1-13-26 Groton Board of Education Policy Committee Meeting

001All right. Uh, well, I'm going to call the, uh, meeting of the Graten Board of Education Policy Committee to order. It's Tuesday, uh, January 13th, and it's 6:05 p.m. So, the first item on on our agenda is call to order, and I will say that we have all members present, myself, Andrea Arian, and Sean Corkran. also in attendance from the board. I see our our chairperson Bev Washington. I don't see everyone yet, but I'll scroll through. Um I think that's it for board members. And then uh from Grten Public Schools, we have uh Superintendent Austin, Assistant Superintendent Mancini, uh uh Fitch Principal, uh Matt Brown, Fitch Assistant Principal Amy McKenna, and as I'm scrolling, I may have I think maybe that's it. if anyone else is here. Uh they didn't say oh and and we

002have our our our um director of finance uh uh Rita Pariac or is it Parkak? Good enough for right now. Correct me later, please. Um okay. Uh so that's what we have. And our next item is to review the minutes from our last meeting, which is on uh Tuesday, December 9th, uh 2025. I I looked at them. I didn't see any issues myself. I was wondering if any of the other committee members um would like any changes to that. >> Oh, they're good. >> They look good to me. >> Okay. Uh I don't think we need to move to approve the minutes. I'll just say that we have reviewed them and uh and they're approved. Um the next item is now we're getting into uh discussions on policies and the the first one up is

003policy 5113.13 credit for work experience. Uh this is an entirely new policy and uh I think um principal Brown will lead the discussion on this. Uh but I'll I'll just say uh briefly this is coming out of a recent act that's quoted in the or referred to in the policy uh that's requiring that all schools have um I guess well credit for work and work release policy for high school students I think over the age of 16. Um and uh and then there's also something that's supposed to have come out of the Connecticut um uh like office of workforce or chief workforce officer. Um I couldn't find any of that policy online. I think we've uh others have looked too at CAB. So I'm not sure that the state level policy is there. Uh but

004we do have ultimately a requirement to to have a policy on the books. So, so that that's the status as far as I can tell and that's just my leadin uh to principal Brown if you'd like to uh discuss the policy. >> Sure. Um so this was this is Can you guys hear me fine? >> Oh, and someone if someone can project it. I I'm on a different computer so I can't do that myself. If not, we'll just make do. >> I can do it. >> Thank you. And this is um P5113.13. It's fits in attendance. Um for some reasons it makes sense. >> Yeah. So as we're waiting for it to come come up um basically the policy is to to award credit for students um for um working. So, uh, you know, as

005long as they can prove that they, um, you know, they work with their counselor and either me or one of the assistant principles and, um, informing us what they're, uh, what they'll be doing, you know, uh, and showing proof of of work and so forth. Uh, and then, um, and and then they they can gain credit for it. Uh, so you guys can can read the uh, the policy up there. to work study employment credit for work experience. Um, you guys want to read it? You want me to read it aloud? >> I read it. I think Matt. >> Okay. Um I think the biggest uh you know and and this is kind it's been a practice that we we have had it with with u some of our students in the past uh where

006they if they provide their work stubs and and so forth and we we do award some credit for for them working. Um this isn't like a common common thing but it but but it has been done. Um, and I think it, you know, it's a great way to entice, um, especially kids that are, uh, on the cusp of graduation or struggling to, you know, gain some of their their credits. uh a way to entice them to uh keep pushing through and you know getting getting work and and be able to to to get a paycheck, but also um you know uh find a reason to to to go to school and get the credit that they need um to fulfill all their their credits to uh to graduate. And really this I think this policy

007comes straight from from the guidance from from uh CABE uh as as it's stated here. >> Yeah. Uh in in terms of it coming from Gabe, I went through the whole thing and I'm going to send it to Erica tomorrow and I you know I don't know where they studied English but it it wasn't at a 4-year university. I can tell you that. So, uh, I made all the corrections that >> I appreciate that. >> Yeah. So, >> but there's none of the content was changed. >> Dr. A, I will be at um, and I think Beverly may be there to tomorrow. There's a Cave breakfast in Norwich at 7:30. >> Yeah. >> There's anything you want us to address with K, please let me know. No, just tell them to send send their kids

008their their their writers to back to school. That's it. >> Matt, I read this and I I have no problem with any of this. The only question I have is Is there a way for us to I I know we have the eligible requirements. Is there a way to define credits? Because there's nowhere where we say the number of credits that they would receive. I'm so glad you said that, Sean, because I thought it was me. I'm so >> No, I had to read it again now to make sure that that was me. >> No, I'm I'm not sure why why that's not on there. Um, and Amy, do you do you know exact like it's I think through the counselor and and the the administrator, they decide on on the amount. It's not a

009lot of credits. uh I don't know the exact you know number of hours are that are needed to to earn earn the credit um for their work experience and I don't know if Amy if you want to chime in to >> share what your >> there there there is a set number and I think it largely depends upon when the student actually gained the employment arrangement um and in terms of like how many credits as Matt said it's a it's a very very small number because the state obviously has its other requirements in terms of what content areas students have to earn credits in to graduate. So, um, you know, we we are kind of limited with the amount of credits we're able to award for work experience generally, but it it could just be

010that that one credit that helps that student along the path to graduation and then it becomes a credit that they really enjoy earning because not only are they earning a paycheck obviously because they're ga gaining employment, but they're getting the work experience and connecting with people in the community and doing that. So, it it it it's a very rewarding thing to be able to do and to be able to make that arrangement um with the student. I know that um there was one piece under the eligibility requirements that Matt probably wanted to mention that the high school team Yeah. >> just uh wanted to draw your attention to. >> Yeah, if you keep scrolling down a little bit further. >> Uh right there is perfect. Kate, thank you so much. So, the first bullet here

011where it says the student must have acceptable attendance record and um must not be considered chronically absent. Um, personally, I think as an admin team, we wouldn't want the wording must be considered chronically absent. Um, because these are a lot of times these are at risk students um students that might have concerns with attendance and and we see this mostly as an opportunity when they when they get credit for work experience. It's like a hook to get some of those kids that are kind of on the cusp of will they graduate or will they not. And this is a nice way of telling them, you know, hey, listen, you're, you know, if you get this job, um, we can get you that extra credit and maybe this is the hook that actually improves their attendance.

012Um, so a lot of times the the the population that that we're awarding these credits for are going to be the ones that might be under that 10% threshold for uh absences. So that that's the only part of this that that concerns me. Sorry. >> Would you like that not there at all or would you like it softened language or what would you like? >> I personally would like soften language or strike through at least the part that says considered chronically absent. >> How would you do that, Matt? >> Even if it said, you know, even if uh we could say the student must have uh acceptable attendance record. um just so it's not so rigid on the actual 90% attendance rate and I would be more concerned with you know once this is in

013place then we want to see even stronger attendance record um and you know like the the next bullet I like too because it talks about their attendance at that workplace so you know if they're they're attending the workplace and doing what they need behaviorally at at that workplace then I I think uh we should be considering that credit >> and and to Matt's point, often times being able to award that credit for work experience is the thing that will draw them back to school. It re-engages them. And that's just an kind of adds to that reason why if we could have that bullet point end after the word record, it would certainly be more applicable to our population. >> Mike, >> yeah, thanks. I I was just going to recognize you, Bev, believe it or

014not. Go for it. >> Um I I hear what they're saying at the high school, but I do think attendance in school is important. So I would hate to just end that um let me say the student must have accept acceptable attendance. And how are we going to define acceptable attendance? I mean that seems uh like a vague statement to me. And it could be well um Matt thinks okay you've been out 20 days that's acceptable and somebody else come might think oh 25 days absent is acceptable. So I I I really like to define acceptable. >> The other thing is do we get a letter or something from the employer to um state how the studenting is doing at work? Yeah, we do. Um, is that >> they share the progress? I believe it

015is on on the on the first page. >> Okay. I must have read it through it too fast. >> It's it's sort of implied, but it wasn't really clear who was going to track how well they're doing because it it's talking about them, you know, doing well in the work setting, but I didn't know if that it seems like it couldn't just be left up to the employer alone. Um, so I think there's sort of an open question there. I I'll find it if you guys can't >> and and Mike, I don't have a hand, so I can't raise my hand like Beverly is doing. >> Oh, just just talk anytime. >> Oh, okay. >> Be Beverly has to raise her hand. No, no, everyone should be able to talk. And I see Anarie um

016raising her hand as well. I think it'll work out. >> Okay. I mean, it does talk about, you know, proof of the employment. So, they have to maintain the employment. Um, and it's it's reviewed quarterly by the the principal or designate. >> Yeah, I I see that. But it says proof of employment. I like to have like a u an evaluation. How they doing at the employment? I mean, we just don't want to be getting credit just to be giving credit because these because we feel bad for the kids and all these kids are at risk and so let's just blow them a credit here. I mean, let them earn their credit, too. >> Yeah, there's a there. It's sort of we could work that in on the seventh bullet point down. It says, "The

017student is responsible for maintaining good attendance and behavior in the vocational setting." And I had just a question, who tracks that? Um, and so maybe some of that could come through regulations, but but uh maybe there's something to add on there because you do want uh you know um good at some level of good performance or accept performance there. >> Um and Amry, I saw your hand up. >> Thank you. Um I have some experience with this. Uh my previous district, we had a lot of kids that um worked in the community, especially in our alternative school. This was a big motivator for them. But um we definitely had a strict attendance policy before they were allowed to go out into the workplace. We felt like that was really important. As we were talking to

018employers, one of the biggest things that they wanted um more so than their academic strengths was kids that were going to come every day to the workplace. and um show up every day. That was that was the biggest thing. So, they didn't want us to give them kids um that were not going to come. And so, I think we're making a mistake by um uh making a policy that is not strong like requiring strong attendance. uh maybe that you know I I can understand um the philosophy I guess or the thinking behind saying this would be a motivator but if we're not getting them to come to school every day they're not going to come to the workplace every day. I feel like that's got to be foundation and then they'll you know um if

019they're if we're getting them to come to school then you know absolutely you know they can go to the job or the workplace but they've got to come to school first. Right. >> I just think Oh, >> my advice would be as long that that's fine. And I just don't want that to be like they don't initially get recommended for this like if they're below the you know the 90% threshold um either you know once this program is started they show improvement uh with attendance or um you know progress towards that 90% or even if you know if they they reach that 90% but I don't want this to restrict a kid who's have you know who has struggling to find their credits um who are you know normally the the kids that that would

020be the ones that need this credit. We want this, as I said before, to be a hook to improve improve their credit. >> Yeah, but that's what I'm saying though, Matt. So, we had kids that they were at an alternative school. One of the reasons why go you they were they were placed in the alternative school was because they weren't coming to school regularly. And we had these programs in place saying, "Hey, if you come to school regularly, um even this alternative school, um here are all these programs." And we had a variety of different uh sites that they can go to. Some of them were really interested in uh like we had mentoring programs for in our elementary schools where they you know some kids were really interested that some kids were going to

021Pratt um similar to our EB program and we we had a variety of different things. Um but for any of the opportunities we laid out for them the first thing you got to do is come to school regularly. Second thing you got to do is start improving your grades. Third thing I mean we had a bunch of different conditions. Um, but the very first thing they had to do is show us that they would, you know, begin to um they could they could show up to the workplace. And the and how they showed us that was that they had to start coming to school regularly. And these were kids that, you know, beyond chronically absent in our traditional high school. >> Yeah, I I agree with Amarie. I I think attendance is very important really.

022I mean, we have a problem already with chronic absenteeism that we're trying to get under control. So, if we just say to these kids, okay, that's all right. I understand that you want to help these atrisisk kids, but sometimes we're not helping them the way we should. Dependability is very important and to come to school is shows you're dependable. Employers want dependability. And and these were based, you know, to to your point, Bev, these were based 100% on our conversations by the employers that said, "We want kids. We don't care if they're strong in math. We don't get, you know, we'll get them there when they when they're employed by us, but we want people that are going to come to work every day." >> Right. And and the other reason I asked about um

023um how do we >> how do we track Excuse me, Matt, I'm talking. Um how do we track how they're doing at work, too? because I see a lot of these young people at work and they're on their dog on cell phones all the time. So, I want to make sure that when they get the job that they're actually working and then that way just not throwing credits away. I'm totally against that. >> I don't want to. >> That's all I'm going to say. >> And I'm not advocating for that at all. I'm advocating that uh you know some of these kids if they if they have poor attendance we're pushing them to start coming to school. I think maybe we're saying the same thing but in different ways. I I want to be able

024to encourage a kid to to engage in a in a work environment. Um and if that's a way to to improve their attendance, I think that's great and that's kind of what we're striving for. Um I am concerned about if a if a kid's at 88% attendance rate um meaning they they miss about you know one day you know two days a month um but they're attending their their work regularly. If they're not attending work they're not going to maintain the job either. And and that's part of this credit is is they need to obviously any workplace if they don't have have the um the attendance to to maintain the the job then they're not going to keep that at a quarterly rate. I I'm just concerned about that you know keeping the the verbiage

025so that it's at 90%. >> Well I I'm for keeping that must not be considered chronically absent into the policy. >> Yeah. this point. I I can see that we might have to put a pin on it and kind of come back to it. Sean, I see your hand. I'll call on you next. Um uh one thing about it, um I think when students are chronically absent, there's a um we have to and do have an attendance sort of intervention team. I don't remember what it's called, but but that might be a way to >> um sort of have a standard and then have a not really a waiver, but you know, or or have a a defined plan for attendance improvement with uh D the attendance intervention team. That that might be a way

026around it. at least because I I I see I see where this is coming from and these are uh all good viewpoints because you want the right you you want to have a successful experience that increases student engagement in in their overall education. Um but but maybe that's a way around it. Um and I don't know Sean if you were um discussing that point or a different one. I just wanted to >> my question was addressed. >> Okay. Um so so we've definitely got that as a working point, right? Um my question is further up and it's just a general question. Um since we have students that sometimes do this, what happens with transportation? Is the um is the school responsible in any way for for getting a student back and forth? Do they sign

027a waiver um like they they would if they were going to a sports event on their own? Is that something we need to have in this policy? Because I there's some things with the policy that I see need work, but I just want to make sure we've got the elements that are workable um uh for Fitch High School. Um usually we don't provide the transportation uh at least not in the you know circumstances I've I've aware of. Um you know a lot of times a lot of these places they could even be transported by bus. Um, and we could work with the bus company to change, you know, where their drop off point is, but >> so li liabilitywise, I mean, you know, even if a student school bus, they're still in school. >> Um,

028and and we're we're in charge of what what happens is the board of education, the graten public schools. This this seems like maybe it's not that case. Uh, you're you're off premises and in work. I'm wondering if some what happens if someone gets injured, things like that. I don't know uh if that would fit in, if we need a sentence about that. Um that that was my my big unanswered question for this. Well, I've got two actually, but that was one of them. I don't know if anyone knows. >> A great question. >> So, so we can find that one out. Um I I can't see everyone's hand, but so so I'm not going to uh Andrea, thank you very much for going through the the grammar and I'll accept whatever changes you uh make

029as a friendly and well-informed uh amendments um when it goes. Uh, one thing that I had a question was is it mentions briefly, it's in the third line of the second paragraph. It just says vocational coordinator and then it sort of is never brought up again. I get that this is from Cabe. Um, do who would be the vocational coordinator at FIT? Like, um, I could think of some people, but who who would we want to define that or would we want to define that? I I mean honestly I think it would be the counselor in most cases. The counselor of that student >> I just assuminated as it were that that you had one when I saw that. >> No. Oh, >> I shouldn't have done that. >> So maybe a guidance. >> I

030mean we have a college and career coordinator but um >> but I wouldn't put this responsibility on them. I would put in in most cases this is this is coordinated through their actual counselor. So you know uh each counselor has a sixth of our population. So they the counselor would be doing a lot of the the coordination and then coordinating with with the assistant principal and the principal. >> So would the should we have the vocational coordinator? Should we put the guidance counselor? I mean, so that was >> maybe slashguidance counselor or >> Well, do we have a vote? We don't have a vocational coordinator, do we? >> No. >> So, I think Mike, you we should take it out and just put guidance counselor. >> Yeah, I do. >> No slash. >> Yep. >>

031The proper term now is school counselor. >> Okay. Thank you, Amarie. >> School counselor. >> I don't I wouldn't want to offend any school counselors. >> Okay. That's true. Okay. Um, let me see. I'm just kind of going through these. Oh, um, you mentioned the the course credits and, um, this would be outside of the policy, but, uh, I do we have a course on the book that's just essentially work study because, um, I I could see that being a pretty easy description to write up and kind of because Well, how does it appear on a transcript for instance? That was my question too, Mike. Uh, you know, I I I'm looking at this and I'm saying, well, well, where does that course credit come from? Is it, you know, under this under the title

032of of student work experience course or is it do they get credit in math if they're working for an accountant? You know, like where does that go? Where does that credit come from? >> It would be an elective credit. I don't know exactly how the it would the terminology they put on the uh transcript itself. I don't Amy, do you? >> No, but even even when we've talked about it in meetings when it's been pertinent, it's always referred to as credit for work experience. So, it seems that the state has sort of picked up on that verbiage that is just commonly used um when these credits have been awarded in the past. So it on the transcript it might read CWE uh for credit for work experience or it might just read elective credit that

033I would have to look into to give you an exact answer. >> Yeah. So it might it might be I mean look you can look into this but it might be appropriate to have a course I mean at the university level we have um for instance internship courses and it's just it's just that and then along with and the primary role of that internship is they do get credit for working whether they're getting paid or not. Uh but the primary role is um there's uh some academic oversight or interaction with the the workplace between the instructor of record. It could be the guidance counselor in this case um and and the employer and then um at the end or sometime during it the in the student um gives some kind of progress report. They're they're

034very short actually. Uh so it's not not ownorous for the student, but it that it that way you're getting some um uh within the academic setting some some interaction about what's going on some kind of record because I this would be in I would think you're not going to grade this. This would be a a past fail or satisfactory unsatisfactory. >> And where would they be employed? Well, they could be employed at Big Y, Stop and Shop. Who knows? >> Yeah. >> I mean, it basically we're just, you know, anywhere where they're they're getting their their pay stub and and we're able to um you know, verify that they're they're working at a you know, in a reasonable uh performance. Uh the only other thing that I I feel uncomfortable about is not knowing how

035many credits um is going to be allowed. Like if I work for two months, am I going to get a credit, a half a credit, a quarter of a credit? If I work for six months. So um there's no way in there's nothing in this policy to say how many credits or how do we determine them? amount of credit that they're gonna get. Maybe that should be in regulations, but I like to see that before I even vote on this. >> Yeah, I agree. And Emory has a hand up. the state department of ed. I mean, I never really got this deep in the weeds with this because um it used it was outside my department, but the state department of ed used to have guidelines um through I think Perkins um for work-based learning

036credit. I can try to look those up. Um, I, you know, I didn't, in honesty, I didn't do that before this meeting because I wasn't sure, you know, I looked at the policy, but I wasn't sure if there were going to be regulations associated with this. Um, but I can look into those to see if I can find them. Um, that may give us some additional guidance as we um, prepare the regulations for this. >> Thank you, Amarie. Appreciate that. Yeah. >> Yeah, that'd be really helpful because what I see with this is because I I'll bring up my my next point again, but or or in a moment, but um I I can see that this is we'll we'll just bring this back again next time to policy if if that's okay. Um because

037that we've got a bit of factf finding to do and uh and then and then you all can decide amongst yourselves what what you think the best course would be in terms of that attendance uh point. Um, so, uh, I mentioned in the introduction to this that I really cannot find and I, um, and, um, Erica asked, uh, Cab about this, too. We can't find the like if you go down, I think it's one of the lower bullet points. Um, yeah, it's the eighth bullet point. Let's see. Um, it's, yeah, it's right before those open dots. So it says the principal or designate is responsible for ensuring that the student credit for work experience is compliant with Connecticut student credit for work experience policy. I'm sure that our principal and design can do that except

038that it doesn't seem like anyone can find the the Connecticut student credit for work experience policy. Um this is the act that's mentioned is um is down below. Um but uh and it's it's sort of new in the last couple years, but it it directs the um Connecticut uh workforce the chief workforce officer uh to develop that policy in conjunction with or consultation with at least uh the department of education maybe department of labor as well. Um but I can't I can't find it anywhere. Um, so, uh, and and so as written, fine. Like when that policy comes along, we wouldn't have to change this, but it'd be nice to know if there's actually one out there. Um, and then then the uh then I will say in terms of timeline, the actual act says

039um, every school system should have this place I think for the 24 25 school year. Um, but I can't just looking around I couldn't find a school system that has this sort of like new verbiage up. Um, they're probably out there >> and I I have a um I have a ECC principal meeting on Friday morning. So, at least I can bring that up at that meeting and see if any any of them have recently done this. >> Uh, so at least that's that's coming soon. >> That that's good. That's great. Um, so so that's the factf finding. I don't want to delay it because of that, but I'm what I'm saying is that um according to the act, it looks like we're behind the times, but according to reality, I I think we're um

040uh right where or ahead of where we need to be. Uh but but the important thing is we do want a policy in place that's workable uh for Fitch. And I was just wondering in terms of uh current experiences, are there any elements that aren't in this policy that you'd like to see in there? Um uh and and you can think on that and come back next time if you like >> uh about that or or you don't have to come back necessarily. You can uh um just um send them to us. >> Thank you. >> Mike, here's my concern. >> Yeah. >> So, I'm at the grocery store and I meet a parent or whoever and they say to me, "Hey, Andrea, I hear you got this new student in the workplace policy. Tell

041me tell me about the program." My mouth is open. I mean like I have no idea what I would say. >> Yeah. I I changed the subject to something about the pro. >> Exactly. >> Yeah. I I think that's fair. And and I think at some point we'll get these um like highlighted examples as this becomes more currently. Well, uh, for instance, with the, um, this isn't credit for work, but, um, with people getting certifications and licenses and as an EMT and nursing and things like that, you'll be able to, um, talk about highlights and portraits of of of what this sort of can look like. Uh, but but we're we're not there yet. Um, >> anyway, no, >> but but true. So, anyone else want to talk more on this? Um if not, I'm

042kind of inclined to move to the the we've got our homework to do and move to the next um agenda item if you if you're okay with that. >> Yeah, I'm okay with it. >> All right. Well, okay. So, our next item is item number four. And and if anyone uh wants to stay for the whole meeting, that's wonderful. If anyone wants to leave except for the the uh committee members, u you're welcome to do so as well. And thank you. >> Thank you. >> Bye. >> All right. Um yes. So the next one is discussion on it's it's both policy and regulation. Uh 3323. It's listed on the agenda as purchasing, but it's got a a longer uh title. And um I'll uh this is not a new policy. It's a a modification of

043um one actually that we' modified recently, but this is a lot more detailed and my guess is a lot more workable and probably speaks to um uh combination of some of the changes that Rita would like to see uh and reflect what's what actually happens in school system and also uh probably would help address some of the recommendations of of of of the audit network the operational review sorry so Rita uh the floor is yours >> I agree um so this is a policy that is um written by shipment and goodwin it's their it's based on their model policy I implemented this in Windham three years ago and it I'm not going to read through the policy I just want to talk about the highlights because it is you know sort of long um and

044there is an appendix a that goes with it that follows the federal guidelines that were put in place I believe four years ago. There was regulations put in place um for purchasing in board of eds. So there's an appendix that goes with this but um so the highlights I want to do is is is basically the policy we have now is very very restrictive and it um it it forces us to do uh sole sources or waiverss documentation because um there's no um exceptions basically. So, um there needs to be exceptions and one >> main one comes to my mind is special ed, you know, um placements that are IEP driven, >> you know, um those cannot go out to bid and um we should be just be doing waiverss um for them. So, um

045I think it's on page, like I said, I'm not going to read the whole policy, but I wanted to point out the exceptions which we would do a waiver on. And that's on page starts on page five. Um and of course, if anybody has any questions on any part of the policy, you know, feel free to ask me. But on page five, it start it talks about waiverss and what um we would need to do if the purchase fell in this area is um prepare a waiver that states um why the bidding is waved. So, and that is signed all the waivers are signed by a superintendent. And um trying to think of anything else to add. Like I said, I put this in place in Windom and it just it covers I think it

046this these 11 areas cover where board of eds um need flexibility. The other thing is I think I noticed a typo on the top um regarding the limits and when we go out to bid and when we need three quotes and that um but other than that um I'm not sure if anybody has any questions. I don't want to go too faster or >> Yeah, I have I have some, but I'll I'll um let our other committee members go first. >> Can I just say something, Mike? >> Yes. Okay. >> As an ex official committee member. Go for it. Uh leader, I'm glad that you put something in here about special ed because last year when we went met with Floyd, um he did tell us that we need to have a um a carveout

047for special ed in the purchasing and bidding um policy. So, I'm glad to see that. >> And we need to specify that it's a waiver because when we were going through the when you when I was being asked to provide information for the observer when I started late June, um they specifically asked, you know, if you didn't go out to bed, where's the waiver? I, you know, I want the wa, you know, can you provide the waiver? And I um I just want to be able to provide um the auditors with the backup and um of you know when things go over 25,000 or whatever limit you guys decide um so that we're complying with policy and also not being it being so burdensome burdensome on my staff because right now we are creating well

048we're using the form that Irene created which is called the source s sole source but a sole source is a reason for a waiver. So um that's why I want to change that's one of the reasons I want to change the policy is because that sole source form that she created does not >> um fit our needs >> basically. >> Thank you. >> Andrew, do you have any questions or comments at this point? I mean this is detailed so you know what you know what this one does in terms of it's doing something. I I have another question. >> No, I have no questions at this time. Not at this time. Anyway, >> thanks. And I'll come back to you, Bev. I'm just going to give Sean the floor at the moment. Uh just in

049case he's got questions or comments. >> All right, Bev, you're up. >> No, sorry. I thought I was unmuted. >> Oh, Sean, stop. Sorry, Beth. >> No, I am uh I have no questions or anything. I'm just listening and following along and appreciate the detail in here. >> All right. Thanks. >> There's a lot of detail. It's a lot of detail and um >> I I just wanted, you know, to point out that if >> the town or if the state or regional um area cooperative is going out to bid for things, we should be able to do a waiver because they've already gone out to bid. So, that's one of the reasons um in the waiver um process, one of the reasons we wouldn't have to go out to bid because they've already done

050it, you know, and um specifically with the state, you know, they do a lot of bidding and I feel like if we get the state contract, a state contract, they've already gone out to bid and done the done the work. >> Yeah. And and then it also has allowances if you just it's a continuation of something you already purchased, too. A lot of things that really make sense are that that actually these are when you the bidding process is genuine. You're genuinely looking in all these cases now for uh something that would be uh competitive. >> I mean, obviously we go out to bid when we need to go out to bid, but there's >> yeah, >> with our $90 million budget, there's a lot of purchases that are $25,000 that we need to do

051right away. we can't hold, you know, we can't hold up the the purchase or whatever we have to do like with facilities or if it's an emergency th those exceptions have to be in the policy. >> Yeah. And Bev, you had a question again. >> Yeah. Uh my first question would be about the waivers for the legal fees. Um can you give me an example of why we need a waiver for legal fees? Well, one example would be if we had to hire an attorney for special ed >> and they're specialized in that area. Um we wouldn't go out to bid for that le for that attorney. >> Okay. >> Does that make sense? >> Yeah, that makes sense. And on um page three under G, advisement of bid award, it says upon the acceptance

052of the lowest responsible qualified bidder. Does that mean we're always taking the lowest bidder or >> No, they have to be qualified as well. So >> it it doesn't I don't think it limits you to always take the lowest bid. It's the lowest qualified bid. So you might have areas in a in a proposal that disqualifies them, >> but yet they're the lowest. >> Yeah. That that's that's a very typical language. >> Um so yeah, I like I like to see that. >> Uh because otherwise people could just throw crazy prices out there just to win >> bids and then not fulfill the requirements. Yeah. >> Right. like they they throw us low price but they actually can't do the work. >> Right. >> So that word qualify helps us, >> right? >> Okay. Thank

053you, Vita. >> Thanks. >> All right. Now, I've got a few. I wonder if you go back to the the top part, just the the very top. So, um I see that business and non-instructional operations is that's a pretty general title. Um, it seems like everything about this is purchasing. Is there a a more specific title we could have? because you you do more than just this. But so um for instance is the old title it doesn't seem the wording quite right but it it seems like it has about the right scope but it's just if we could fine-tune that a little bit >> um >> to you know p it's almost it's almost purchasing guidelines honestly but >> right I agree the business is not instructional operation I this I think that's just a

054category that might have been on there from yeah >> shipment and goodwin or ce you you know how they have the categories. So, um but the title of the policy should include purchasing. >> So, it could we just call it purchasing? I mean, is that would that be okay or we >> Yeah, I I wanted to look at I don't know if I can do it quickly on my computer. Um let me see if I have something. Whoops. I'll have to look at the but I think you're right, Mike. I think it should like specify and not be so broad about business and non-instructional operations. I think that's just a category it falls in. >> Yeah. And I mean this is a bit of what's in the name, but it it'll just just help a

055bit. Um so so I'll just write down purchasing and if you want something more >> Yeah. If I find something that fits Yeah. >> we'll put that in. Um and then um then I'm going through it's just on that section B which is it's it's starting at the bottom of the page but if yeah right there um the wording in here is um it's it's got this legalistic wording that's probably from a state statute. Um like um you know after going out to bid for good or service and receiving submissions. So that part's fine. But then this next phrase comes up like three times and and part of it's missing once. If the local municipality uses such goods or services, the board shall consult with the legislative body of the municipality or in the case

056of municipality for which the legislative body is in the town meeting or represent town meeting and >> I think that was supposed to come out because we don't consult with the town council or the legislative body when we do biddings. So >> not not to worry it's out. >> I think that should come out. Well, that that's >> well actually that first one might you might want in there like but it just needs to be grat and specific because that that first paragraph is about like hey the town already has something like munice for instance can we do it together um >> right right I agree I agree them about like electricity or water or things like that if they're going out to bid I feel like we should be a part of it if

057we can be. Does that make sense? >> Yeah, >> it it does. And so the next two paragraphs, they each have that that thing. And maybe those ones you want out because it says um so I guess it's all about um consultations with municipality that that part B. So we do want something in there, but if it's the town council, we could put the town council. If it's supposed to be the town manager, we put the town manager. Mike, I'll send you and Erica and and maybe I'll send um Rita and Beverly. I'll send everybody I'll just send it to Here's what I'll do. I'll send my revisions. I didn't put them send them out today because I didn't think we'd be looking at those revisions, but now I see that we are. And um

058I'll send them to Erica and ask her to send it to everybody, okay? so that you can all see what I my my suggestions are because I think I cleaned up that language. >> Okay, great. That's good. And in the next area too, Mike, the it says 25, but I think there's an area it says 20 and I uh maybe it's in the next page. >> Yeah, I got to Yeah. So, um actually, yeah, let's can if we stick to We'll come back to that. I think I caught that one, too. >> It's something small, but not Yeah. >> Yeah. There's it's so it's like um it's it's like a combination. The number was changed but it kind of had right part of the relic before. If we go still to that first page now,

059I'm on um so I just wrote down for that uh part B there. I just said make rotten specific um and um and then it's that um 2a um it so at the so it says for this is all about for 25,000 or more and then that last sentence um says at set for such purposes or such purchases in the amount of at least 10,000 but less than 25 may be awarded by a superintendent or his or his or her design And that's fine, I guess, but it seems like it shouldn't be in that that part of 25,000 or more. And then it makes me wonder what about less than 10,000. So I wondering if that needs to be that sentence needs to be somewhere else. If there needs to be a provision about less

060than 10,000. That was a question I had there. >> I can look at that and and make and see where it needs to be. if if it's just got inserted in the wrong place. >> Yeah. Um Okay. >> Because it doesn't make sense. So I Yeah, I'll have to review that sentence and paragraph. >> Okay. Now, now we can go to page two. And if you see I don't I don't have that. I think it's on page three for me or something that I had the error. But um if you have one on page two, uh >> Mike, can you go back to um your your your um two um purchasing be quieting competitive bidding process 25,000 or more? >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Are you going to take out after the first sentence everything else

061that talks about exclusions? Because everything else after that is talking about exclusions. I think I'd be okay with the exclusions. Uh maybe Rita can um speak to this. It's just that last sentence that seemed like >> that's the last sentence. >> It's talking about things that aren't like, you know, or less than that value. >> It's just out of place. It's fine to have, but just out of place. >> Yeah. >> I thought it' be part of the exclusions. That's why they put it in there. But okay. >> Oh, that's a good point. >> We You could take a look at it later. I think I to look at the whole paragraph and and yeah, make sure it matches what I wanted it to say. I think me and Erica were looking at not only

062were we using the shipment and Goodwin model policy, but we were also looking at Cab's policy and going back and forth. So, Cab's model policy. So, it might have been just because we were looking at two different models. >> Yeah. Yeah. Well, you need you need to blend them together and then tailor it for ours too. So, that that's natural and this is even before our first read. So that's >> it's good to do that at this stage. >> Um I I'm going to item G if that's okay. I just have a quick question on that is I think it's like third the third page. Yeah. So it's very short. It's a advisement of bid award. Um and I just have a note. Well, what about if it was less than 25,000? How because, you

063know, then it's excluded from this bidding process. How how do people like do we need to say something about um so so for 25,000 or more you have to do this lowest responsible qualified bidder? Um and then for less than that, you don't necessarily have to go that route. Um, I just thought maybe there has to be a sentence in there about um, like to make it more general, I guess. Um, because if it's less than $25,000, $25,000, you it may not be the lowest responsible qualified bidder. Um, I don't know. That's just a note I had. So typically we had a threshold and say it was 20 25 or 15 whatever the threshold was to go out to bid. Um there was a there was a threshold how do I want to say like

064from 10 to 25 we had to have three qualified quotes instead of going out to bid we and if we couldn't get those quotes we went with one of the um you know then it becomes almost a single source and you do a waiver. So >> yeah. >> Oh, I'm just asking a simpler question because the way that first sentence upon acceptance of the lowest responsible qualified bidder, which has to happen for the 25k or above, >> but doesn't have to happen for the 25k or below because it doesn't have to be the lowest responsible qualified bidder. You don't even have to establish that. Um uh it it just it just seems like it seems like maybe we don't need that first phrase. Upon acceptance of Loris, responsible qualify bidder. It probably just needs to

065say a letter will be sent to the successful bidder. >> I see what you're saying. >> Yeah, because we already lay out that process earlier. >> I see what you're saying. Sometimes it's redundant, you know, like some of these some of the words are redundant in in the um paragraphs. So yeah, I see what you're saying. And so if we just get that I took a long way to get home on that one for me. Um and the next one is that uh section 4 part A. I think this is where the error is that it's it's right. It's it was on screen before. It's just yeah right the good right little down lower. Yeah. Perfect. Um >> yeah, there's something wrong with that paragraph because I see 105,000. Yeah, I think it probably was

06615,000. No dollar sign. It's supposed to go to 10,000. That's just a a typo. And then the 10,000's there, which should that be 15 or something? It seemed like a different threshold. Or maybe it's 25. I don't know. Something needs to be fixed there, right? >> Yeah. Because we're we're up to the board's, you know, discretion of what the threshold should be. I think the old threshold in the old policy 7500 I think that's low. >> But we could go 10 15 you know but sorry about those um errors because I didn't notice that. Um but whatever it is that we decide on we can put in there. >> What would you like as sort of the the the first go at this? Would it be the 10 or the 15? I think between 10

067and 25 we get we try to get three bid I mean three quotes bids three quotes you know over 25 is when you start the bidding process. >> Yeah 25 is when the legally you need to start the bidding process. >> So yeah I think quotes is fine for >> for those for the 10 to 25 >> and and under 10 we don't have to get quotes we can go with any vendor. >> Got it. between 10 and 25. It doesn't >> I just want to make sure we don't designate that we have to go with the lowest price. Correct. >> No. No. >> Okay. I just wanted to make sure >> because I want to make sure that we're getting qualified biders. >> The only time we go with the lowest price is when

068it goes out to bid. I mean, >> what was missing there was was the dollar sign. So, when I looked at that, all I did was put in the dollar sign. I I was I looked at the 105 and all that and I thought this is nuts, but I'll put in the dollar sign. >> Yeah, I think it's supposed to be 10,000. >> I think it is. Yes, I think it was. >> Yeah, purchases less than 10,000 may be made directly without regard to any Yeah, that makes sense. >> And then the next one that that part B, um it's that just that first line, so we don't have to slide it at all. It's just right at the bottom of the page. It generally quotations either oral or written should be solicited. I thought,

069well, why have oral there? Um, wouldn't you always want them written? >> I can't I can't see a reason for oral. >> I I I agree with you. >> Yeah. >> So, so if we strike that one, >> I'm not into the oral quotation. I don't want it verbally. No. >> Yeah. Because it's hard to then you have to make a record of the oral. It get it gets reduced to writing at some point. Might as well have it from the >> I mean, now that we have email, it's in writing. >> Yeah. Um, see when I looked at that, I thought, does this come from the town chart charter? And that's and I wasn't realizing it was from the law firm. I thought it was from the town charter. >> Yeah. >> And we

070maybe we shouldn't touch the language there if it's in the charter. So >> now I know. >> Okay. >> And then you go down just a little bit. It's end of this section B. um that last paragraph there that the purchase shall be awarded to the provider whose proposal is deemed to be best to best provide the good and or service desired etc etc. Um I I that seems out of place here because it's the process for attaining quotations not for awarding them. Um I I don't disagree with it but um just seemed out of place. Wait, did I hear you say because this is noninstructural, but it was the law firm that said that special ed had to be in there? >> No. No. I I it wasn't the law firm. The law firm

071has a model policy and it suggests having waiverss for things that we don't or can't go out to bid for. I'm the one that's saying that the policy we have now does not or the old policy before last year's revision had exclusions for special ed. Then that was taken out and I we need to get it back in because you know we can't be going out to bid for special ed. But it wasn't the law firm. >> Okay. But >> it was a recommendation from Floyd too, Andrea. >> I did hear that then. >> Yeah. Oh, from fromloy different law firm. Sorry. Yeah. Okay. So, so if it's not instructional, we're talking about painting walls and stuff and I'm like, when I'm reading this, I'm looking at like, you know, putting in new sewer things

072and stuff, you know, electrical systems, not educational, and it and it even says non-education or non-instructional. So, I'm thoroughly confused on where we are with this. Maybe I'm just thoroughly confused. So, you're you're asking uh >> Yeah. Why is special ed in here when it's not instructional? >> Oh, I think um I think that Yeah, I don't that's that came from the title does not that title came from the title. >> Yeah, we're getting rid of that title. Yeah, that title is not does not make sense because this is for all purchasing including instructional. >> Yeah, Andrea, do you remember Mike just talked about that? >> I think it's noninstructional operations. >> Yeah, >> I remember. I still had the question. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> All right. And then I'm if if I I

073mean I'm just kind of going through. I just have a couple more things on. I think it's the next it is next page. It's it's like item B there. So right about there there's this um right above B. It says purchases of special or professional services. They're expected to be less than 5,000. Shall be made directly by a superintendent or designate uh without regard to competit proposal process. I was wondering if that was supposed to be 10,000. >> Yeah, that's supposed to be 10. So maybe that's that one. Um and then and then um it's it's on page on screen right now. Down to the bottom there's that C formal competitive proposal process 25,000 or and above. The first line says request for proposals for purchases special or professional services for 20,000. >> Yeah, that

074should be 25. >> That's 25. >> Yeah, >> good catch. Yeah, we we'll find more. Like it's just you'll always these things >> I'm sorry. >> Yeah. No, >> no need to apologize. This is a >> this is a heavy lift. >> I've just been so focused on budget and I've didn't review this enough as I should. >> We're working on a budget. >> There's no apologies necessary. after I proof my own writing for the last time, I consider it perfect and I don't read it for a few months and then I I can come back and >> and you find >> see all the errors that were still there. >> So it still hurts but not as much. Um and then let's see. So let's see. Uh >> oh. Uh there's just a a

075statement that I guess I don't know about. Oh, actually I was unsure if we wanted this in here. It's um it's in that C. It's the third paragraph. It says it's a it's kind of a skinny paragraph. When where possible, proposal should be solicited from at least three potential service providers. the refusal to submit a proposal from an otherwise valid provider shall qualify as a proposal. How do you document that refusal? Is that you you go out and and um try to I that that seemed weird to me, but I'm not in this business. So maybe maybe you know how that actually comes up. >> It did it did come up with um uh transportation. So, like in Windham, we went out to bid for transportation and we were told by one of the main

076um transportation companies, "No, I'm not bidding." So, it was he they refused to put in a bid basically. So, that refusal counted as a bid. It counted as a >> like counted as a >> That's what I'm I'm trying to give you an example. I think it has happened. >> No, we had that with transportation, too. I think um two came in. >> Um so is that um how's that documented? How's a refusal documented? >> Typically it's via email like >> okay >> you know that's what I've gotten via email. No, we don't plan on bidding. >> Should we put written refusal or is that um >> Oh, I see what you're saying. >> Yeah. I mean >> because a verbal refusal would be hard to prove. >> Yeah. Exact. Exactly. So So >> So

077that was on C paragraph. >> I used that around the house for leftovers. >> Everyone said no one said they wanted it. So >> I like your >> actually that was my last one. >> Oh, it does said the process shall be documented in writing. >> Oh, good. Yeah. >> Is that the part? >> Yeah. Yeah. That's the next sentence. >> Yeah, that's the next sentence. >> I didn't get that far, I guess. No, thanks. I just didn't know what what that actually if that occurred, but you quite clearly it does. >> It's weird how it talks about that because to be honest, those are in the waiver. Um, you know, the the last sentence says, if a single reasonable source exists for that service, this fact shall be documented in writing, but a single

078source can be a reason for a waiver. So, you wouldn't have to bid So, it kind of contradicts it, but >> Got it. So, that was it for me. Uh, does anyone else have any comments, questions, suggestions? >> No, look, we caught a lot. I'm good. I'm >> So, so Bev and Andrea, um, you're you're my uh intellectual resources on this one. What happens next with this? We've identified some uncontentious areas like to like grammar to clean up um some words to add that that we've talked about in the meeting. Um some things to look at. Does it come back to policy so that we look at this like refined version again? Uh do we just um get to see that and then it um gets slated eventually for first read? uh process-wise, what happens

079next in in this situation? >> I think that it well, I'll send those things to Erica. She'll send them to everybody. Everybody will look at it and then I think it needs to come back. I think Beverly, I don't know about you, um that it needs to come back to to policy and we need to >> maybe just restructure everything. >> Yeah, >> that that sounds correct. >> I agree. >> Yeah. and and that would help us like if you didn't do it that way then when you get to u our first meeting with the board that's when a lot of changes occur so it's good to bring it back to policy >> that would never happen yeah okay so so actually this uh our next meeting's agenda is writing itself so that's that's what

080we're getting here >> I just want to add that this will this policy and appendix will replace the current policy and regulation. >> Yes. Yeah. >> Because the regulations part part is in the policy if that makes sense. >> Yeah. Um did you want to talk? We don't have to at this point. Did you want to speak to the regulation at all? I mean I you can or we could do it next time. No, I think when we come back after I fix all those grammar and number issues, which I'm really embarrassed about because there's numbers. >> Don't worry about it, Rita. >> I wouldn't be. It's it's one of it's an internal consistency problem where the the same number is written many times and those are hard to catch. So, >> um, so, uh,

081>> we're not trading you in, Vita. Don't worry about it. And the the appendix is straight from the from the the law. So, you know, the appendix is long and we can review that next time, but it is straight from, you know, the actual statute. So, the federal statutes. >> Got it. Okay. Uh well, we can move to the next agenda item. I will say we are um an hour and 12 minutes into this. Um the I can see the one after the library material selection that's about suns setting the the policy. Um so if if this next one goes long we can um talk about whether we want to treat that one uh tonight or not because I think it'd be quick whenever it happens. Um but so the next item is item number

082five discussion on P3160 uh transfer funds. I think it has a different name. That one's also uh one for you, Rita. >> Yeah. So, this one shouldn't take as long. It's not a very long policy, but it's important because um it came up with the ops review. So, basically, it's changing um the it's adding a budget procedure, board budget procedure, and line item transfers. that's going to be the new name instead of transfers of fund between budget functions because state law says that we have to transfer between big buckets which are listed right on that first page. Um and that's what are that's why I want to change it. This is another um model shipment in Goodman model policy that I implemented in Windom. So the only thing I did notice on this first page

083where the categories are is that supplies is its own category. Other purchase services is its own and then supplies should be tab down to say including utilities. So this is basically changing our trans budget transfer policy from a function to a object major object because that's the state law and I I see now actually I was misreading before on that other policy as you said that that top line like for here we have business non-structural operations that's what you're saying that this is u the category. >> It's just a category that these 300s go into. >> And I I see the the um like here we had the old version the old title crossed off transfer of funds between budget functions. Now the new one is board budget procedures and line item transfers. On the

084other one it was just tabbed down more and the new name was um purchasing guidelines. Um which might be okay. >> Yeah, that's that I think that's >> so sorry about that. what it is. So, yeah. >> Does anyone have a a questioning a comments on this one? >> Well, um uh it says the itemized estimate provided to the board of finance. >> Yeah. Yeah. Oh, so I'll I'll speak to that then too more broadly. Um >> so so on this one the title is uh board budget procedures and line ite transfers. >> Yeah. So that >> should be >> that should be town council. >> Yeah, probably. But but actually I think this is a case where um the the new uh this new policy is trying to do two things and and I

085would just suggest uh we stick to the line item transfer part of it. And um I I think it would be nice in policy to have articulated the steps that the the budget goes through every year. Um but I I feel like it would get bogged down because now we're going to get to well there's the board of finance thing and then it says following the annual appropriation the board shall meet and revise itemized estimate and all these things. um when really what we're talking about is uh we have a I guess it'd be I don't know if you want to call it the itemized estimate or or the approved budget. It's in these categories and this is the process for doing the the line item transfers. I thought I thought we just want that

086kind of like clean just about the line item transfers. That'd be my suggestion. I don't know if people um had different thoughts on that or for if you did Rita as well. Well, where you where you at, Mike? At the in the beginning in the first paragraph and then she lists salaries. >> Is that where you are? >> I love that. I love that first paragraph and the different categories as as mentioned. This is state state law. >> That's all going to set up for line item transfers. It also speaks to >> the budget and the budget process. But then um right after that list um >> you get uh the board shall review the recommendations suggestions board of finance which you brought out and then the next one is following the annual appropriation and

087then if it scrolled down longer uh then the superintendent shall be responsible for administrating and moderating the budget through the year. Okay, these are good things. >> Uh and then the next one such budget report shall be presented to the board. I think we have that in other policies. I just suggest like we've got those four paragraphs right now. The board following the annual, the superintendent, such budget reports. We could just get rid of them from here. And now we go like we'd need a little verbiage, but based on the expenditures and budget projections, um, you know, then we're recommending the transfers. It just seems like it's trying to set up as a title new title says the whole budget process and financial reporting which seems like just too much >> uh for for one

088policy. >> So you suggesting taking out that paragraph that says such budget reports should be presented >> a few of them. Yeah. Like the the board shall um No. Um based on such um yes such budget reports I'd say goes the one above it the superintendent or design shall be responsible for administering monitoring the budget um following the annual appropriation the board shall meet and review the itemized aspect. This is like a lot of our work through the year condensed into um sort of like a sort of timeline and operations summary. Um, I don't know that the policy on line item transfers needs that to get bogged down there, but Rita, I was wondering is there did did the review want that specifically in there? >> I think it's because the state statute addresses both

089the budget and line item transfers. So, >> I saw >> Yeah, I looked around. I saw kind of like a not half and half, but some people some districts had it just line item transfers, some had it >> sort of like we can take those out and just have it for line item transfers and that they're transferred by the big buckets, not by function. >> Yeah. Um, well, they're transferred by either way, but we just have to make sure that the board is approving and making sure the transfers are done by major objects because that's what the law says. >> Yeah. And for me that's like the essential ingredient that we want to get through so that um that's that so our policy is in line with the state and then your um what what

090you are doing uh is in sync with that easily in sync with that uh in both uh too. I'm just I can see this coming uh in front of the whole board and if I were sitting there I'd be saying well uh is that really how we want our financial reports? you know. So, >> yeah, I see what you're saying. >> Like, do we need more detail there? Um, and and instead of the line item transfer, which most of it it doesn't seem contentious because well, it kind of can't be. So, I know that was my biggie on this one. I've got another one, but um >> because all of the the only thing that the policy has now is just like two paragraphs about budget transfers, right? If you scroll down. >> Yeah. >>

091Right. >> Two or three. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Literally the only thing. Yeah. And we're also talking about unexpended funds which is not line item transfer related. >> So out of all this policy that we have in front of us, what would you keep >> that page? That second page. >> Yeah. the second page because >> like I said the statute addresses unexpected unexpended funds. We don't have to get in too much detail on the first page. Like you said, Mike, you know, take some of those paragraphs out out if you think we we don't need to get too detailed, but definitely this page we need to agree with the percentage of the >> you know, there's a there's a line the first the first paragraph, >> you know, how much what is Susan's authority

092to to sign off on before it comes to the board? I don't think there was a dollar figure in the old policy at all. >> Yeah, the old policy is right below and that was very recently updated. Um, >> was it? >> I think the shortcomings the one clear shortcoming was it didn't have that uh list of eight items. Eight eight. >> Oh, right. The the the categories. >> It has to have the categories listed, right? >> Yeah. So, that's that's one thing we absolutely need. Um the unexpected funds part. Um I I think we might have a policy on non-lapsing funds. >> Oh, if we already have it then >> I I'm going to check. Um >> yeah, we do. I think we do Mike have a non-lapsing fund policy >> then. Yeah, then

093then definitely take that out. and and then um so it's like the first part and then this part and a little bit of the um the end of the first page. Um I did have one question. >> Can you go over again what you're taking out for me? >> Yeah. Yeah. Let's go from the top. >> This is just my suggestion. >> This is a suggestion I'm not trying to railroad through. Um even though it'll sound like it. Uh ju just uh we could probably keep the tit the name of this is just line item transfers. >> Mhm. >> And then we're keeping that first paragraph and that list. >> Um right after that we might need to say something about like itemized estimate or the budget, you know, we might need something about that.

094Um because then we're talking about transferring in the budget. And then right at the bottom of this page, um I think it's yeah, that last paragraph, we do need something like this. This is where it's talking about why we need to do a line item transfer. Um and it says as needed. I think I think this paragraph would need some um there's no provision for board approval in this and I think um we we definitely want that in because that that's what we've been doing actually and that's that's worked quite well actually this year I think. Um so so somewhere in here we need board approval. Um the old policy talked about you know before transferring you get board approval unless it's an emergency and then there's reporting out. There's some of that talk about

095like emergency stuff, but I I think we need >> Well, I think the board approval is in the next paragraph, the first paragraph on the second page. >> And that's where we have to set a threshold because I >> Yeah, let's see. Does it say >> transfers between the board budget or ter? So it's talking about transfers between the broad categories in the itemized estimate made in such since it shall be announced at the next regular schedule meeting. >> Yeah, I thought it said something. >> Yeah, it's sort of like it doesn't So the the old policy kind of shouts out board approval. It's um >> Got it. It it's it's like the second line of it says the superintendent with board approval. It's it probably just needs to be in there earlier as a

096as a statement. I'd say because I think that we're talking about the process we're doing right now. Um >> Right. >> And and and just we don't have to detail that. I just I just know that um if it doesn't say the phrase board approval, uh people like me get hung up on that, >> including I get it. So, um, and then and then Bev continuing, we'd keep all this. And then that unexpected unexpended funds. I I think we if if we're both, uh, remembering that we do have a non-lapsing fund policy. I think that wording is probably in there. We do have a non-lapsing fund policy. I just don't know wording in there. >> And so, it could be referred to here if you wanted to, but it might not even need to be

097If we're taking out board budget procedures, then it doesn't need to be there in my opinion. >> Okay? >> Because it doesn't apply to transfers. >> And then I have a a small one. It's at the bottom of this page. It's just a legal references. Um just we uh it's it's helpful to have like the titles in of those legal references. Um because sometimes it's just um you know, powers of the board of education. and you're like, well, you know, that's not going to tell me much. Uh, sometimes it's very specific. Um, you know, transfer of funds between functions or something like that. Um, so most of our policies, I think, actually have that title or some shortened version of it. >> The title of the statute, is that what you're saying? >> Yeah. Yeah.

098>> Yeah. It's just like, you know, the first line of it or something is what people often do. And so yeah, you can see this was revised uh last April. So >> Oh, really? >> Yeah. Yeah, this policy was looked at uh quite often. I mean, and then it was revised in October. Oh, no, my mistake. I thought it said 2024. It says 2004. Yeah, but I mean the rationale is is clear. We operational review uh and uh we want it in line with with what's actually being done and >> yeah. >> So, so Rita for this one since we'll be coming back for the other one should we just uh >> Oh, yeah. come back and take a look at that. Um, this is where um the the past um chair of this committee

099would line edit stuff. Uh I'm not as fle with that as as he is, but I can see the the the benefits of that approach. But um I we'll we'll keep it straight. We've got the the record uh recording too, >> right? We got the recording. So, >> uh, so but but, uh, I don't think every detail needs to be in the minutes, however. So, you know, just pointing that out. >> Those would be super long minutes. >> Yeah, >> those would be hours instead of minutes. >> Yeah, it's true. I tend to write hours when I write minutes, but I don't have to do that, which is nice. Um, >> thank you for looking at both of these policies. I I really appreciate us looking at them and revising them. It will make you

100know um my department run smoother. >> Yeah. And and both of these as I said these are clearly so it answers Andrew question. So what does these do? What do these do? These ones are very clear and it has a day-to-day effect on the operations which is important. >> Right. >> So so are you going to rewrite this policy Rita? Take out stuff that we don't need. I'm going to talk to Erica and hopefully we can listen to the recording and and revise it. >> Okay. And then don't forget you can always call Mike up and he'll help you along. >> Yeah, >> I made some notes on my thing. But yeah, uh definitely on that and the purchasing one fix up the the um the numbers and and re rewrite it a little bit.

101>> We should put Bev in charge of that. No, this your committee. >> I know. I know. >> I think Erica does a great job. I just I should have reviewed it more. >> No. >> Uh um Okay. And so, uh Rita, we're going to talk about one more policy, but it's about libraries. So, uh if I'm gonna head home because I'm still at work. >> I can tell by the file cabinet that you're still at work. >> Yeah. Have a safe trip home, Rita. >> Thank you. Thanks so much. >> Thank you very, very much. Take care. >> All right, I think we can do the libraries one. If you're Is everyone okay with this? Um, like kind of 5 to 10 minutes. >> Yeah, 5 to 10 minutes should work. >> Okay. I've

102given myself a a time frame and now I don't even have the policy. Uh, now I've got it. So, uh, the next item on the agenda is discussion on P6163.1, library materials selection. And this is on here because uh I would I would propose that we sunset this policy. Um the reason for sunsetting it is there's new we um had kind of first and second readings of library policies at the last um um regular board meeting and that's to get our policies in line with the the latest legislation. um we were sort of ahead of the game and we had a very similar version to it with a different number but the regulation the the act was very specific about the wording uh everything like the title of the policies and and the elements that

103are in. So this one was close but not exact. Um so it will be replaced by um when we approve the um second readings of um of the new version. I don't have the number of that one right now but but the idea is um this policy is here. It's been here for some time um first in 1999 and updated in 2023. Um but uh we're replacing it with something that um has these functions and and new wording. Should we I I agree. Should we hold off sunsetting until the other policy is in place so that we have a policy? >> It it will it will be in if we um recommend that this be sunseted now, it will come up um in the agenda actually either the same meeting or the meeting after our

104second reading of the other one. But but yes, I I would say absolutely we need something else in place. >> Yeah. So, so we can we can put that in um uh >> sun setting. I mean, >> yeah, >> we can put it in, Mike. On the next agenda on uh for January 26, we'll just put this after we hopefully approve the new one. >> Yeah. And I I guess I uh that's a good point uh Sean had. Um, I I could I could frame the motion um that um the we as the policy committee recommend sunsetting policy 6163.1 library material selection once the new uh library policies are in place. >> Right. That sounds good. >> I am all for that. >> Would you like to second it? I would like to second it.

105>> Okay. So, we can >> we can discuss it uh more if you like. Um >> Oh, I can't wait. >> No, I think I think we're good. I think we we we look at the policy. Is that going to be part of the next agenda for the the next board meeting, Bev? >> Yeah, that's what I just said. I said we would put this on after we um approve the the new one. >> Perfect. I was just making sure that the new one is will be part of it. Perfect. I'm good then. >> And and that that really is um homework for Bev. So, I did get to do that. That's nice. >> Hold on and I'll check for sure. Sean, hold on. >> Okay. >> Do you want to uh uh we can

106vote on it while we're waiting. Um any everyone in favor >> of that recommendation? >> I setting I really don't know what suns setting means. That means like just throw it away. >> That means it goes away. >> Yeah, >> it goes away. That Well, that's what I figured, but I didn't know that for sure. >> Like when the sun sets. >> Goodbye. >> Yeah. >> Sorry. It's a term I use all the time at work. So, >> yeah, it's it's nice. Um, do you uh um >> It's better than getting rid of, right? It sounds nice. >> Has a bit of grace to it. So, in voting, Andrea, would you be in favor of of removing it, sun setting it? I surely would. >> Great. So, that pass and um that's all our vote.

107So, that passes unanimously. Uh three uh 0. Um and and Bev's looking it up, so we'll uh kind of hang on right now. >> Uh because the new policy is P6161.13, library collection development and maintenance policy. >> I think it's that one. Yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. It's on the agenda for January 26 for a second meeting. >> Yeah. It's so if we had this right after it just be smooth. Um there's not harm in having both of them. It just look weird. All right. Um, I'm going to move to the next agenda item, um, which is the, um, review and referral of tracking list. I actually do have that. Um, so I, Bev, I'm never sure about this. Are we allowed to take things off of this? because um I I I feel like the

108best it seems to be written out that this goes off the tracking list once a policy has had it second reading and been approved, not once policy committee is done with it. Is that how you'd like that to go? >> Can you say that again? I'm sorry, Mike. So, we've got a few items on the the policy committee referral list and um the ones that have been completed, it's it says date completed and it's the regular meeting because it's had its second reading, >> right? >> So, uh I think that's probably the way it should be done. Um so, nothing comes off our list in a policy committee meeting. It comes off after being approved at a board meeting. >> Because if it wasn't approved at the board meeting, it probably come back to policy.

109>> Yeah. Yeah. >> Yeah. I like to cross things off though. But >> but you could cross the 614. >> But Mike, you could cross off the policy 6141 in regards to the six steps, right? The six steps. Was that the curriculum development one? >> And we went from six steps to five. >> Yeah. But was that Oh, maybe Enry would know. I don't is that that seemed like it was a second reading at that point. >> Yeah, we approved it. I talked about it last night when I gave all the new policy, but Amarie can speak on it. >> I have it was approved on December 15th. >> Which one was that again? >> Um, >> it was the um curriculum um development. Uh >> yeah, that one was approved. >> Good. So, that

110was that was the 1216 >> 1215. >> Oh, 1215. Thank you. Okay. So, that's that that's the last one on our list of five. It's not the only ones left, but that's the last one listed. So, we got I just crossed that out. That felt good. Thank you. Um the other two right now are uh discussion on uh P1312 and P1312.4 public anonymous complaint uh process and procedure. Um that's one of them. And uh the other um then another the other one that's not crossed off yet is review financial uh reconciliations policy on a monthly basis. Um that one since Bev since you're here I I wasn't I I looked at that and I wasn't exactly sure. I I I remember uh out of the operational review they wanted to see that the accounts were

111reconciled with the the ledger I think with the town. Is that what we're talking about here? >> Yeah. And um um actually um John Burke advised me that we should have a policy that we are reconciling um our checkbooks or whatever every month because we haven't been doing that. >> I don't know. There's already a policy already or not, but um I didn't look it up to see if there was a policy, but it came from the operational review. >> Okay. Okay. >> I'm back. So, I can say that Rita is absolutely doing that, but I don't know. We should check to say see if we have it in policy. >> Right. Right. >> Okay. So, that one could make sense if um we'll check to see if it's in policy. Uh maybe Reed is

112the best person to check that. Yeah. Because she'd want to see if it's like up to standard to what what um she'd expect and then we could bring that um to the next policy meeting probably because she'd be here anyway >> for for the other two. Yeah. Okay. Great. Thank you, Bev. >> You're welcome. >> Um does anyone have any question? Those were the two items. Um, Shauna, Andrea, do you have questions on the referral list? >> But Mike, um, I I I gave you a referral. I'm pretty sure. I can't remember what it was. >> It's not on the list, Bev. Sorry. >> Sorry. >> Not happening. >> What was it? I think >> I think you did, actually. >> Yeah, I did. >> Yeah, >> it had to do with um Oh, shoot.

113I'll I'll look it up. You can look it up and and I'm sure Erica will we'll get it on this. We'll get it on >> we'll get it on the sheet, >> right? And >> I do remember you saying that. Um so that's good. Um >> it it has to do Oh, you know what it has to do with for policy? I my I just remember the rate schedule. The facility rate schedule. It needs to be updated. >> Oh, that's exactly right. >> Okay. >> And it it was in um it was in regulations, but it should be in policy, and even Rita said so. So, we're going to have to have Erica put it in the policy instead of the regulation and vote on it. >> That's right. Because I I tried to um

114punt it back to finance and facilities. >> Go. It's a policy. >> That's not happening. >> Get the policy number. I think I told you, Mike, the policy. I can't remember off hand. No, but I I do know I I do know that one. So So we'll have that on our list. Um for sure. You know, it's a little demoralizing. We crossed one off. We just added one back on. >> And that's how policy works, >> Mike. And the other suggestion I gave to you, you remember? >> Um yes. Uh and I'll bring that up in future meeting topics, which are next agenda item. >> Okay. Um any other questions or comments on the uh referral? So we might have to mute Bev on the next. We'll see. Uh okay. So our next agenda item

115is future meeting topics. And uh uh I'll just say broadly first of all we can see our next meeting is going to be a lot like this one. Just a second look at um um the policies we saw. Um probably shorter look I'd say. Um and then uh Bev brought up I think um well actually Bev you can speak to it because you were at I think it was a conference or or meeting about it. >> Yeah. I went to a uh policy workshop and the presenter suggested that um the board every year take one series out of the policy book and review it. So I I called up Michael and I asked Michael as the chair of the policy committee um would he be willing to do that and he said he would bring

116it up at the committee and um and discuss it. So that's what they um suggest that you take one series like the 10,00 series and I even look through the policy book and we have a lot of old policies. Um you know some might not be need to be changed but at least you can write revised on so and so date but some of them go all the way back to 1997 1996 so they're quite old. >> Erica may even have a chart that describes some of those older ones. So, I should find out from her if she has something we can start with. >> Well, they suggest taking a series. So, take the 2000 series and just go through the 2000. They didn't suggest doing it randomly. Go through this policy. Take a whole

117series and look through a whole series. >> Yeah, it's a way to structure it. Um I I wouldn't want to kind of unnecessarily read through a lot of policies. Uh, but I do like the idea because right now we're working on well, we're adding require new required or recommended policies or things that come up and need to be updated. But you do need that other look of what's what's in our body of policy. Um, and if there is something from the the 1990s, I I know Susan that bothers you. So you do get those put up to to be reviewed, but but to have that look, say in the 2000s, um there are these set number policies that haven't been looked at for a while. Um let let's make sure they're they're on our list.

118>> And you could do like anything older than 2015, you know, you know, you can make it work for you. >> Yeah. >> I just wanted to give your committee more work to do. You know, you and Sean are new to it. So what it what it felt like >> keeping us on our toes. >> We were on break too. We were on break. >> Yeah, we we we will take that um structured look as well. So, I do want to make sure we get through the um these time-sensitive um uh finance related ones first. >> It's a priority. Anybody have any other suggestions for future meeting topics? >> How about for this meeting? >> What did you say? >> How about for this meeting? >> Oh, you Well, no, it's future, but what would

119you like? You say what you like to say. >> Motion to adjurnn. >> I second. >> All in favor? All right. We're in favor. The meeting's adjourned.