside the building that they're they feel like because the teachers are trying to be helpful just like GOA and everybody else. So when somebody suggests something, we go and dig in and take a good look at it and they you know they they feel like this is something but we have heard they don't want it to be the teeming aspect but there are other areas where we 2.0 0 is not unusual and by the way the last couple of years as you know we've been cutting across you know 6 through 12 and this is generally what we do we need to reduce two now let's go look at the master schedule look at the enrollment and figure it
051out instead of just saying go cut an English teacher or go cut a math teacher because it may be you've got a 02 math a 02 English somebody wants to be 08 they've got a little baby they want to drop off or whatever and they don't want to be full-time maybe they want to be point8 so you allow the principal to have the flexibility And again, we believe that we can make this work. All right, that's helpful. Then do we have any any other questions? No. Okay, I'm happy to call a vote for this. All those uh in favor of this reduction, Kathleen, Sophie, Jen, Mike. Okay. All those who are not in favor, Laura, and I'm going to abstain on this. I just feel like I don't know enough even though staff is supporting.
052So, it passes. We do a Can we do Can we do an update on the on the math so far? Yep. We can do the math. We had uh that first chuck which was non-personnel which was 494,457. The only other after that PE was 265K and I think this is the next one that that passed. Correct. So that would be the middle school cross team at 156. Yep. So the total the total that I have now is 915,457. Okay, handing it back to you, Kathleen. Right. Um, I'm going to make a motion to reduce the K212 media assistance basically by half it seems from 15.7 to 7. Well, a little bit. A little bit more. Do I have a second? Thank you. So, Dr. Jones. I mean, it seems that this came from the unions.
053Is this right? That's correct. Yeah. That this is and it was both unions. Yes. Yes. Okay. Well then I mean I have no opinion on it but GA and go is saying to do this as in well a media assistant is working in the media center with the media teacher and we've had the suggestion to actually we to eliminate all of them or we could look at having a 0.5 remain at each building so that there is somebody to help do the work and you're not totally reliant like on volunteers. Um so what this does is it takes all of the elementary middle down to 0.5 instead of a 1.0. At high school they have 2.0 they would go to a 1.5. Um you know the impact of staff is you would have staff working
054in two different buildings uh.5 point you know in in the building. So, but it's doable and again it was suggested, you know, by staff and and I want to say, you know, from the union's credit again, everyone is just trying to put items forward that none of it is a great idea. Um, I was just going to say I we keep talking about not wanting to make productions that are in the classroom. I I feel like, you know, media assistants do more than just check out books. um which we know you know and it's I think that they're integral and it we want to support ELA and and learning and I think reducing those that make it possible for students to to get added education when they're in the library especially at the you know
055middle and high school and and need some direction in there. This one uh cuts to the core for me in a lot of ways. So, I don't know, Mike, you had something to say. Nobody nobody these are tough decisions, right? They uh and we know that. I think obviously this is dealing with people and we we have to acknowledge that. Um, I think our challenge is we have to um, like we said, we have to make get to a number here and not getting a number only is going to create more uncertainty and and angst and and problems and we're not going to be able to run the district. So sometimes these are some of the tough decisions of course we need to make. That's what I said earlier, but that's why I'm saying this
056one particularly. I didn't know if you had thoughts on this particular item. Yeah, I think it's not not the exercise at a whole. Yeah, again, it's not something that would have occurred to my mind, but the fact that both unions are suggesting it, I mean, I don't know how you don't listen to your teachers and and your administrators on this one, I guess. Any other questions or comments? I mean, you know, if if we make this reduction and we discover it's not working, what do we then do? because sharing staff doesn't always, you know, you know, it's hard. I think it's the same answer on all of this. If it doesn't work, it doesn't work. We have to figure it out because none of this, none of these are great. They, you know, they were
057in the budget for a reason. So, everything that's on here, we're just doing because we've been put in this position. I'll call the question. And sorry, I just wanted before I call the question. So it would be reducing by seven. Is that what you're suggesting here for 386? 8.7. It's 15.727 27. I'm sorry. That's why I was just double checking. So reducing 8.7. Yeah. So more than half. Okay. For 386. Okay. All those uh in favor? Kathleen. Kathleen. Sophie. Sophie. Yes. No. Uh, Jen, I'm going to abstain. Michael Joseph. Yes. Okay. And I'm a no. So that's 321. It means it passes. Okay. I'm going to make a motion to put the DHS house restructuring on the table. Dr. Jones, can you explain this a little bit? So, this is one I think that probably
058has had the the most questions um from and this is it's morphed and changed over the last since we started talking about this. It is looking at taking one house, don't know which house that would be, uh the house administrator, assistant dean, a counselor, and the admin assistant and reducing those. but it also has the dean of students at the high school. And as we talked about last time, we kind of gave a little bit of history of that. Um, and it that with reducing the one counselor, you're at 728,000. And I think it's really it says restructure because it would cause the high school to really think about not just taking 130 kids and just redistributing them. It's really looking at how are we going to administrate the high school and is it going
059to be different than it looks today? I'm sure we would be working on it all summer. Michael, you then I was gonna say something. So, so to clarify because when we talked about this um last week and certainly a number of the emails talked about the elimination of a specific house. It sounds like um this is more of a comprehensive reorganization that's going to take time to to to figure out, but you have some confidence in it. You know, I'm not I'm and I I said this the other day when somebody asked me the question, I'm not as afraid of it in that probably because I've seen so many different structures and lived in different places. Um if you look at a school district like Fairfax County, which is one of the largest in the
060country, they know how to run large high schools. They have an assistant principal model that's 9 10 11 12. You know, is that something we would look at versus what we've been doing since 1970s? Um, you know, it takes a lot of thought. It would look different. But would our freshman transition actually even be better if you had one person and that was what they were focused on was really welcoming all the freshmen to the high school. It's it's a different model, but again, this this would take some work and it's a big number item and I think, you know, that's that's part of the difficulty in the discussion is trying to take all of the inputs um and figure out what's what's the best structure. I am not as afraid of it as as
061somebody that might be that only knows the health structure. I'll just say this. I know I said this last week. I think especially if we're going to be talking about changing school start times and we don't know where we're landing with that, but it seems inevitable that something is going to have to change there. I really don't feel it's it's appropriate to keep putting the brunt on the high school. Either way, whether we want to have a discussion about restructuring in the high school, I think that that's a longer term discussion than being having our hands forced to do it through budget. Um, and sure, things can change and definitely improve and be better. But out of everything other than the school spare time discussion, this is the one I'm most opposed to. um just
062because I just because it's being done because of budget. I think if we just want to discuss about a restructure that makes sense. I feel like it's important to have community input and time to to do that research. That's just my my opinion. I'm but one of eight or well six here tonight. But um I am I'm sort of adamantly opposed uh to a full house restructure like that. I think the number of emails we got, the only thing I would say is the most we got were in regards to school start time specifically for high school. Uh, and the second was on house restructuring and it wasn't just from staff was from parents as well that that were really against this. So that's, you know, I just want to put that one out there.
063Sorry, Sophie. Um I I completely understand your concerns. However, I do feel like sometimes necessity is the mother of invention and maybe there is an opportunity here to think about um how some how some you know we could do something beneficial and I and I fully appreciate change is very hard and that it's a long tradition of the houses and three of my children have gone through this program. So frankly it's like I'm leerary to even talk about it. in a public setting. However, I feel like it is a big number. We need to identify big numbers to get to $4.5 million. Um, and it's not changing curriculum. It's not changing class size. Um, it is going to change the students experience in some way in the high school, but but maybe it could be
064a positive way. Um, and I think that in, you know, I'm supportive of this in the, but I'm also committing that I would be very invested in working on this and making sure that it was something that was positive for our students and our staff and our teachers. Jen, sorry. Um, I'd have to agree with Sophie. I just professionally have worked in both type of models under you know a a grade level model perhaps or um we we didn't call them houses but h a a house model and there are pros and cons to to each model and to Karen to your point I think yes it's something that needs a lot of investigation and Sophie I would be willing to work with you on it um since I've kind of worked between both of
065those things, but I would really love, as you said, Karen, some input and really looking at um structurally from, you know, I speak from the point of view of a guidance counselor. Um but how how those are all aligned across if there's a restructuring also. So, is it possible to move this item down to the bottom? Well, I was going to say I don't I mean, I can't speak for anybody else. There's only, you know, six of the eight of us who were here tonight to make these some of these decisions. I don't know if this is one that we want to possibly put a pin in and then we can maybe have a little bit more of a discussion and or look at how that structure might work. I mean, I think it's not
066for us to unfortunately oversee how it it's done. That's something at the high school and and for administration to do. It's just for us to make the decision on budget. But um you know I I would not be comfortable making this decision tonight. Just I feel like we need more understanding even if it's we have to wait a week to do it. Um you know because I know we have a meeting coming up. But that's just my opinion. Again I don't know what everybody else's thoughts are because we don't know how this is going to would work. Laura I don't want to make this decision with a gun to our head. I think it's like you said warrants some further investigation of what this might look like, how it might impact the students and I
067I think we need to come back to this without a the you know budget pressure on us that we have at the moment. Kathleen, but the budget pressure is the reality and we have to make decisions and we have to make big decisions. I mean, you're also talking about making we made we spent years on start time years. It was a vote that was 53. It was very close and we have eight years now invested in it and to just now maybe throw that by the wayside is equally as ridiculous. So, um can I just finish? Okay. So, I um I think we need to be serious. Okay. This is we are in an a real situation here where we cannot start the school year in the red. We just can't and we have like
068four or five days to make these decisions and they're all horrible and this is not how I want to end my eight years on the board. But we are where we are and we need to be financially responsible. Um, and I'd like to understand this more because it is a large number and I'm hearing some positives about it. And frankly, correct me if I'm wrong, but it feels like it follows the middle school model a little bit where you kind of stay with your class, which has some real merits. So, I'm willing to hear about other things because I think it's always important to be innovative and thinking about different things. And the fact that it's been the same model since the 70s. The fact that it's older than me is a little strange. So,
069um, I think we need to talk about it, I guess, is my point. Well, that was what I was trying to say is that I'm not ready to make this decision tonight. I think we have not done due diligence on it and it's sort of adjusted even from our discussion last week, which is why I said if we can put a pin in it, just because it's a big number doesn't mean it's an automatic thing to go. If we were going to do that, then, you know, we wouldn't have to make some of these decisions. They're all tough. They all stink. I mean, I I just we're being put in an unenviable position, but more importantly than that, there's six of us here. Uh two two of our members uh were unavailable or, you know,
070didn't show for this evening, whatever it may be. Um so, I know we put this on uh calendar after the fact, but I'm not comfortable making a decision that makes a huge change like that without all eight of us here to have that discussion or at least have a little bit more information about this. That's just I think I think the I think the other thing to keep in mind here what's also unfair is um many to it's to it's unfair to many of the people in these seats. I mean the longer we delay this um not only we have to pass a budget um we really owe it um to um the people who are sitting in these seats to um give them a give them a sense of what's happening u with their
071job. And I I don't think um delaying uh no question we should be talking we we need to have follow-up conversations about the reorga the high schools like but it's it's probably it's um the quicker we reach a decision on this the the kinder it is to to all involved. I don't disagree. I just this is a big number. It's a big change. It's not like saying we'll make a little reduction here and a small something here, you know, and to me we're we're sitting here talking about a huge huge change at the high school and this impacts onethird of the students. Onethird of our students are at the high school and it will impact every single one in one some ways and some of that it may be a positive impact but you know
072we we turned down doing you know new investments and left those on the table. I think I think we just need to have more discussion I'm happy to take a vote uh if you guys would like to, but do you want to vote on this or do you want to draw it? Let's come back. I guess I feel like we need to keep moving and then I'll come back to it. I withdraw the motion. Okay, continue on. Yes, I recognize this is okay. Um I'd like to make a motion to reorg the K8 evaluation team. Do I have a second? Thank you. Dr. Jones, can you explain this? Yes. This is something we've actually been kind of discussing quite a bit this spring because we've been down individuals this year where we we're struggling to
073keep the teams fully staffed. For instance, one of the team members has been the interim assistant principal at ISD almost all year. Um, and so, you know, we're having to we've had to go to a different kind of a different model anyway. We feel like we could make this work. And what it does is it takes the team and redistributes. It does not affect the high school team. Um, and Stacy, if you're on, feel free to jump in if I don't say this correctly, but uh, our bilingual team is still intact. Um, but the K8 team, actually, there will be a couple of them that will be part-time uh, evaluation, part-time out at the schools. Um, but again, it's just a different model and that we feel will work and and we feel like we'll
074probably be much more effective just because right now we we're running short all the time. Well, this might be you see this as a positive. What are they evaluating? What is the the evaluation teams? When a student is recommended for special education, um it depends whether you're at the high school level or K8. They're either doing the initial eligibility or they're doing the trienials. So, it is a special ed. Yes. Yeah. It's but it's it's how we get the testing done um for students. And we're the only actually district in Fairfield County that has this evaluation team structure. Um and and again, we're struggling with it um to keep it staffed. And we've been having to use a kind of a different model. And one thing that we do is we put out um to
075any of our current staff that actually want to pick up an additional evaluation and we have a lot of people that have been volunteering to do that and have great data data this year. Um and we pay them uh you know their pdium and they do that outside their normal hours and it's been highly effective. Um and they actually they get evaluations done really quickly. So the model's been working because we've had to use it. We were forced to use it. So that's why it's on here because we know we can make it work. All right. Well, then I think call the question. Okay. As long as we definitely think this is not going to slow things up, I'm happy to call the question. All right. Uh, all those in favor, it's verbally. Yes. Kathleen
076Sto, yes. Sophie Coven, yes. Laura Casten, no. Jenbat, yes. Michael Joseph, yes. Okay. And, uh, I'm a yes. Okay. Now, um I'd like to make a motion to restruct restructure adult education by half FTE. So, I have a second. Karen, go ahead. I'll second that. Thank you. Dr. Jones, can you explain this? So, we are required by law to have adult education. We also have an enrichment program that we run that is actually optional. That's tuitionbased. Um the person who runs adult ed is actually an an administrative salary. So what we're seeing right now is half of an administrative salary. We would restructure in how that looks and who runs that program. Um and we feel like we can do that. It is a a person which of course I just remind people that because
077we have somebody in that job. Um but we do feel like we could make this work in a different structure and not have a halftime administrator doing it. Any discussion? Okay, no discussion. I will uh put this to a vote. Kathleen Stow, yes. Sophie Coven, yes. Laura, yes. Jen, yes. Michael Joseph, and I'm a yes. So, that's uh 6. Okay. I'd like to make a motion to eliminate the print shop. I'll second that. Dr. Jones, can you explain this? So, as you know, um, we've traditionally had a fully functioning print shop. We had a flood at Habam Meyer, which caused us, um, to to restructure what we were doing. Instead of rebuilding the print shop, we went with an outsource model where we send stuff to, um, a printer in Stanford. Basically, what this is
078is the last remaining position that we have doing that. It's almost like a courier position. people will send things maybe he'll design. What this means is for um our GPS staff uh administrators and the town of Greenwich have to do do their own. If they want to use the print shop, you send it and go pick it up yourself. Seems fair. Okay. Want to call the question? Okay, I will call the question. Kathleen Stowe, yes. Sophie Coven, yes. Laura, yes. Jen, yes. Michael Joseph, and I'm also Yes. So, that passes 6. Okay. I'd like to make a motion, and then I'll explain this um to reduce the administrative assistance by six FTEES. Do I have a second? So, it's a shame that Wendy uh Vizo Walsh is not here this evening because this was actually
079her suggestion. Um I think probably need to correct the record. I think she thought that there were like a hundred in the district. I actually don't think it's that many. Um but there are more than it seems um that perhaps we need. So Dr. Jones, can you tell us the numbers and see how we feel about that? Yeah, I think Dr. Bud, if we'll um if if we can let him speak to this, we did go back as requested, pull all the numbers for each school um so he has those totals. Dr. Bud, can you share the numbers? Yes, I can. Just a minute. Can you hear me, please? Yes. Okay. So, people who work in administrative assistant roles in the district have somewhat different titles across the district. However, if we look at school-based
080administrative assistants uh with the titles of administrative assistant or administrative staff assistant, most of whom are full-time and some of whom are part-time, there's a total of 59.1 FTE. There is an additional there, excuse me, there are an additional uh number of specialized administrative assistants uh at Havomire, but most of them have specialized titles such as in the finance department or the nursing department etc. So this is reducing six of those basically 59.1. Um we will also look at the habire number as well but again most of them are like they're doing financial like they're actually the finance person. So you have to have it. Um but it's six positions. Yes. So I guess it I guess it begs the the question how how how confident are we in being able to maintain um current
081operations with with this reduction. I think we can actually do this reduction but again we are running so lean everywhere because we keep doing this every single year. Will we make it work? We'll make it work. Do I think it's better than, you know, $420,000 in teachers? I mean, that's what we're talking about. Um, yeah. Again, I'm sorry that Wendy's not here because this was her idea. And um I think that if you're sticking with the philosophy of trying to protect the classroom, which is the right philosophy, um this would have you know, not as much an impact. Um so I just wanted to ask if this was something that has been vetted, you know, to think, you know, as Michael Joseph said, is this something that we feel that, you know, I know we're
082running very lean and I know everybody that's in the budget was somebody that we needed and these reductions are going to have an impact one way or the other. Um, just want to make sure we feel our buildings will be able to be run properly. Yeah, we wouldn't put it on here if we didn't think that our buildings can run. But I, you know, I do want to point out we spent all summer long building a budget to prevent to present and get voted on in November. We spend from November all the way through now making sure that everything that's in the budget is needed and it's part of, you know, what we need in the budget. So, when we say vet, we're vetting in a matter of what, 14 days or something. But yes,
083I wouldn't have it on here if I didn't feel like we can do it. Um, but it's again just one of those decisions that's, you know, it's difficult. Any other questions? Um, I guess I will call the question. All those in favor? Yeah. Kathleen Stow. Yes. Sophie Coven, yes. Laura, Laura Cen, no. Jen Bat sadly, yes. Michael Joseph, yes. I I too am a no on this one, but it passes uh or two. Okay, so Patrick, correct my math, but this puts the programming section at 1,584,194. Um I I have the total including the nonpo the the non-personnel together. Yes, I was doing separately. Yeah, the total is 2078651. Is that right? It is. Yeah. Yeah. So I was breaking it up. So for programming so far we're at 15841 94 and then the um
084non-personnel yielded 494457 for a total thus far of 2,78,651 has passed so far. Oh yes, sorry I missed the last one. I'm sorry. I guess I I guess I showed my hand. Um uh so um I'll make a motion as a former Parkway parent to um reduce the Parkway assistant principal. Um just can you when you're seconding just but yeah know it's fine because just in case Yeah. We can't here. Okay. So it's on the table for discussion. Tony can you Dr. Jones, could you give us a little I don't know where this came from and and well what more? Yeah, I mean I think in the community assistant principles come up almost every year when we're building the budget. Um this one it's based on the size of the school and the demographic which
085is different than one of our say other smaller schools and one of you asked a question about that this week wondering like do they have a high e population? No they don't. They have very very few. Do they have a high um special education population? They don't. They actually have one of the lowest. So um it used to be high and if you go back to say five years ago when they had prek, some of the parents would want to opt to keep their children there. So we had actually had at one time it was almost 50% it was very high of um special education students there. But that demographic has totally shifted and when I pulled the numbers after being asked that question, thank you to Dr. Hollyer. Um there are, you know, five
086students in kindergarten, one in first grade, eight eight. Um they're they're very low numbers. Um actually that's sorry I've got my paper here. It's like 2 3 4. The largest grade is fourth grade which has 12. Um and even fifth grade those six students move on next year. Um and the numbers in kindergarten are two. So the numbers are very low compared to our other demographics. I guess I my concern about having some a different setup in one of the elementary schools is, you know, like you just described that there's this variability in the needs of the students going through. So maybe now their special ed population is low, but you know, if it goes up, then that could be a real burden. And I mean I suppose we could add a vice principal back
087but you know just it concerns me a little bit because even just what you described of how high it was and then it's low and then could it be back up to 50% in three years? I you know well and I think that's why you have to manage stuff like that every year. Um I I use Eastern as the best example since I've been here. you know, when they were all the way up to just over like they were getting 900, um they were very high and so we added the AD dean position there instead of doing a full assistant principal this year that reverted back. Um so because their numbers have dropped enough that we didn't feel like that extra position was needed right now. Um so this is something you'd have to watch.
088You know, it is different when you have a single principal, you know, in a school. If you're sick or you're gone, we have to look at that from the district level. How do you make sure the billing has coverage and things are taken care of? As somebody who was an elementary principal by myself um you know, you have to make sure the structures are in place um when they're even at a district meeting, you know, who's in charge when you're not there. Um and but that's not an uncommon problem to have across the country from a principal standpoint. And again, this is on here because somebody suggested that we talk about it and look at it. I think that does beg the obvious due diligence question who would be in charge when the principal is
089not there. I think that's where structurally we have to you have to decide um you know sometimes it can be a coordinator that you which we've dealt with that a lot especially during co a lot and we would mobilize a coordinator that is over in the building is there but it's another administrator is what usually happens or you know in some districts they have like an internship type program and there's a teacher that already has their 092 and you have to figure that what that would look like but there are lots of different models we would decide which one works best there. I I mean I I can't I know that they have a smaller size, you know, school enrollment, but we have this structure in every other school for a reason. Um you know,
090we we we have to build from behind and, you know, we talk about equity across the district and things and I I mean, again, I know we're doing this exercise for budget. Just have one of the fifth graders do the Yeah, I guess we can auction off principal for a day or assistant principal for a day. Everybody gets it. Um, but I I just I just I I this is another one that that kind of boggles the mind. Let's just think this through. So, the the I don't want to put words in your mouth, but the thought that um one administrator could um be at Parkway is because of the lower enrollment at Parkway. That means things like less 504 meetings, less teacher observations, less parent meetings. There's actually is less work to do when
091certain in in when when you're counting up the different administrative tasks in a in a building. Is that is that fair to say? That is fair to say. Just remember, we also just reduced the number of people we have doing evaluations across the district from Havomire. So, okay. Um, I think it's an issue of equity. I don't agree with this at all. Um, and it's not because I'm a Parkway parent if there were I'm not a Parkway parent anymore, but um, it really is to me this is the structure we have at our elementary school. Parkway's actually been on the uptick. Um, and I think it would be unfair to make one principal do, you know, maybe you're not saying it's twice the job, but it's one and a half times the job at least.
092So, I'm not in favor of this. Yeah, and you make a good point, um, Kathleen, in that they are the largest that they have been in a very long time without preK. Okay. Um, yep. Does anybody else have a thought or would we like to vote on this? Okay. All those in favor of this reduction, Michael Joseph. Okay. All those not in favor verbally, please. No. Kathleen Stone, no. Sophie Coven, no. Laura Casten, no. Kim Behead, no. And Karen Hirsh also is a no. So that fails. Six 51. Okay. Or five, sorry. So, um, all right. Let's I'm going to uh I think I'm through all of programming. I'm going to skip down to um other reduction item options and high school. I'll put the motion on the table um to reduce high school athletics
093um basically pay to play um by 455,600. Do I have a second for discussion? I mean, I'm totally opposed to this, but I I thought I thought we had already moved this off. We did not vote on it, and so that's why we have to be more official about this process. Perfect. That's why we're putting every single thing forward for discussion and a vote. Uh, is there any discussion, Michael? So, let me let me go. So, so I think let's let's take the um spirit of the reductions um that were passed by the um majority of the BET or the by the BET for for um in the in this in the spirit they were taken. Right. The the BET um made these reductions um believing that there were places where we could tighten our
094belts or find efficiencies um otherwise streamline the budget. um paytoplay um doesn't do that. Um it passes that would pass the um cost of athletics on to um parents um and families of the community, some of which are of different means. So I'm not sure that this um I don't think this is something we should consider because it probably doesn't I don't think it I don't think it even follows the spirit of what where these reductions were made. Yeah, I think Dr. Jones. So, this is sort of what we were saying last week also that it didn't it it it limits the ability for students of need um to be able to access, you know, sports and as well as a lot of students need need those to get, you know, college scholarships and whatever
095as well. Dr. Jones. Yeah. I think just to add um to that from, you know, calls and input this week, just as a reminder, the revenue goes to the town. So, that in itself is not an easy issue. they already have over $4 million of our revenue that does not flow to the schools. So, I'm not sure this extra 400 is magically going to be an easy flow. Um the WMS um especially was concerned and that came up in my PTAC uh meeting this week where that community like when they do their middle school sports, everybody gets to participate. Um they were very concerned what this would do for participation uh in limiting families that just don't have it. And you know, I listening to the parents talk about how the students are already, you
096know, many of our students ask and have to have free lunches. They're asking for scholarships, um, you know, for things like field trips and and it's over and over. We put our students in that situation and they just felt um, from the PTA group that I was speaking with, this was not a good idea. I would also add that I thought a really valuable point and you could many of you could speak to this better than I can that we really already have paytoplay because our boosters raise a tremendous amount of money and we kind of say here's what you need to contribute if families can't they manage that but and and I know Sophie we we had a conversation it's pretty big money and so we already have paytoplay um and then the last
097thing that people forget about we would have to hire somebody to be especially if we're cutting aa case um to administrate this. It's a lot of money. Somebody has to make sure who's paid, who hasn't, and you certainly don't want to be putting kids in the spot of who could pay and couldn't pay, but the money, somebody has to manage all of that money. So, I just want to share those because those were all discussions this week. Jen, I just want to add um in addition to it um causing you know some increased stress on our families that are not financially able to meet um that requirement that we would put on that. Um we're also penalizing our athletics. We're penalizing sports, asking, you know, families to pay to play. And we don't really do
098that as far as I know with any other afterchool activity, and correct me if I'm wrong, but that we we offer here. Um, who would make a great headline that Brunswick is putting forward uh millions of dollars to put together a state-of-the-art pra just just a practice facility and we're going to be asking our varsity players to pay to play sports. They they already uh take students uh from the public schools to to go play for them as as it is. So, it would just be another way to negatively impact our our our students who uh are athletes as well. Um, I don't know if anybody else has anything they want to say, but I'm happy to take a vote because I thought we'd already pulled this one. But all those in favor of this
099reduction, I hear crickets. Okay. All those who are not in favor of this reduction verbally, no. Calling Stone, no. Sophie Coven, no. Laura Cen, no. Jen, Jen Ben, no. Michael Joseph, no. Karen Hirs, vigorous, no. Okay. Um, the off the table items are off the table. So, now we can move um the high school athletics down to that same category. Um, so I'm going to stop here honestly because um we're missing two members and we're down to the big decision point which is transportation but also um the GHS house restructuring which apparently we need more time on. Um, so I think we're going to uh need more information on that um for some of our members on the GHS house restructuring and then I think we will probably do the final vote um on our
100meeting next Thursday for those uh taking notes at home. We are halfway there where we are and much like Miss Stow is saying I think when we discuss transportation that could take us all the way there or almost all the way there. Um you know if we have to go back and revisit anything. Um but I do think it's exceptionally important that there are eight members at the table to make some of these discussions because they are big. Um so I completely agree with that uh that discussion item. I think you know we all have that responsibility um much like we were talking about to make these reductions. Um I'm I'm not calling the question. So I think I think we have two other members that should be a part of this big decision. So
101any any other thoughts, comments? Thoughts comments? I guess my comment would be I'm disappointed that we can't take the votes tonight and um or as Dr. Mccante Anthony suggested there are a lot of people who are some of whom are in the audience here some of whom are on Zoom who would really like to have a decision tonight but I agree having two members of an eight member board missing is is really problematic. Um so I hope that they can be here next Thursday. Um I just want to double check if we do this by Thursday or on Thursday. Is that does that get us where we need to date wise? We will have to make it work. I mean, it just makes it more difficult for staffing obviously, but you know, we we will
102have to make it work. Okay. Well, I mean, I think that that Michael Joseph, if people haven't done the math at home, um um right now, right, we're at 2 million. Um there are there are transportation options that that get us get That's what I just said. Yeah, I know. Yeah, but that's why I said I think it's important that all of us much like Kathleen had also said is you know echoing Kathleen is that we're all here because this is a the next two items are the biggies and I think it is important that the full board is here to have that as a discussion. Um you know with that I think we're probably I don't think we have anything else to discuss but I do want to just say publicly uh to all
103of those who have sent the hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of emails. Typically I reply um I may not be able to reply individually to all of them that have come in because there are so many but we do thank all the members of the community, members of our staff um our administration um and others who've reached out with with their thoughts and their opinions, suggestions and otherwise. We are reading them um obviously since some of these recommendations have come from the public. Um we obviously will be taking this up again next next week. Um, you can certainly continue to send any other thoughts and ideas to us. Um, oh yeah. Yeah. Did want to ask one more thing because up to that point you reminded me. Thank you. Um, because Dr. Jones, we did
104get a lot of questions and emails about um um other things not on this list, you know, as far as from from supplies to other PD costs and travel and stuff. And I know you've looked at all those. you want to you want to talk a little bit about um why why the list looks like how it is and what we've been doing behind the scenes. Yeah. So the things that you just mentioned are things that you just cut tonight that are on those non-personnel uh lines and so that would go back to that discussion. Um, I don't really there's not there were some new things on here tonight like the administrative assessments that we had to pull data on, but other than that I there are not a lot of other suggestions that actually
105are ones we can look at and make work. That's a good point. Thank you, Michael Joseph. Um, anyway, I just was saying yes, I greatly appreciate all the all the input from the community. Um we we are actually listening um and uh appreciate you know the support. Nothing none of the discussions that we had here this evening were easy. The discussions we're going to continue to have to have and choices we have to make next week certainly will not be any easier. Um actually in all the years that I've sat on either side of this table and advocated for our students in schools. I think this is the toughest decisions and discussions we've ever had to have. Um, and with that, I also really want to say a special thank you to um, our budget
106committee and the rest of the members of our board of education. I know we've all been feeling the the stress and the pressure, lack of sleep and whatnot is getting to us all, I'm sure, but I appreciate all of you showing up to the table uh, tonight and having these tough decisions. Um, well, the six of us, as I said, I appreciate you guys showing up and and and being here for these discussions. It's not easy. It's not fun. Um, and I know it's not it's not something any of us have wanted to do, but um, I do appreciate all the the the input and the and the conversation for from tonight from everybody. And with that, does someone have a motion to make? Sophie like to make a motion to adjurnn. Who wants to
107second that one? Laura? Second. I think we can verbally all say all in favor. Yes. Thank you. Thank you. Good night.