001All right. Call to order the meeting of the Salem School Committee. >> Folks, we're going to start the meeting. >> Hey folks, we're going to get started. If you can please keep it down. >> Yeah. Right. Thanks. >> One, two, three. Eyes on me. Okay. Um, call to order the meeting of the Salem School Committee of December 15th, 2025 at 7 p.m. This meeting is taking place in person at 29 Highland Avenue, room 227. You can also join the meeting via Zoom using the link posted in the meeting agenda. We have one member participating remotely, so votes will be by roll call vote. Uh, our first order of business is approval of the agenda. >> So moved. >> I'll second. Motion made by member Campbell, seconded by member Miranda. Under discussion, seeing none, member Campbell,
002>> yes. >> Member Cornell, >> yes. >> Member Hoffman, >> yes. >> Member Manning, >> yes. >> Member Miranda, >> yes. >> And myself, yes. >> Public comment. The Salem School Committee would like to hear from the public on issues that affect the school district and within the scope of the committee's responsibilities. Spanish interpretation is available for anyone who needs it. The members of the school committee would like to remind the public that Salem public school students regularly attend school committee meetings. We encourage all meeting participants to model respectful and productive public discourse for our young learners. We'll have public comment from the chambers and then any public comment on Zoom. Please use the raise hand function. Uh the school committee policy is a limit of five minutes per speaker. You can make your way
003up to the podium if you'd like to provide comment. You do not need to identify yourself, but you you're welcome to if you'd like. >> [snorts] >> Hi. Uh my name is Laya Hal. Um I have two students at uh Carlton. Uh one will be out at the end of the school year moving up to sixth grade and my other child will be starting um third [clears throat] grade in the fall. He's in second now. [gasps] So, um, I have some thoughts that I put together. Sorry, I just ran up the stairs here. So, um, [sighs and gasps] I looked up the definition of plan in the dictionary, and it says it's a method for achieving an end, an often customary method of doing something, or a detailed formulation of a program of action. As
004far as I've heard from the last school committee meetings dating back just six weeks, the committee has some ideas on school reconfiguration, but no actual plan. So, I guess tonight the vote is happening on what idea sounds best um as to how to reconfigure the schools. And um it seems like that is a decision regardless of chaos and distress that it may cause to our elementary school children and their families going along the way. For some of uh children in our community, school is the one reliably safe space that offers the comfort of routine and predictability. I believe a poorly planned reconfiguration will have the most detrimental effects on these students and their families. The elected officials in this room talk about equity but fall short in delivering to the most vulnerable members of our
005community. [snorts] I can speak personally about the teachers and administrators at Carlton. They're hardworking, big-hearted, extremely dedicated, and diligent, and in my experience, go above and beyond what their jobs require. Every person in that building is an asset to Salem public schools. And it's shameful that you downplay the prospect of losing any of them as employees as well. It's really only a small number of positions that would be eliminated. To be clear, I'm not saying no school reconfiguration ever. I'm just asking you take the same that you take the time to make an actual plan that will serve the students and families of Salem Public Schools. I'm asking that you move forward with transparency and take this community's concerns seriously. Setting in motion a halfbaked plan to have the elementary schools in Salem reconfigured by
006August 2026 will not only not close the budget gap as per the numbers you guys have presented, which is supposedly the whole reason for reconfiguration, [sighs and gasps] but it will cause such an expensive and stressful web of new logistical problems to solve that will leave everyone wondering why you proceeded with the reconfiguration at all. uh everyone will lose including the elected officials but more importantly our kids will lose. Thank you. Busy day. I will wait for you to get seated before I get started. Good. Good evening. My name is Megan McGoff Christian and I am a parent of a Salt Install student. It seems clear from the last few weeks that it is likely that the committee intends to move forward with a merger of some sort. I think that we are all in
007agreement that options one and two combining Salt and Stall and Horus man failed to meet the district's value of equity as well as failing to advance the goals of this reconfiguration effort to save money while limiting the number of full-time educator reductions. I will let fellow parents speak more on that if need be. But I would like tonight to speak on two other important factors I ask you to consider as you make your decision. First, I do want to address the idea of moving Bentley, a selective and closed enrollment school, into the center of town while concurrently removing the open enrollment schools from the center of town, aka the new old option. It seems that some committee members like this idea on locating the dual language program from Bentley in the Salt and Stall building.
008While I recognize the research on the benefits of dual language schools being built in a community where those languages are actively spoken, we must also balance that with the reality that Bentley as it is currently configured is not an open enrollment school. Moving Bentley to the Salt and Stall building now with the new bad plan, the new old plan does more harm than good. By open enrollment schools, I mean that a student faces no obstacles in joining the program other than the availability of space. At Zultanstall, we are welcoming to students who face disruptions in life that can make school attendance a challenge. We often welcome students who are moving into Salem at all times of the year and in all grade levels. We welcome kids who do not thrive for whatever reason at other
009schools in the district. We know that no single school, no single innovation, no single environment is best for every kid. But having a centrallylo easily accessible to the disadvantaged neighborhoods uh to having a school centrally located easily accessible to disadvantaged neighborhoods where all are welcome is essential. Bentley's wall-to-wall model does not enroll students beyond grade two. Enrollment is selective even in the lower grades. And I doubt the model honestly is ideal for students who arrive midyear or midweek into a classroom. This is by definition a selective enrollment school. As it happens, other schools in the same neighborhood, Salem Academy Charter, is also a selective enrollment school. Merging Carlton with Salt and Stall, one of our options tonight, complicates it even further. Removing Salt Install from its current location, and combining it with Carlton in Bentley's
010current building would result in there being no open enrollment school at all in proximity to the center of town in South Salem. This is simply unacceptable and fails to meet the goals of this district. and I ask you to vote no on the new old option. Secondly, I want to address the reuse of school buildings. As some of our friends from Carlton were discussing a few weekends ago, Dr. Reich, you have the experience with the closure of schools, having survived Chicago public schools 2013 school closures. this that committee in 2013 closed 50 elementary schools across Chicago in the interest of balancing the budget, updating buildings, modernizing the infrastructure. Um that effort at the time the largest mass closing of schools in the nation's history according to WBEZ has a mixed record as far as success
011goes. At first, I have to admit that as a dear friend of a Chicago teacher with a vivid memory of the chaos of CPS in the mid2010s, I was hardressed to see how that could be valid here. But over time, I have come to think that at least one major lesson of that closure is important for us to consider here in our own much smaller district. One of the major issues with the CPS closures is that the promised reuse of the 46 school buildings left after the closings were complete simply did not happen effectively and quickly. 10 years later in 2023, 26 of the 46 buildings were still vacant. These were predominantly in the west and south of Chicago in minority majority districts. >> That's uh that's the five minutes. Thank you. >> Thank you.
012Is there any further public comment in the chambers? Is there any comment on Zoom? >> See any raised hands? Oh, wait. Hold on. Someone just did Hi, can you hear me? >> Yes, we can hear you. >> All right. So, um I'll try to be quick. I just I listened carefully to all eight scenarios presented by the consultants and I understood why four were eliminated based on the misalignment with our core principles. And for that reason, the late reintroduction of a new scenario from the consultants's not recommended list is deeply concerning for me. um it has felt sort of like a bait and switch and undermines the integrity of the process as it was presented to to the community which is reinforcing um why a large portion of the community declined to engage in this
013process because they perceived the process as predetermined rather than truly collaborative. So, I urge you to carefully consider the implications of this late change and the message it sends to families, staff, and the broader community. Thanks. No other hands. Okay. Uh, next item on our agenda is the consent agenda approval. These are the minutes of the forum of November 25th, the minutes of the regular school committee meeting of December 1st, the minutes of the special school committee meeting of December 6th, approval of a field trip for uh the Salem High School Harvard Model UN delegation to Boston and the approval of the warrants of November 26th and December 4th. >> Motion to approve. >> Seconded. >> Motion made by member Cornell, seconded by member Campbell. Roll call vote. Member Cornell. Yes, >> member Cruz. >>
014Yes, >> member Hoffman. >> Yes, >> member Manning. >> Yes, >> member Miranda. >> Yes, >> member Campbell. >> Yes. >> And myself. Yes. >> Matter carries 70. Student representatives report. >> All right. Good evening everybody. Um, I just wanted to present some of the things we've been doing with the student council recently. So, we did meet with Drs. is right at the beginning of the month and we went over a few of the things and the processes that the new incoming students have to go through in order to enroll at Salem High School. We found a lot of different methods that we the students can help better the newcomers connection to the school and how we can welcome them more and provide them with a safe and nonoverwhelming um experience as they first get
015introduced to the school. considering how much is going on throughout the year whether it's clubs or even lunch it can all be very very stressful for newcomers and we found a way with one of our very dear Miss Grdero who works to um enroll the students and she also works very closely with IEPs and 504s we found a way to connect our student mentors so it's the new program that I have been talking about these last few meetings where we implement a mentorship program for the new incoming students with the already attending students at Salem High School. And we have found a way to connect our students with the new newcomers to ensure that they all have their necessities and their interests met throughout the year. We are also have we have also decided to
016invite five freshmen to our next monthly meeting with Drs. Reich and to introduce them more to what student council looks like. And we have also started editing the bylaws, which is something that has not been done for a long time. And so far, it's going very good. We're working, myself and all of the elected officers are working on the bylaws and we'll continue to do so during break. Thank you. [applause] >> Any questions from the committee members for our student representative? Okay. Thank you very much. Superintendent report. >> All right. Good evening everyone. Just have a few updates um for the committee. First of all, uh the Salem High School Musical is this week um on Thursday, Friday, and Saturday um at uh Salem High School auditorium. The admission is $10 for students, seniors, and
017active military, $15 for general admission. Um I would the I should tell you what the musical is. the prom school edition. Um, and I highly encourage people to come and check out the talent that we have at Salem High School. Um, and audience members are encouraged to bring clean, gently used formal wear to be donated to the clothing connection um to benefit students unable to afford such formal attire. So, come check it out. Uh, this week uh we do have a community um dinner uh this week that we're hosting with Root Northshore. our food service department along with Root um will have our first free holiday solstice community dinner on Wednesday um from 5 to 7 at the Salt and Stall School cafeteria. Um the community dinner is open to any SPS family and staff
018and there's a capacity of about 212 guests. uh and families are encouraged to register ahead of time, but we hope to see everyone for what we hope will be um you know, community dinners. Uh you know, a more regular occurrence of having community dinners. So, I hope to see folks there. Um I also, as I shared with the school committee, we did get approval formally now that the middle school dual language program uh has been officially approved by the department of education for expansion to grades 6 to 8 at Collins Middle School. Uh the program may now move forward for implementation beginning in school year 2627 which is this fall as the fifth graders move up to sixth grade. So we're really excited about that. But we now have the formal news. Hopefully that will
019come with resources from the department. Um and I know Andre and the team at Bentley are working um on on uh on that. But very excited that the program will be able to grow um in the future. Um I also just want to wish wish everyone a happy holidays. I know this has been, you know, there's been a lot of um conversation in this district as we see here tonight and has been for the last six to week uh six weeks um or more. Um I hope everybody um enjoys the fact that we have two full weeks of break and no one is more deserving of that I think than our staff and our students who have worked really hard this year um and uh deserve the time to disconnect um hopefully not disconnect not
020disconnect and not come back. We want to see everybody back on June 5th. um uh Monday. No, no, not June. [laughter] You know what it is? Is um I I've been channeling June after walking outside here today. So, thank you for uh uh January 5th, Monday, January 5th. But it's the first time in a long time that we've had two full weeks of break. And I hope everybody has a chance to enjoy that. Um but I hope everybody uh stays healthy, happy, and uh it's it's a memorable uh time, and I know it's a special time for a lot of our families. Happy Hanukkah to those folks that celebrate. Um, and with that, I'll turn it over to the uh to the mayor, unless you want me to um mention the MSBA update. Now, I
021think we should probably do that. Okay. So, >> in your packets, you have a MSBA update. Um, the big news is that we did um meet a milestone uh in that Well, we're going to meet a milestone this week in that we will be submitting our schematic design submission to the MSBA uh on the due date of December 17th. Um at the last meeting which was last week we reviewed the schematic design submission which is our like initial design for the building uh with the MSBA will look at. They'll give us feedback. I'm sure there'll be a lot of feedback on the plans. Uh we are printing out what that schematic will look like to to share at every one of the schools again so folks can see the updated design. Each school has uh
022an older version of what the building will look like, but there's already been updates uh for this submission. Um, and at this point, we're just going to we're in a holding pattern to wait for the MSBA to give us uh feedback on the plans. The next uh school committee, school building committee meeting is on January 29th from 6:00 to 8 um right here. Um but the good news is we're on track. Um I don't know if do you want to say anything about the construction estimates or we're good on >> Um so the construction estimates that were approved for the schematic report were pretty consistent with the preliminary schematic. Um it's I think they came down by about $5 million. So it's around a $450 million project. We don't know what the MSBA reimbursement will
023be. Um we suspect somewhere around 40 to 50%. Uh we'll know that in February. In January, uh, I will file a bond order with the city council to fund the project and request a debt exclusion vote from the community, which will take place on May 5th, uh, if the council approves. Um, then the the only other thing I want to add about the um the high school project is, uh, we do have some changing membership on this committee. And so, because we do have a school committee representative on the committee, uh, I'm going to ask the school committee member elect to to fill in. She's been serving as the city council's representative on the building committee and so I think the continuity of her service will be valuable. Um and uh the city council will
024select another representative from their body to serve. >> Uh that concludes my uh comments about the MSBA. I we'll do the transfer later. >> Um we can talk about it under motions. Okay. We'll take it later. We'll move to subcommittee reports. Item seven. Are there any subcommittees? >> Yep. >> And the curriculum subcommittee met about both the uh competency determination um proposal that's due to DESIE on December 31st. um and we moved it to policy um for their review um and pending their review which I don't know when it's scheduled um will come before the committee on the 22nd um so that we can vote on that so that it can go to um DESIE in time for their deadline um we also met regarding the program of studies for all three high schools um
025and those were all um recommended to come before this full committee um that will also take place on the sec 22nd Cornell >> and the policies subcommittee did meet and approved the competency proposal to send to uh the committee on the 22nd and uh we'll make a proposal to suspend and adopt uh rather than go through the three reads because we have to have it done before uh January 1st. >> Any other subcommittees? All right. motions and resolutions. Uh, first item listed on our agenda is a budget transfer request. >> Yeah. >> So, Assistant Superintendent Paulie is not here, but um on her behalf, uh there's a series of uh budget transfers that are recommended for your consideration. The total amount requested for transfer is 51,000. Because the total of these transfers exceeds the $15,000
026threshold established by policy. Uh and because these transfers are across cost centers, we're asking for school committee approval to make these transfers. The rationale is in your packet. Uh there is a transfer in the amount of $12,000 at Witchcraft from [clears throat] contracted services to stipens uh to help fund um stipens needed throughout the school year. Um in out of school time, uh there is a total of $9,000 from contracted services and office supplies to stipens to fund out of school time um stipens throughout the remainder of the school year. And then under special education uh contracted services, 20,000 uh to be transferred from contracted services to tutoring supports for students that require extra tutoring. Um and then finally also in special education 10,000 from uh contracted services to stipens to help fund the safety
027care stipens which is the training we provide our staff staff around safety care. Um so those are the uh four transfers uh totaling 51,000 for school committee consideration. >> Um move to approve these four in the total amount of $51,000. >> I'll second. Motion made by member Campbell, seconded by member Miranda. Roll call vote. >> Member Cruz. >> Yes. >> Member Hoffman. >> Yes. >> Member Manning. >> Yes. >> Member Miranda? >> Yes. >> Member Campbell? >> Yes. >> Member Cornell? >> Yes. >> And myself? Yes. >> The motion carries. 70. >> Next item on our agenda is reconfiguration. Is there a motion? member Cruz. >> Thank you, Mayor. >> In my blind spot. >> In your blind spot, but always next to you. Uh, so before uh making motions, I think that I didn't
028have the opportunity to join you all last week. I was dealing with a stomach bug ripped through the entire cruise household. So, um, but I did have a chance to I'm fine. I'm fine uh to watch the the minutes uh to read the minutes and then watch the deliberation. So, just first wanted to thank uh my colleagues, the superintendent, the consultants uh and the public just in total for the deliberations around the reconfiguration and what's been proposed. Um I didn't get an opportunity to engage uh on Saturday, but I just wanted to be able to just share uh some of my thoughts in advance of, you know, motions heading to the floor. Um, so I think the thing that uh sticks with me after reviewing the data, engaging with the public, and then spending time
029with educators and families from across multiple school communities, uh, is that folks really care about their schools. That that is number one top of mind. Your kid only gets to do the third grade once. And that's something that I deeply respect. uh and for our educators who are watching the process. Many of them uh some courageously came forward to I think talk about what they believed was in the best interest of children and their colleagues. Uh but I know many are watching with baited breath about what's going to be their working conditions for next year. Um so you know I do appreciate the folks that have just reached out and taken the time to connect. Um, so as I was going through the the fact base, listening to some of the testimony, um, you know,
030I think the thing that stuck out with me was again what was the driving, uh, factor for making the decision. And I understand it was, uh, the the fiscal situation that we were dealing with, but also the u the educational modeling within the district and what was our long-term vision, you know, which of these paths would ultimately get us to a place that would be the most impactful for student learning. Uh and in particular, I just wanted to elevate something that I thought was really important when I was spending time uh and so did members of the committee with uh families and educators from the district after our public meetings. Um and I found it to be really impactful and validating was uh when I spent some time with the Bentley families and the educators
031uh who stayed after the Spanish speaking forum uh to to just connect uh onetoone and in many ways they helped shape my thinking. Um, and so when the options were first presented, I think with a clean slate, um, you know, the thing that I wanted to stress was that all options needed to be on the table for the purposes of deliberation. Uh, but the first option that we had talked about in June was option three. Um, and at the time that was not recommended. Uh, and I know that we were still exploring what was going on with the MSBA. Um, and when that came up, I thought, well, maybe option four would be the best option. Uh, but I found a lot of the testimony that we heard from the public to be uh, invaluable.
032And in particular, I wanted to raise up testimony from my former tutor, uh, Miss Kelly Quinn, uh, which I found to be really compelling. In her testimony, she talked about the limitations that the current model, uh, at Bentley has, uh, due to the space, uh, the difficulties recruiting staff, uh, families accessing the programming due to the start time. Um, and so you know what I I'd name about option three in particular that I really liked is that it offered the opportunity for the district to align our programs and buildings in a way that's more coherent, equitable, and sustainable over the long term. And um, you know, that's how I would rank that was my top choice. Second would be option four. Uh, and then some of the other uh, options uh, just didn't make the
033cut for me. So those are really my top two and the only ones that um, I think at this point that I would consider. Um and so I think that the thing that I would like to put out there around option three if we were to consider it is that I would support this option but I would support it uh fa phasing it in over a couple of school years. Uh and the way that I would propose doing that is uh twofold. Uh first we need to take into consideration the level of planning that needs to happen in the district capital readiness and uh instructional design. So for this year uh you know what I would propose is um that fiscally how we make this work so that we could have what I would call
034a plan in phase year uh would be to number one um advocate to increase the city's educational allocation from the assumed 5% to 7 or 8% for the planning year so that we can close uh the deficit uh that mirrors the amount uh that we're currently considering with all the reconfiguration options. Many of the current and soon to be city councilors have expressed an interest in funding the schools at a higher level. So I would hold them accountable to that and charge them and the mayor to work together on a city budget that invests uh more in our schools so that we can uh really thoughtfully plan out uh the educational design and the model. Um I believe that the salt and stone in the long term would be an ideal home for the dual
035language program. Uh but there's some things that I would just name that in this planning year that we would still need to go through. Uh so I I do think um we would need to also consider pursuing a special act of the legislature. Uh we did this one time uh during the 2009 financial crisis where we pursued a 0% interest loan to the district uh to close a budget deficit that was caused by uh mismanagement from a previous budget director. Um, I spoke with the former state representative, John Keenan, uh, who's our current Salem State President, and he talked about his approach to doing this during a really tough budget time. Uh, I'd be willing to do this with the Ways and Means Committee and to approach the chair and advocate for this, uh, over
036the next two years. Uh, and what this would allow us to do is it would relieve some short-term financial pressure that the district is currently facing. uh we would avoid kind of making uh the big sweeping move until we knew what the chapter 7 reforms actually look like. Uh and then I'd be willing to advocate for additional funding through the supplemental appropriations that will inevitably come from the millionaires tax. They're not leaving the state. uh but we did see uh an additional appropriation uh last year and that would be in in particular what I would do is I p pursue funding that would allow us to bring on the additional staffing and support and resources that we need from uh a capital perspective a logistics and planning perspective uh to make uh a long-term reconfiguration
037move possible uh that includes you know thinking about building uh a new elementary school building um and I think what I heard in the concerns uh with this process in particular from the folks in the dual language program is just something that I wanted to raise up is that many of the families that we're talking about uh that need equity within our district, they can't be at public meetings like this. um they're not a part of the decision-making processes and even with our best efforts to provide a Spanish language forum and a smaller uh conversations, I think taking the time to, you know, pursue this option would allow us to ensure that we're engaging uh those members of the community that don't normally have a voice uh in school-based decision-m. Um so that would be
038the kind of proposed approach that I would put forward uh to the committee. So it would require uh us to take on some additional steps. Uh, but I do believe that it gets us ultimately where we'd want to go, which is, um, I think option three is the ideal state for the district. Uh, but it allows us to kind of think it through a little bit more. Um, and to I think address the longerterm financial issues that we will again face uh, not just in this coming budget, but in the following budget as well. Uh, and then I would just name that again for my second choice, the option to merge uh, Carlton and Salt Install into that one building. I view that as a functional bridge. Um, in the long term, I still think
039that we need to be talking about building a new elementary school building, uh, and those programs, uh, and the innovation program itself being re-examined, uh, just to ensure that again, if there's going to be a merger of that program in any of our school buildings, uh, that we're taking into full account kind of what's worked well with that particular program, but incorporating the voices of the families that uh, weren't a part of designing that innovation plan. So, I just named that those uh, innovation processes would have to open up as part of this process. So, uh those are my kind of immediate thoughts and the the approach and pathway that I would put forward uh to support ultimately getting to path uh of taking option three. And so those are kind of my full thoughts
040on uh where I stand with reconfiguration. >> You'll make a motion. >> So I'd move to uh approve option three on the condition that uh I laid forth that we'd pursue some of those uh fiscal options. Uh, and that's that would be my motion. >> I'll second the motion. >> Okay. >> We have a a conditioned motion for scenario three made by member Cruz and seconded by member Miranda under discussion. >> Member Campbell. >> Um, this is perhaps more a question. I I have a lot of thoughts, but um before I go into any of those, this is perhaps more a procedural is with this conditional vote. To me, it feels like it feels complicated to have such a condition on it to vote when those conditions can't be met in this meeting. And so
041I'm I want to make sure that folks feel comfortable with that condition being met, being able to vote on that, even knowing whether it can or cannot be met or if perhaps folks might feel better with a different one if those conditions can't be met. I'm not sure if I'm making sense, but the condition of it makes me having that like that makes me nervous to to put forth something and then not have an agreed upon plan for if those things did not come through. If I understood the point, it's to if there's a contingency option that could be added to the motion if those things don't come through as some kind of fail safe is what you're >> That's the concern that there isn't a fail safe that's built into the motion. >> Right.
042I'm concerned that you have a contingency that we do not know if it could or could not be met at this time. So, you'd be agreeing to something with a contingency on something without having >> Yeah, I I hear what you're saying. I think what I would name is that right now we're operating off of the assumption that on the city side we'd be uh committed 5%. That's the assumption that we're making. We haven't yet approved a budget uh for the school side. So we're already making the decision on reconfiguration without other steps having been taken. Uh so on my part, you know, I think that the contingency is always there uh from a school committee perspective that there's other steps in any process. We can't vote on an innovation plan being changed without, you
043know, going through the the public process that's required. You can't vote on a budget without going through the public process that's required. Those are all contingencies. I think my intention here is to continue to support the superintendent's recommendations on around changing our elementary school reconfiguration while noting that our advocacy around these things uh that are fiscal in nature, they've they never stop. You're always advocating, you're always pushing. So, you know, I I don't necessarily uh know if I we need to build in a fail safe as much as that's already kind of part of the process given that we're not uh we don't have a commitment on the city side that it's going to be the 5%. We have an assumption that we're building next year's budget from and we're making a decision or at
044least there's a proposed decision that's being made um based on that 5% without knowing that that's actually what we have in hand and we haven't even started that particular process. >> Member Campbell. >> Sure. I hear that. I however I heard a couple of additional contingency pieces including perhaps conversations with the Ways and Means conversations around appropriations from the millionaires tax where and also a a an a hope or an expectation or a contingency that there would be a much larger percentage than I think I certainly have ever seen on this body. And so for me, I think it would be hard to say this plan, and I'm not even weighing in on the plan or not the plan. I'm just saying like to to have that many contingencies associated with with this particular motion
045makes me a little uncomfortable. >> Understood. So, I what I would say is that I I think I've seen this committee in the past uh engage uh in sending resolutions to the legislature to advocate for the things that we thought we needed, whether it was the first time we're on where we were trying to fix the funding formula uh or other uh requests. Um obviously, I stand here with two different roles. And I think what I'm naming on my part is that I think our state delegation can play a role uh as it has historically in the past to help address budget deficits here within the district. So, um I I hear you on separating out those pieces of the contingency. Uh I'd be open to, you know, uh removing those as a condition if
046folks just wanted to vote on option three, but I'm kind of laying out the I think what I think the path to get to option three actually is in a sensible manner. >> Member Cornell, >> I just I'm [clears throat] I'm got I think I got a little confused. Are so are you proposing to you're proposing three but you know with all of these you know with a lot of planning and and these different contingencies built in uh whether or not we you know keep them as proposed but also to merge Carlton and Salt and Stall in the short term. >> Uh yeah. So okay. >> Yeah. My proposal would be to merge the Carlton and Salt and Stall >> at Salt and Stall. Uh, so I said that I'd support option three or four.
047I don't think we can make a decision on which building it would be necessarily right now in terms of that particular proposal. Uh, I can't bind the future committee if they have to wait a year. I don't think I can do that legally, if that makes sense. >> I'm still confused. Yeah. So, so are you proposing no changes for the fall? >> No, I'm not proposing. I'm saying uh it's a two-year change. So, it would be fall of 2027 is when you'd make the change. But I don't think I can bind the next school committee to making uh I don't think we can at least uh doing something for the following year. Maybe we can. I'm thinking it through. Yeah. So I option three is what I'd be proposing we'd vote for in the long
048term. So yes, it would be the Salt and Stall Carlton merger not happening at Salt happening at Bentley. Okay. >> And then Bentley moving into Sorry, this is why I needed to keep my notes in front of me. Uh, and then Salt and Stall, uh, Bentley moving over to the Salt and Stall building, but it wouldn't happen until fall of 2027, if that makes sense. While we take that gap year with the funding. Apologies, that was I need to drink some water. >> Additional discussion. I have Yeah, member Campbell. I guess I'm just thinking that I it might be behoove us to debate the merits of the plan itself >> without a con with without >> I I don't want to put the cart before the horse. I think it would be better to to
049to have a discussion about the actual plan whether or not the contingent whether or not all of that additional funding does or does not come through to provide a a to provide us a year of funding because then that that's just my my own personal opinion is I think it would be for me I'm having a hard time well maybe I'm making assumptions about folks but for me I think there are some folks who are like maybe [clears throat] they don't even like that plan at all and the contingenc I don't know I I the contingency piece is really throwing me off to to I think I just maybe need to think it over. >> I I totally understand. I think that that's what the deliberation period is for. So, if folks, you know, have
050thoughts on option three just without those other elements and they want to express those and I' I'd be happy to hearing those. I heard some of it during the retreat, but >> I guess what I'm trying to say is if the money didn't come through and we found that out, then what would happen? And I know that that's not for you or for me to decide, which >> does make me nervous, but also I don't want to put anybody into a future bind by saying we'll kick the can down the road and hope that these things come to be. >> I hear what you're saying, Amanda, because we wouldn't be here. So that's the part that I get is unclear for us. I think the vote would lock us into option three, but the committee
051it the school committee has the legal authority to go and change decisions if they had to based on whatever changes fiscally. So, you know, I would say that we'd be locking ourselves into option three. But if things did change come, you know, uh the end of that planning year, we find out what happens with chapter 70 and then the school committee needs to make a different decision for whatever reason, um you know, I I can't predict the future. I just I couldn't tell you with certainty what would happen. But I would imagine that they would always have that right to make a decision to make a pause, to make a stay, to modify a decision that was made by a past committee. But I think as currently composed might I would say that this committee
052would be voting on that longer term kind of play rather than the interim step. >> Member Cornell, >> I would just point out that at the retreat, one thing that we were unanimous on is that doing nothing was not an option. And I think what you're proposing is essentially doing nothing for a year. And that that is we we've talked a lot about what the larger ramifications of that are, which is potentially losing innovation programs, losing prek. That concerns me. That concerns me a lot. >> Yes. I I would distinguish doing nothing from a phased in approach, which I think members of the committee here have stated that they'd be open to discussing how we phase in approaches uh here within the district. So uh around reconfiguration in particular. So, um, you know, I would
053say doing nothing would be voting affirmatively to vote all these options down rather than having one in place. So, I'd distinguish it on that fact. [clears throat] >> Yep. A member Cornell, >> but we would essentially be doing having no cost savings this year. That that is what I mean. This year, we would be doing nothing but planning. understood on that piece. But what I would say is that the advocacy that would be happening on the budget process and then the work that we would have as a committee. So I think the the charge that I would put out to the future committee would be that they would be working with the mayor and the city council to push for the higher allocation on the city side to mirror the savings that would be proposed
054in this particular year while also pursuing the funding from the special act that I'm proposing that we've done in the past as a city when we faced a similar deficit back in 2009. Um so you know that that's the path that I'm proposing to get there to being able to have that particular gap year. Um, so I don't know if I would frame that as doing nothing. I think that what I heard from the superintendent in my conversation with him when I asked about the assumptions that we're making within the budget, um, and that that city allocation, if we were advocating for a higher percentage while we were trying to figure things out and build ourselves along a runway, is that you could phase out the proposal if you had a particular percentage that was
055allocated by the city. Um, and I know that the assistant superintendent provided what those percentage increases would look like to all members of the committee. Uh, and that, you know, my my push would be that we would look for instead of the assumed 5% 7 to 8% to be able to close the gap at the amount that the superintendent um is trying to suggest with reconfiguration in this particular year and then you could phase it out to a second year. So, that's what I'm I'm pushing for. So Steve, I don't know if that goes or aligns with the recollection of the conversation that we had about it, but that's essentially what I was trying to achieve by saying that I think we should be pursuing a higher allocation in this gap year that we would
056take. So, uh, let me, um, express my concern with, first of all, as far as the city's appropriation, you know, there's been a over 10% when you add in the health insurance and debt costs that are on the city side of the budget, well over 10% increase over the last two years funding in the schools. Um, and you know, we're starting the budget planning process for FY27. So, it is far too early to commit to what whatever percentage is available, but suffice it to say, we'll be spending more on Salem public schools than the city ever has before. Absent a fix to chapter 70, which I think you and I know we've talked about for several years, is creating probably the larger constraint on our ability to fund our schools. the formula not only doesn't
057provide us with enough funding, but constantly moves the goalpost in terms of what it says the city needs to provide and then levies an additional million dollar penalty on over the last couple of years for saying that we're not reaching those goals. um the special act, you know, my recollection is, as you indicated, uh member Cruz, the special act was the result of um of financial malfeasants and that the legislature agreed to help the district correct for a past problem that was not the result of any decisions that were made by a policymaking body for the committee. And I think it would be a very long leap to think that the that the legislature would go along with providing a special act to give funding specifically to Salem when a lot of the challenges that
058we're facing from a financial perspective are not the result of malfeasants. They're the result of transportation costs going up and uh out of district tuition going up and uh electricity costs going up. All the same cost centers going up that other districts are facing. So, if they provided it for Salem, I would be I I think it it creates a precedent that any other city would look at and say, "Well, our district has these same financial pressures. How come Salem gets the special act and we don't?" It seems like a lot to ask for, but I think my biggest concern with phasing in an approach over multiple years is the loss of educators, the loss of of families to the district. I think that creates a degree of uncertainty that could create um a fair
059amount of turmoil for the district in that interceding year even if all the financial elements came together which we don't know for sure. Um to my mind you know we all agreed I think both in June and then also this past Saturday again that the concept of scenario 3 is one where we we feel is is the best ultimate configuration for this district in many respects. The phased approach is that scenario four is the first step of that getting to scenario three. And that scenario four brings uh two school communities together such that by the time they are moved as one, they are moving as one community as opposed to students being asked to move multiple times or with a fair amount of uncertainty about whether or not a special act is going to pass
060or a millionaire's tax is going to break our way. Um that that's my sense of it which is you know that scenario three is something that I think we all agreed was was a future condition that we would like to see for this district but [clears throat] that the first step to get there is scenario 4. You know, we've heard from um from the consultant team, from from the superintendent and the district administration, from our educators that moving effectively three or four school communities and over 700 kids in one summer um is is is logistically fraught for this district to undertake at a time when we're also looking at uh the high school project, the expansion of dual language to the middle school uh and all the other work that we have going on. Um,
061so I I I have apprehensions about going directly to scenario three and I think I would just articulate that I have significant apprehensions about going to scenario 3 conditioned on certain things happening over the course of the next year. >> Member Campbell. Um, I do agree that I have some concerns about the phased approach in the sense that I think for, you know, I'm an educator, not a parent, so I'll speak from the perspective of an educator, but, you know, if I knew that my school community was one that was going to be merged or had the potential to be merged or was in the plan to be merged, and I did not yet know if my position was or was not in consideration for some type of uh reduction or some type of merging,
062um, I I think it would be reasonable to start looking. people have healthcare to to procure um which is not an easy task right now and groceries and all of that stuff. So I would very much be concerned about the uncertainty that it would place on educators. Um I think that often times like the phased approach it has a lot of merits to it because it allows for a long runway for um for planning logistically but I do think that it can create a lot of uncertainty for people. Um, and you know, just my own perspective, I I would feel very uncertain going into it without, you know, I think it just kind of extends the uncertainty. Um, and then when you layer in the contingencies, that also additionally makes me very nervous. However, which
063is why I I would rather I think just discuss um the potential for scenario three versus four. Um, I do disagree though that I don't necessarily view four as a stepping stone into three. Um, because I think that would require a ve to do it fairly and to do it right for for all of the school communities involved, you would have to leave a long gap of time um to avoid like significant move after move. Um, and then um at that point I think there's a lot of other things that are in play. So I don't necessarily view them as reasonable stepping stones from one to the next like oh we do four so that we can do three. Um and um although scenario 3 does require a lot of moving pieces and a lot
064of moving parts um I I do feel as though if I'm thinking about the best interest of of students and in the best placement of students I do feel in support of scenario three. Um, I've I've thought a lot about it. I know logistically it's very challenging. My only thinking around scenario 3 is that I would prefer and I check the numbers. I believe it will still be feasible to leave the ECC there um so that we can do more intentional planning. But um my my biggest concern around like viewing four as a stepping stone to three is I just don't think that that's the good and right thing to do for kids or for educators. Um, you know, I think if we did scenario four, we should do scenario four and use it as
065like this is what we're doing. This is our approached plan. But, um, I think any type of consideration for it as a stepping stone. Um, I think it just lets the uncertainty linger because then, you know, you sit and wonder like how long am I in this classroom space for? What is the actual long-term plan? How many years? Are they building a different elementary school in 10 years? um that that's ultimately, you know, so I would prefer to look at it like scenario three or scenario four or, you know, and rather than the linking of them or additional contingency plans and I I think um I I just in good conscience can't view scenario 4 as a stepping stone to three for me. I I think that that makes it really hard for school communities.
066Cruz, >> I I would just add that I think that the the reason, you know, I proposed the path that I did and I'm open to just exploring option three on its own merits, of course, um is also in large part due to the considerations around the ECC and the fact that the school building we would be sending the uh we've heard from the educators, I think I've talked to school leadership, I went to parent teacher conference and I've heard from, you know, folks that they really um do enjoy the the way that the building is currently configured for ECC and the way the facilities are structured. I think we need some time uh to be able to think about that as the early childhood center. I think you can move some of our other
067partner programs uh in there in the interim, but I totally understand that that particular school community also um would need some time to make a transition uh to a new school building. Uh but then I also think uh in the interim, you know, I'd name that I I do still have the concern that as part of this process um that we needed to be thinking about the new liberty uh in Salem Academy and I know we've had different discussions about not uh not Salem Academy, uh Salem Prep. Um, and so I I think as we think about Salem Prep and New Liberty, um, you know, I just think that there was an opportunity to think about, you know, where they could be temporarily housed as we think about that lease that they currently have at
068the Witch City Mall. Um, so, you know, that's another, uh, consideration for me on on the one-year. But I think to member Campbell's point, like I'm open to having the conversation about just the merits of uh, scenario three. And uh but I I do want to name that I think getting creative uh and thinking about a phased in approach uh is something that uh is prudent that is possible. Uh and then I to the point that you made mayor about the special act. I don't necessarily know if it needs to be a special act or if it if it's a budgetary amendment. I mean in the past uh during CO we we passed what we called the pothole fund uh for municipalities in the state budget that allowed for districts to draw on on grant
069dollars. So, you know, I think the the point that I'm making there is that uh on my part, whether it's a special act, an amendment uh in the budget, I'm committed to working with Senator Lovely uh to helping to address both the facility needs that folks have within the district, but then additionally uh to provide some stop gap funding uh in the interim. And I understand that that feels like an uncertain uh an uncertainty for many of the members on this committee. Uh, but that is that's our charge as public advocates is to go to to the mat and ensure that our communities are getting what they need and I'm willing to do that. >> Member Hoffman, [clears throat] >> I have some concerns too. I um I three and four are I think our
070best options. However, I worry about a phased I worry about um one is moving Bentley right now, whereas we're not quite ready to grow that program. We're just moving it to the middle school. Salem has failed twice at dual language and I would hate to see that happen a third time. Like I would want to make sure that if we were to move Bentley to Salt and Stall that we had an actual plan. and we have to hire teachers and and we'd have to um figure out how to work it all together to make it solid. Like I know it's solid in its building right now and I think that their c their um school culture is growing and bonding and that worries me to move it to a new building and then potentially try
071to find teachers that one that speaks Spanish and one that speaks English. Um, I think that uh I also want to be cautious too because of the new development that they're talking about in um in down in um the point like what's that going to do the the demographic down there? Is it going to price out our families that are there and then they're going to be in a different part of Salem? And so then maybe our our demographic switches to a different area of town that's a little struggling a little more than others. Um, I also think that for number four, I think putting two communities together to combine and bond together and have uh the innovation part with it and give it time to grow there. And it might not even be th
072that community moving later on because we actually don't know like it's just a I feel like number three is like a golden idea like a star to to kind of reach for but it's not the right time to go that far of a stretch right now with the uncertainty because you can't we don't know if chapter 770 is going to change like and it's not going to change next year but we do know we will lose lose our early childhood education and is that what we want to do? Like are we not committing to that? we're just gonna like I don't think we cannot not do anything but I also don't think that that we h I think we really have to like think about the parts that are going to hurt the after school
073programs then um the we have New Liberty and Salem Prep that we need to figure out a space for even if it's temporary at um at the Carlton building you know I have my concerns about us moving it to the enterprise system I'm not confident with Um, we don't have a great history at Salem State and that worries me and I don't want to give money to build a new school for our most vulnerable and then in 15 years have to leave or less, right? Like there's no guarantee that that they're going to be able to stay there. And that worries me because I don't want to spend money at a college that's not ours, right? Like if it's our space, great. But I think that um that having moving two schools is more realistic.
074It's less than 700 kids. Like moving everyone all at once is a big on ontaking for all for everyone involved. And I don't think that's fair to families or to our staff. But I think that also there's also like we're talking about the potential of you know five years, 10 years for another or 10 years for an elementary school, five years for a potential another move. But as long as we have something mapped out like this is our course, this is our strategic plan and parents can find it on the website so that we have and then we talk about it every month instead of every six month thing drives me crazy. like I don't want to just talk about it in our retreats. I want to actually have conversations about this throughout our time
075because it gets really frustrating because we have all these ideas but then we get stuck now having to make a decision and I don't think that's fair to anyone and I don't think it's fair to the oncoming members of the school committee that are going to have to make hard choices too. like we're all making a hard choice this year and um I just want to be respectful of our our our new coming our oncoming school committee members, our parents and our kids. Like you know a small step is not a bad thing. >> Member Miranda, >> thank you uh for that. I I just want to add to that um comment, member Hoffman, that the 1,200 units that have been proposed uh at the Shland development is also not a guarantee. So, in terms
076of like the gentrification that will inevitably happen if that goes through, um I would I would hope that um this group of people individually uh would be advocating um for supports with the city council um on being really mindful about moving moving that forward because it does impact uh some of our most vulnerable families over there. Um I as time has gone on um and since December 6th um I've had a bit of a change um of my a change of heart I guess um in terms of putting the green sticker that I did on scenario 4. Some of the reasons have already been uh mentioned here tonight, but I think one of them and uh this kind of tracks back to something that was mentioned at the end of your comment, member Hoffman, um
077around uh moving the dual language program. I don't think that move moving that to Salt and Stall would just be in order to immediately grow the program. Um I think that movement is would be um for a few different reasons, but one reason being that the dual language program uh is not um and bilingual programs in general are not meant to serve kids like my own kid that is a native English speaking child. They are were created uh to provide high quality education to um English learners. And so when thinking about centering that voice, uh the Point neighborhood, which is where we have a school that, you know, we're talking about moving things around, has listed time and time again, um the Salt and Stall School and then also the Bentley school as their second
078choice. um the Point neighborhood, South Salem, Vinnen Square, and Highland have not listed Carlton um as uh their preference, their preferred school. Um and so I think going from the data that we do have um from our um from our families in the point and families that we haven't um maybe haven't had the chance to hear from. I think listening to the data that we have on that um that tracks back to their pref preferences is really important. Um, and because of that, um, as well as some other reasons, I would be in favor of voting on scenario three tonight. Um, the new old scenario 3. Uh, though I'm not attached um, specifically and I'd want to learn a little bit more about uh, potentially moving, keeping or moving the ECC. >> Oh, you're right.
079That's the wrong one. >> Oh, man. Manny, I think you're off mute. >> Yeah. Um I I think uh I'm going to vote for um the one that's just the two scenarios to scenario one and two. The I think it's four. Um, and I'm I'm doing it because I think um it's it's close it's close enough that we we need to support the the communities that have already involved. Um, so one and so so Kton and and Bentley will be supported but the same thing that Manda was just saying but I think it's because we vote we're supporting those people so we so we vote num for number four um not number number three. I think that's the the way to go on this. Um I think I think if we do that, we would
080we're in a better place. And I think um if we if we vote for the others the others four um we'll be I think um not not go we wouldn't be going down the right road. So I'm going to I'm going to say it's it's vote for the numbers one and two in the original thing. So, it's it's clearly for >> Thank you. Thank you, Manning. Member Cruz, >> I just uh wanted to clarify a couple things. Um I guess first I had a question for member Hoffman. I wasn't clear on your point around the early childhood center and how we would lose it if we voted for option three. So, I don't know if you could clarify that point. But then the the second piece was around uh with respect to the chapter 70
081formula. This is the final year of implementation of the student opportunity act. So the the law and the formula are set to essentially expire uh come the conclusion of the budget process. There's currently the committee that's meeting to determine what we're going to do with the future of the formula. I I I can tell you with a good amount of certainty that the formula changes almost annually based on, you know, what we provide in terms of the increments. Um, so the formula's already changed a number of times, which is why we exceeded the original $ 1.5 billion dollars that the plan set to offer to districts and got to $2.5 billion. It doesn't mean that, you know, all communities u necessarily saw what they were expecting out of chapter 7. Salem and a few others
082because of other elements of the formula without question uh were disadvantaged. Uh, but I would just name that the formula is going to change uh in this coming year. Um, that is going to be a debate within the legislature. So I think would I would just clarify for the public with certainty Student Opportunity Act runs its course come the end of this fiscal year uh and there will be a a new education funding formula one way or another member Hoffman I don't know if you could just clarify that point on option on option three no contingency involved you had mentioned that you were concerned that uh that move somehow would impact the early childhood community staying within Salem Could you just speak to that just so I can understand where that concern lies? >> I
083speak to what >> the concern you said you were worried that the ECC you didn't want the ECC to close. >> Oh no, not the ECC. I just meant our early the preK programs that we have going. >> I can't hear you. >> Use your microphone. >> I didn't hear you on the Zoom like last >> few minutes. >> Our prek programs, not the ECC. >> Understood. So when you say our prek programs, you're talking about at the other the ones that >> us being able to fund our prek programs. >> Okay. >> And keep them >> understood. >> Vice Chair Cruz, we can't hear you on the Zoom either. Could you speak? >> Thank you, Member Campbell. >> Um, yep. I have thought long and hard about this and I want to echo a
084lot of member Miranda's points um which is that dual language schools are intentionally designed to be integrated inclusive but most importantly designed for immigrant children and for language minority youth. That is their entire mission. Um that's what they were designed for. That's what this program was designed for. Um and they are particularly well suited to be situated in neighborhoods exactly like the point because of their integrative nature. a two-way program um where it brings together language groups um across multiple different populations. It it is intentionally designed that way to make sure that they are integrated and inclusive. Um and I I agree wholeheartedly that I I am I would not advocate for any sort of expansion within the elementary grades just simply by moving it, but instead um honoring the fact that we have so
085many kids. I think at last check at least three buses coming from that particular neighborhood um to the Bentley school. Um and although we have not been able to collect this particular data anecdotally, I hear many times that families often originally choose the dual language program and then later have to adjust their request for the program because it is not located for them. Um gentrification of dual language programs is a very real concern. It happens all the time. It happens in communities here in Massachusetts as well. it happens across the nation. Um it is the the double-edged sword of a really wonderful dual language program is that um it becomes a victim of its own success and it becomes only accessible to families who can reach it, access it, figure it out, network their way
086into the school. Um and I'm I am significantly concerned that that could happen to this particular program. I know that the wait list is longer for that particular for a particular demographic more so than our newcomers and for our Spanish speaking families. Um and I do worry about the gentrification of that program and it not through any fault of the staff or any fault of the district um but not being able to carry out its mission specifically for immigrant youth. Um if it remains geographically inaccessible to the majority of our families. Um, and so I do understand that it is it is more complicated. But I am firmly of the belief that it is better to do the right thing all at once. Um, even if it's really hard, even if it's really tricky. I
087have talked to Dr. Drake about some possibilities of what he would need in order to make it happen. Um, and I just I feel I I have gone back and forth on it quite a few times because I understand that it is not the easiest solution. Um but this program, which by the way is not in fact a selective program, um you can see it from the demographics and it does in fact enroll children past second grade. Um it it's intentional integrative design. To me, it just it it really should be in that neighborhood where the majority of its children come from. Um and so while I do think that option 4 can in fact resolve some of the additional budget issues that the district is facing, it can rightsize. I'm not opposed to option
088four, but I strongly believe that option three is the right thing for the particular demographic that I think we really should be committed to serving. >> So you're saying >> Yep. Member Hoffman. >> So you're saying you would move to four but not expand it yet? >> Option >> three rather. Yes. Not expand it. I don't think anybody would advocate for expanding immediately the next year in the elementary grades. But I think to member Miranda's point that for me the most salient point of the move is not the expansion. It's the the right location for that particular programming in that particular demographic for the mission of the school. >> Further discussion member Cruz. >> Uh so and I know I laid forward a a path for phasing and I heard my colleagues just state that
089they'd prefer to just talk about option three. Um, so I'm just going to amend my motion uh to just uh uh to approve option three uh and to remove those other elements, but leaving that for members of the committee. I'm happy to send those things in writing uh and some of the research that I've done just so folks can take a look at it on their own time. And if members of the community uh committee or a future committee uh wish to further engage uh and understand what options are available to help address the the fiscal crisis uh within the the district, I'm happy to continue to thought partner with you all. >> Does somebody have to second an amended motion? >> I I think if you made the motion >> I made the motion.
090>> You can withdraw the second if you wish, but you don't. Okay. Further discussion on the motion. Member Cornell. >> I just want to thank all my colleagues for um being so thoughtful and bringing, you know, all of these really important um considerations into the conversation. I I don't I cannot I can't vote for three um right now, but I just want to be very clear that I support three. when we talked about it this summer, it was um I think an option that we all felt really strongly about. I really take um member Campbell's points to heart. Um I would like to propose four because it brings us to a position where we can have more equitable and uniformly sized schools and we began this conversation because of the budget. That's where it started.
091And so, uh, our, you know, our strategic planning, I think we did a really good job last Saturday of having a two Saturdays ago about grounding ourselves in the strategic plan to remind ourselves what our values are as a district, but the the budgetary piece is is um is significant. It's important. So, I think for me, I just want to reiterate my support for three. I just think in the short term I I don't think that that's um something that I can vote for. Uh but regardless of how we end up as a body, whether we're unanimous or we're, you know, relatively split, I know that everybody will be working really hard over the course of the next nine months to implement whatever it is that we that we decide on. member Miranda. >> I
092also just wanted to add, sorry I forgot to say this. Um, the first time that I spoke, um, but this past what day is it? It's Monday. Okay. Last week, um, I had the chance to meet with the ELPAC. Um, and I also had the chance to meet with our family engagement facilitators. Um what I understood from the meeting with the family engagement facilitators um who are obviously working very closely with our families um was that proximity to the dual language program uh for a lot of our families in the point um uh creates a barrier to access to the dual language program. um which we we know that a a bilingual education um is amazing for a um for a million reasons. Uh but I I thought that their points around um barriers to
093access uh were very important. So just wanted to highlight that here. And then I also wanted um to highlight because I think one of the things that I've been wrestling with is um how we are identifying harm and what type of harm could come from delaying um a move of the dual language program to the salt and stall building. And I think that um there are harms to uh delaying. And one example of that is that um it's obviously for a lot of the children um that might attend otherwise if the school was was closer um to their home uh they lose out on a dual language education. Um, and I I think it's the harm um of delaying such an action, however many years that would be, uh, for very good reasons, not wanting
094to disrupt the same school communities over and over. Um I I think that um it's I think there would be multiple cohorts of students that would miss out and they'll obviously never be able to um have that experience of having um a dual language education. And then the other part that I wanted to mention um in terms of that aspect just escaped me um though I have notes right in front of me. Um, it's gone. It's just poof. Gone. >> You can come back. >> Okay. >> Member Campbell. >> While you search for your point, I do it. I appreciate your point and I I I would like to quantify what that would mean um for children who would miss out on that in those multiple cohorts because within the dual language education experience, it's
095not just the opportunities to to become bilingual and biliterate which is obviously a huge economic benefit. Um it's also the access to content. When you come into a new country and you don't have access to the language of instruction, you lose years of of content mastery. Um that's what the research tells us again and again and again is the the content gap can be as small as 3 years and sometimes much higher depending on the child. Um also losing access to family connections, culture. Um and so I I just I I take your point really well. Um and I appreciate you raising that and I just you know as a dual language educator wanted to quantify what that means um by delaying continued access. Um and in my number crunching and conversations with the district,
096um the the Bentley as it exists now without any additional classrooms could accommodate upwards of I believe 8 to 10 kids per classroom um if it were to move. Um because right now the again the largest barrier is being able to get children to the school particularly on the Spanish side. Um, and so for me that is eight to 10 kids in every single grade level, K through five, for the foreseeable next decade. Um, and that to me, although I can appreciate the challenge um around it, I you logistically it's not this none of this is anything I take lightly, but I also in in in counterbalance the opportunity for that many kids to to remain connected um to their language and their culture and to have access to content and the opportunity to become
097bilingual and biiterate. That to me feels like too high a cost to pay. >> Thanks. Miranda, >> I did remember my point. Um, >> you'd get there. >> Thanks so much. Uh, I just also wanted to mention, and this is like very important, so me forgetting is not um I have 22 pages of notes here. Uh I also just wanted to highlight that scenario 4 um with having the idea that we would later on move the dual language program to the Salts building guarantees continued disruption for our staff. Um and I I think that that like level of instability is something that we're trying to come away from as a district. Um, and though I see the the rationale behind um going with four because it like quote unquote fits inside of three, um, I
098for those reasons around um, stability, I would vote against it. So I I I'll I'll add for my part, you know, member Campbell, I and member Miranda, I certainly agree that, you know, the having the dual language program at the Salt Install building makes all the sense in the world. Um there's I think we also know a a history of the larger and more complex uh school reconfiguration or consolidation effort is the the harm that happens tends to occur to the most marginalized students. Um, and we've heard directly from our educators and directly from the district that moving this many students in one move is logistically a challenge for them. And I I take them at their word that and I'm concerned about making these moves in one year, doing greater harm to to the
099students that we're we're all trying to I think provide the greatest degree of protection for because they're the ones who are most vulnerable to negative impacts from these kinds of uh transitions and changes. Um it's not to say that I don't think scenario 3 is the scenario where we want the district to be. And I like if we if we were designing this today, if this was the committee that was making the decision about where the dual language program was going to live back when they when they had that conversation, I think we would have arrived in a very different place. Um, and that's a place where we want to arrive at. Um, I think that we need to do in a way that is achievable and responsible to the to our goals, our equity
100goals, our goals for financial sustainability, but also for what we know is is uh achievable for this district. And so I'm I'm most comfortable with scenario 4. I don't believe that um it's not related to a future state of scenario three. Um, we can't tie the hands, as member Cruz indicated, of a future school committee, but it provides the forward-looking opportunity for that move to happen. We're entering into a new strategic plan, uh, development. That's the opportunity to lay the groundwork for it. Um, we do have a project in the core program with MSBA. So, to the extent it's related to any future elementary school project, it's not going to be funded by the state until that's completed, but it doesn't have to be related to that elementary school project. It can happen before then.
101But the the precondition for scenario three is uh to my mind still is those the the two smallest elementary schools that we have uh coming together as one community. Miranda >> the number that I heard from Dr. strike. Um, and I know it's it's probably not like a super like there hasn't been a ton of research, but I trust um I I trust what he's saying. Um, was about 80 to 100K in order to secure some type of project manager um to oversee all of these changes and do it well. um with voting on scenario three. It wouldn't from my perspective, it would not be voting on scenario three and then you know forgetting this ever happened. It would and I would um say publicly like I would do everything that I could to make
102sure that you have the resources necessary in order to do this well. Um so and I would advocate for that. So I think the the number like 80 to 100K even 200K is like relatively small and I think it's not worth um it's it's not worth the disruption that we could guarantee by voting for scenario 4. >> Dr. Z, can you speak to the implementation of the scenarios >> uh in terms of the the moving costs and the transition costs? That's what >> Yeah. Yeah, I mean I think I think you know the more I've looked at it I said 80 to 100. I think at minimum it's 100,000 to to you know we'd have to stipen staff um get movers. I'd like to have project management support if it's four schools moving. So minimum
103would be that um it could be done but obviously I I thank you for advocating for the resources that we would need if that was the scenario that the school committee voted on. member Cruz. >> So, um I appreciate you saying that, Member Miranda, because I I won't be here. So, certainly, uh you know, I think if this was the option, knowing that someone would be willing to go to the map for those resources, super important. Um I' I'd also just name that I think that with respect to our larger conversations around facilities that following uh I don't have too many more I think I have one more opportunity to do this at the special meeting, but I'm not going to talk very much. Um, you know, I do think that the district needs to
104fully explore uh if we're going in a different direction here and eventually getting to a place where Carlton the the building uh where it's currently located. Uh if that becomes our early childhood center and we're thinking about moving all the other uh prek uh seats that we have in the public side and then also our partner programs into that building. I just want to name that I do think we do have money that's being left on the table uh from our conversations around rental facilities and leases that can help close future budget gaps. Uh so I would just stress an urge to this committee that as we think about the partner programs that we have Pathways, Angela's Daycare, uh apparently you know several churches now uh the Boys and Girls Club uh YMCA and others
105that uh this committee uh does task itself with reexamining our current uh rental and lease agreements to ensure that we are bringing in some revenue uh if we're going to have our partner programs uh colllocated with the public programs that we're offering to ensure long-term stability because we know with the chapter 7 form formula. Uh those public prek seats uh don't get the same uh rate of reimbursement that you would get for uh a kindergarten through 12 student. Uh so I would just, you know, put that stake in the ground for folks to consider in the long term that I I do think that there's some potential revenue that could be coming in from partners that I think we've seen in other uh leases that currently exists within the district and that we should, you
106know, explore those uh down the line uh during the budget debate uh to ensure that we can offset some of the trade-offs here. Member Campbell. >> Um, I just want to clarify, Dr. Dre, I heard you say moving four schools and in my my preference would be to leave the ECC where it is. Um, my understanding is that Carlton and Salts would fit just as tightly between the two buildings. When I looked at the numbers from Dan and Sarah, I'm looking past. Sorry, I'm looking at Dan and Sarah. That is my understanding from the numbers is that they could in fact both fit with the ECC still there. We we don't think so. >> No, >> we you I I I we I did u check on this when the question came up um that
107you couldn't have all three schools in the same building. Carlton, Saltton, Stall, and the ECC. >> Longterm you'd have to move ECC to >> like long term. But >> no, even I I mean we can con confirm. I I'm seeing agreement. We we did look at this again. Um we don't think ECC would have to move either to Carlton or to Horseman. >> Cornell, >> I just want to say one last thing so I'm being sort of transparent about where I'm where I'm coming from on three. Um, so I feel like over the past month I've I've been sort of balancing or not the past month since we talked about brought option three back onto the table. I've been kind of balancing doing the least amount of harm to the fewest number of students versus
108doing the most amount of good for the greatest number of students. at the same time understanding that we have to save money in the short term to protect the greatest number of educators and programs that we care that we care about. And so that's those are the things that I've been trying to balance. So when I think about doing the least amount of harm to the fewest number of students that what and I've said this on the six the population that keeps coming up for me is salt and salt. Um, and so when we when we're looking at the population and not I completely this is where the tension comes from because I don't want our um English language learners to be or our Spanish speaking families to be disenfranchised and not able to access
109this program. That's incredibly important to them. At the same time, um, our salt and salt population has, um, you know, nearly the same number of low-income students that, um, the dual language program has. It has more students with disabilities. Um, it's got, um, you know, a very high number, it's got similar number of high needs students. And we know that this, you know, displacement adversely affects those students tremendously. and having, you know, I've spoken to this before, but the trauma in that building and the trauma that those teachers have lived with for the past however many years is still there and that's been a lot for them to overcome and we've seen them make incredible gains and that weighs tremendously on me. um taking them out of that environment will have an adverse effect on
110those students and they are um our most second to our dual language populations. They are our most at risk population. So when we're talking about centering equity, that is something that is just in the forefront for me all the time. Um, and I to to that end I I really could not see myself taking a vote to move those students. >> Member Cruz. >> Um, I I just moved a question. >> Uh, so the motion before the committee is to adopt scenario three without conditions. The motion is made by member Cruz and seconded by member Miranda. So, roll call vote on scenario three. Member Cruz. >> Yes. >> Member Hoffman. >> Sorry, which one are we voting on? >> Scenario three. >> Three. >> Just leave it. You don't have to. >> No. >> Member
111Manning? >> No. >> Member Miranda? >> Yes. >> Member Campbell? >> Yes. >> Member Cornell? >> No. >> And myself? No. >> The matter fails? 34. Is there another motion? [snorts] >> I'll make a motion to uh support option number four. >> Second. >> Motion made by member Cornell, seconded by member Cruz for scenario four. Under discussion, >> member Campbell, >> I'll just flag I think this is perhaps a really short-sighted um approach. um I if it's what the committee is going to put forward and clearly that is but I would just flag my concern that it to me feels incredibly shortsighted in the long run. I I worry that there will be some consequences to it that we can predict here and are going to see >> member Miranda. >> I'll agree with that.
112Um, and then also just want uh to state that from the data that we do have, I I want there to be an understanding from everybody who votes, and I'm I'm not trying to guilt trip anybody, um, but I want there to be an understanding that um, some of these families did not request Carlton um, the Carlton innovation model for a reason. And this scenario to me feels a lot like forcing something that some of our most vulnerable neighbors have specifically not asked for. Um, and I think that that's really harmful. >> Member Cruz. >> Yeah, thank you. I'd just echo some of the sentiments that have been expressed that I do think in the long term uh you know option three is still the ideal state. Um recognizing that I still think that moving
113forward with reconfiguration is important. Uh I won't be able to support uh the motion because I I do believe that you know uh on option three that is the best course forward. Uh but I'd just name that, you know, I do think uh in the short term with this particular proposal, um you know, I'd ask that, you know, future members of the committee uh just uh consider when you do make that long-term move to think about, you know, pairing this also with uh future MSBA uh considerations and that we think about a long-term kind of strategic planning conversation around uh our elementary school early childhood centers that, you know, I think gives us the opportunity uh to I think build um build the confidence and that we will eventually get to a place where the
114dual language program is centered in the community that needs it the most. >> Yeah. >> Oh, member Campbell. Um, I just want to add that I had the opportunity to speak with um, [clears throat] I won't say many Salt and Stall families, but several Salt and Stall families who had expressed interest in had the program moved to that neighborhood um, to be able to join the program like at this juncture and then after confirming with the Bentley School that there are in fact places. Um, so again, when I'm thinking about access to programming, this does not provide access to that programming. this continues to have them at a school that provides monolingual instruction to the best of everybody's capabilities, but the research says is not the best program option. It is not researchbased. It is
115not supported in any evidence base um for for English learners. Um that's dual language and and that is just my my continued concern is that we are continuing to make inaccessible the most researchbased program for English learners. it is just simply too far for for families to walk to and and if if we do it the other way they would be able to walk to that program. So those are my concerns with it. >> Move the question. >> Uh on the motion for scenario four adoption um made by member Cornell, seconded by member Cruz. A roll call vote. Member Cornell >> yes. >> Member Cruz >> no. Member Hoffman, >> yes. >> Member Manning, >> yes. >> Member Miranda, >> no. >> Member Campbell, >> no. >> And myself, yes. Uh, scenario four is approved.
116The motion's adopted. Four to three. Uh, yep. Member Cruz. Uh, >> I'd move for a fivem minute recess. [clears throat] I need some water. Okay. Motion for five minute recess. Objection. >> Two minutes. >> Yeah. >> Two minute recess without objection. Seconded. >> Two-minute recess. We are back. Um, Dr. Z. >> Yeah. So, um just in terms of uh next steps, um I I think uh I just want to be clear with um the the community, we we do plan on um sending out a communication um to the district tomorrow, just uh summarizing this, but I by the end of this week, we should be able to share information about uh the leadership of the school as well as um opportunities for families in both schools and staff and students to participate in both a
117transition team uh writ large as well as a team an innovation plan team as we promised and discussed throughout the process. We'd be looking for uh representation from both uh schools, parents and staff uh from both schools, an equal number of parents as staff. Um and we would ask people to submit their interest uh by the beginning of January. Um and so that we would be begin to start the work right away upon return from the break. uh at the January 5th school committee, which is our first regularly scheduled meeting after the new year, um we will be um I will be presenting um a plan or or more specifics about the timeline um and considerations that we have for the merger. Um you know, I understand that there's a lot of emotions right now.
118We want to make sure that we honor those. I know that I've had a chance to speak to both principles at length um today and uh on Friday. Uh they have plans in place to speak with children uh tomorrow. I think they've uh done a good job of uh being thoughtful about what the message is. Um, we also see this as an opportunity to um create a new school uh that is strong uh is stronger with a a vision that um with a design that um that uh that accentuates the strengths of both school communities. We have committed to the innovation uh model. Uh but there's also tremendous strengths that both schools have um that need to be part of this conversation. And I think it's important that as educators that we focus on the
119opportunity to do something to to create a third larger school that is as strong as any in the Salem public schools. And I have the utmost confidence in the staff and the leadership uh of the of the schools uh that we can do that. Um, and as I promised this community, um, throughout this whole process, this is going to be a significant amount of my time, uh, the district's time, um, in order to make sure that this goes well. But I have no doubt that we have the right people. The majority of staff will have opportunities to be part of this community. Even as I've started to map out and to have discussions with the union and with the school leaders, uh the majority of educators have the opportunity will have the option of being
120part of this school. And so um as much as I know there's a lot of uh emotion, I'm incredibly optimistic and I think there is a real opportunity to to expand what we know has been a high interest program in Salem or a model that's been high interest. Um, I do want to respect the that people need time to process [snorts] and um over the next couple days, but we are planning on hitting the ground right away to make sure this transition goes well. Um, and I plan to report to the school committee on January 5th more of uh the details, but like I said, by the end of this week, the community should have um information about the school, the leadership and opportunities to get involved with this uh transition. I'll turn it back
121over to you, Mayor. >> Uh the next items on our agenda are approval for third reading of several policies. Uh, make a motion to approve policy AA, policy AC, policy ACR, policy ACA, policy ACE, and policy AD for a third read. >> I'd say ADC is the last. >> Sorry, ADC. >> Second. >> Motion made by member Cornell and seconded by member Cruz. Under discussion, >> seeing none, roll call vote on adoption of the policies for third reading. Member Hoffman. Yes. >> Member Manning. >> Yes. >> Member Miranda. >> Yes. >> Member Campbell. >> Yes. >> Member Cornell. >> Yes. >> Member Cruz. >> Yes. >> And myself? Yes. Motions adopted. 70. >> That concludes motions and motions and resolutions. School committee announcements. >> Seeing none. >> Motion to adjurnn. >> Motion to [clears throat]
122adjurnn by member Cornell. Seconded by member Campbell. Uh, roll call vote. Member Manning. >> Yes. >> Member Miranda. >> Yes. >> Member Campbell. >> Yes. >> Member Cornell? >> Yes. >> Member Cruz? >> Yes. >> Member Hoffman? >> Yes. >> Myself? Yes. We arejourned.