001It's nice to see you all. Um, I am going to call this meeting to order and um, Pepe Sabbo is going to read our equity statement. In Asheville City Schools, we are committed to equity and anti-racist policies for all students and staff to learn and thrive. We recognize that our positions come with power, responsibility, and public service for the entire ACS community. We will model our commitment to equity through our practices and decisions. During this meeting, well, and anytime really, we invite a pause if harm has taken place, a moment to name the harm, and space to practice repair. Thank you. Thank you. All members of the board are present, so we have a quorum. And at this time, is there a motion to approve our agenda? So moved. Second second. All those in favor?
002I. Any opposed? Okay, our agenda is approved. At this time, we are going to move to um possible action items could be on the consent agenda next week. And our first item 2.1 is a contract um about some security equipment. And I'm going to let April speak to that. Yes. Thank you for this opportunity. I actually requested Miss Thornberg if we could take action tonight on this. That's why I sent it ahead of time. That's okay. I just want to make sure that everyone knows. So, we shared this contract out um already and I just would like to invite the board if you have any further questions that I could answer for you at this time. Have a couple. Um would you tell us about uh the process for selecting this vendor and the if
003there was a competitive bidding process? This is not a requirement of the board to do a request for proposal for a bid such as this, but we did work collaboratively with the IT department in selecting the vendor, went through all the details, the scope of work and made sure that it was not only compatible with our current systems, but also at a reasonable price. Will you tell us a little bit more? Will somebody tell us about the scope of intended use for this? And I'm asking this question because the I I react to the idea of running students through metal detectors. Yes, sir. But I've also had a productive conversation with uh the principal for the education and career academy. And so I just want to hear about why we're going this route and then
004where else this might be used in the district. Sure. That's a very good question. So first of all, this has been a conversation with the district safety council for many years. Um, principles have been talking about this possibility. It it es and flows and levels of conversation. Um, many counties actually have already incorporated this at all of their secondary schools. Asheville City, we've been very reluctant to go this route. This is a huge paradigm shift for us. Um, but we did the where is the love event on February the 14th where it wasn't kids brought that up as a need. We did some more focus groups with REAp and other student listening sessions um to kind of hear where the students are. It is something our kids are very comfortable with. Um they have to
005go through a very similar system. This actually mimics Josh Riby took his family to Dollywood and it's the exact same system going to amusement parks or going to a concert um many sporting events. It is less invasive than the wand which was the original origin of this request. um previous leadership at the alternative program and Miss Robinson had requested that we start considering a walkthrough device instead of using wands on that campus. So that started that conversation um is being a little bit more of a rapid let's move forward a little bit faster on that. And then we decided that after using the sheriff's department's portable unit for graduation that it would be a better if we procured one of our own to use for our larger events instead of wanding guests at large gates
006and things like that. So that's why we went the direction of a portable units to start with. That's the elevator speech. Very quick. I can go in more detail if needed. Thank you. Uh, I also noticed that it looks like there's a an annual maintenance of 10,500 and that it's discounted 50%. Is that a reality? Well, this is because Matt Whiteside has a good relationship with them and they he helped us. I think he's still in the There he is. um he supported this work with Josh. Josh Riggsby and Matt did a lot of the work and Josh is with me too who can answer any more questions but they worked together collaboratively to secure the best bet what would meet the needs of our campuses better. So I feel confident in their work. April,
007can I ask why we why um you're asking us to vote on this tonight? Yes, sir. Um as I mentioned, this is something that we started a long it's been a long process before the hurricane. We were really kind of we were starting to talk to vendors and trying to figure all that out. The hurricane did delay our work on this not only during the response but also the recovery time and we wanted to do a little bit more due diligence on really talking to different vendors other school systems that were using something similar. We did not get the contract. It took us a minute to really get that um figured out and we did not get the proposed contract in time for me to take it to full cabinet to have it before the
008board for the April meeting. And because we are using grant money to secure this, we have to procure the uh equipment which means we have to not only purchase it but have it in our possession by the June 30th date. and I'm just asking the board to please consider moving forward with allowing us to buy this with So, one thing I noticed on the um original proposal is it has a date of April 4th and a 30-day notice. And so, that 30 days was up yesterday on 54. We've worked with the vendor to to fix to do that. So, um as you know, for as long as I've been on this board, I am often challenged by needing to vote on something the night that it's presented. I understand that we've had this for a
009few days to look at it, but this is the first time we as a board have met to discuss this. What is the harm of waiting until our regular board meeting where we normally take action to vote on this? It was my nervousness of not getting the equipment by the June 30th date. Just worried about not being able to secure that. I'm sure we could work with the state if we had to. Just kidding. be here for graduation. That is our hope, but given the severity of things across the country, I'm just expressing a little bit of concern. Then one more question. Transportation wise, how does it any truck can load it and put it on? So, the units the units themselves weigh about 50 lbs a piece. um we can put them in the
010back of the truck and get them to wherever we choose to set it up um fairly quickly. Uh they have options that we can have it as a battery backup or we could have it hardlined in for power. Um but it's a it is made to be an extremely easy easily portable unit and with you know looking at graduation last year we had just under 4,000 guests. It took 90 minutes of wanding and processing to get those guests in place so they could attend graduation, which led to about a 15-minute delay in the ceremony, which all things considered is not bad. But if we could have this in place for sporting events, for graduation, uh for prom, we could have a more positive guest experience with people getting through these these checkpoints in a more
011efficient manner. So one of them the the contractors for two correct. So one of them would be permanently housed at the Randolph campus. No sir you can remove them. Okay. And but where were the other one like during the school day or whatever? Where is the other one? So currently there are two entrances at the alternative school. They had to change that to just the one because of the wanding but they would like to go back to that. And then also as I've mentioned before, we have talked about this at other campuses. So working with the secondary principles is where we would start um to have that ability. Okay. And I'm sorry to keep pressing this point or or keep asking questions, but um and it's an operational one that I that you know I
012blame myself for not knowing that we wanted students at Randolph campus. Do we want students at any other campus? Not currently. No. So not at Sulsa, not at Asheville High, not we do. We do for all member for all campus events like big events like basketball games and football games and big events. We do want all of our guests similar to board meetings. Well, we're not wanting students anywhere for arrival. We do not currently do that. No, we are it is a discussion point on district safety council though. Um, is this purchase affected by tariffs? I noticed that taxes and and things like that are not covered in the contract. We are currently not expecting that, but like I said, the every day things change across the country. So Canadian based company and the the
013gate system would have been subject to tariffs. Okay, that's helpful. Uh, and so currently this would enable us to have the separate middle school entrance. Yes. Is that correct? This would allow us to have two separate entrances. Okay. Thank you very much. If they if they just deem to do that. Yes. Oh, if that's the decision that they make. Yes. Understood. Thank you very much. That's all the questions I have. Yeah. Um, I just want to summarize because I do think um, it's a little bit different that we're voting tonight. So, I just I sort of want to tell you all what I'm hearing and then if we're ready to move forward, you have one question. Now is the time. Go ahead. Actually, it's more of more of a point. Um, I just want to
014acknowledge the fact that last time we were in this room, we were discussing um a budget, the possibility of of um cuts to our personnel uh in a budget that if we don't get what we've asked of the county, I understand that this is grant money, but but um and if if we as a district are then going to spend 70,000 on this equipment. Again, I understand it's grant money. I don't know if our community understands that nuance that much. And so for us as a council to be deciding on $170,000 toward equipment when we're talking about cutting staff, I it's a comment. I don't I don't even know if we need to answer that because again I understand it's different pots of money and also sometimes those nuances can get lost in the conversation
015out in the community. So why are we spending this kind of money on something like this when we're talking about h possibly cutting staff? Yes, it is important to note that this grant was specifically awarded for equipment and not for personnel. This was written into it as part of our process. Like I've said, we've talked about this for many years. This is partially we fund some of our surveillance cameras, our server to protect them, the door controls. This is a grant given by the state to help school systems offset the cost for this very expensive and important equipment, but is a very valid concern and I appreciate you uplifting it. So, we're no local funds will be used. No, sir. Thank you. Um, just to summarize what I've heard from board members and to see
016if we're comfortable voting on this tonight. We don't have to. We can push it to next week if we want. Um, there have been questions about the timing of this. Why is it feel like it's rushed? And April has given her explanation. We've had some conversations about the intrusiveness of screening anybody and the why we do it and balancing um people's privacy with other competing interests. Um we've talked about um what I'll call the spending money, the optics of spending money in the present climate, but also acknowledging it's a grant and we have need for it. I think this is I mean there's plenty of information on both sides of this one. Um, are you all ready to vote? Do you need any more information? It's for the safety of the kids. It's for the
017safety for students. So, I guess we could just vote on it and get it here as soon as possible. Maybe you can put it out here one Monday night and let us walk through it. Is someone willing to make a motion? I move that we um approve the proposed contract between Asheville City Schools and what Evolve Concealed Weapons MCA. MCA second. All those in favor? I. Any opposed? I nor one opposed and otherwise the eyes have it. So that contract is approved. Thank you. Um, turning now to the rest of the consent items. And I'm going to apologize, April, that I I left my laptop, which is why all this tech stuff was going on. I'm sorry. But thank you, whoever produced this really nice laptop. Um, but I'm back on my game. Um, next
018we turn to Miss Pchade, student releases to Bunkham County. Good evening, board. What you have before you is one, two, three, several releases to Bunkham County um schools. And as you can see, these are continued placements and the dual language program. Any questions? Are any of the students on this list students who were with us this year and have recently left to go to Bunkham County or because I know continued place I do now understand what continued placement means but that's not every one of these. Um the rest of them I would have to check and get back with you looking at their uh discretionary admission. Okay. I think as we continue to get this data, I'm I want to get better myself at knowing, are we seeing students who were with us and have
019since last month moved away from us, or are we getting sort of the required list because these kind of they go annually, but they have to re get revisited annually, right? Because they live in our district. Um, moving forward for the upcoming school year, um, I've heard from multiple board members, we're going to have a running record so that you can see all of them with the date and all of that with this continued placement and I'll highlight the ones that um, you will be approving. So, you'll see a running um, record of all of the kids moving forward. Thank you. Um I just to sort of follow up piggyback on Rebecca um maybe that could also let us know if we're approving that child for the first time. Yes, that would seem to be
020the way to think to look at it and say whether this is something that's continuing or not. Thank you. Any other questions? Are you all agreeable to this being on the consent agenda next week? Okay. Thank you. At this time, we're going to turn it over to Dr. Deckant, talk about contracts, memorandums of understanding just for the board's purposes. Um, if we have agreement, it will move forward to the consent agenda. If we don't have agreement, we'll figure out what we want to do about it. So you have a list of uh contracts for approval, contracts for information only and twous. Do you have any questions about those that are listed on that document? I have tons of questions. So maybe cue me last. Okay. I have only one question and I meant to email
021it and I forgot. Remind me what means. Um Matt can talk about rate. I'll pass that to him. It's it's a federal funding piece. Yeah. Is um a FCC program administered by an organization called a USAC and that's a very interesting point that I'll get to in a second. um e-ate essentially there are charges on um wireless bills and wired phone bills and those funds are used to support schools and libraries internet access and so each year we do an application for various components of -ate to help support our technology in the district um there's an interesting thing happening with at the moment where there is actually a lawsuit that claims that -ate is a essentially a tax that is not levied by the government but is levied by this USAC organization and so they're
022going back and forth on whether or not is going to be allowed to continue. Um, it was before the Supreme Court a couple of weeks ago and nobody knows how it's going to land yet, but the reporting is that will probably continue in its current form with maybe some additional guidance or law behind it. I'm not sure, not a lawyer. But helps us pay for internet access essentially. Um, there's category 1, there's category 2, category 1 pays for our fiber between the central office here and our schools. That is our charter fiber um contract that's up. The second is called category 2 and um that goes on a five-year funding cycle. We get a dollar amount per student across five years and we can essentially spend that money only on network infrastructure to distribute internet
023in the school. So we're using that for switches and wireless access points this time around. This will complete that five-year cycle and spend down the budget available and provide us with almost 400 new access points for the next generation of wireless access our students need. Thank you. And just so as a followup, um, Matt, when it says things like the cost is X and these costs are 100% eligible for -ate support, is that another way of saying there's a source of funding and it's we're not paying those dollars? I mean, is that what that means? Yes. And I'll just put a little caveat there just to make you heard me hesitate. Is a federal program that gets incredibly complex really quick. So, if I get down in the weeds too far, just like pull me
024back. Um, for category one, which is $96,000 for our fiber, uh, the -ate program will pay for 60% of that cost and the remaining 40% is paid for by the district, but the state allocates that 40% through PRC073. So, it essentially we don't have to come up with any new funds. It's all provided by either at -ate or USA. Um for certain category 2 applications or uses, um the same thing happens. And so both of the contracts we're looking at right now will be paid either by -ate support or that 073 and zero cost to the district out of pocket if you will. Thank you. And just to wrap that up, um it to George's point, as we're in these tough budget times, I think it's just always important to acknowledge what when these dollar
025amounts that are large are in front of us, how who's paying for them. I just think that's helpful. Um um I would also like to add to that as part of that conversation a big thank you uh to the gentleman right there that just did all the good talking because most districts hire a consultant to do those claims. So Matt has actually saved the district considerable amount of money by being able to do that in house. We'll see if we get the money. Um, I know I jumped in because that that rate came up with a couple of these contracts. So, I um I think what might be helpful I do know Pepe has shared a number of questions and and ask for information which I've shared out to Maggie and staff. Um, but I
026think what might be helpful for the board tonight is if we just take these one at a time and figure out if we're in consensus and it should move on or if it's just a process of gathering information. Obviously, we can do that and then decide to move it on and just take a moment at a time. Does that seem okay? So, we will start then with the charter communications dark fiber, which is really unfortunate. Um, any questions about that particular contract? I don't think you had any, but I'm happy for you to any concern about that one. Moving forward to the consent agenda on Monday. Seeing none, moving on. Um, Chartwells. Um, Pepe, you had questions. Um, I would like to see, um, just generally in this form, and I've shared this with April,
027and I think you're open to doing that in the future, having dollar amounts on the sheet of paper that we're looking at. Um, and the information contracts that are below a $90,000 threshold. Um, I'd still like to see what we're agreeing to, so links would be great. Um, when it comes to Chartwells, we learned in our last schoolboard meeting, I believe, that um, the employees that are paid directly by Chartwells have a different number of days. So, their total compensation versus uh, if the same employee was paid directly by Asheville City Schools is different. um because the Asheville City Schools employees have certain extra days that they're paid for even if they're not present. I believe that's a fair summary. And so I'm wondering things about the original contract, which I would like that contract
028and the other amendments to be linked because this is just an amendment that's linked here for a review and so it would help me to see the contract and the and the previous amendments. And then I am also really wondering whether Chartwells can give us a price and we can do some math on what it would cost if Chartwells continued to have a contract with us. And they do provide some value added services for sure. And we still paid all of the employees directly through Asheville City Schools. and those employees would be um would have access to the same benefits as the grandfathered employees. And so that's just a a request of something I would like to know because I'm really uncomfortable um saving money by reducing compensation to our food and nutrition workers. And
029so that's is that a do I have questions in there? I mean, it's just a bunch of like I just want to know more and I also don't want to be saving money on at the expense of our food and nutrition workers. Um, so let me just process those out loud. I think there are in what you just said some questions for information that some people might have tonight to share back with us. there might be some information that could be sent to us between now and Monday. Um, ultimately what is before us is the renewal of the Chart Whales contract for um with specific amendments that you can all read about the price per meal. Um, I think what here's what's going through my head and I'd welcome other board members. It may be
030that a staff member tonight is able to tell us exactly what this amendment is focused on, like which piece of the larger puzzle so we have context and then we could see if any of the other information you've requested is available tonight versus over the next week. And then I think the board is going to need to make a decision about whether we um it may not be that it goes on the consent agenda, but if we need to take action this month, then we just need to move it on to um for as an action item next week for discussion. I think that's where I'm seeing this go. Do others have What I noticed that may be really positive is a fixed price for next school year for meals. I'm unclear about whether meals
031are breakfast and lunch and it's the same amount um based on reading the addendum, but I would love to get some more information on the breakfast lunch and how this connects with our hope to provide universal breakfast and universal lunch. I'm not sure. I'm looking at either. Do you want comments now? Yeah, I would love comments. Yes. Okay. So, um the year before I got here, um the RFP was put out to potentially, I think Miss Dockery worked with that at the time, um contract food services and hire a food service management company. and Chartwells answered that RFP and the RFP terms included which is standard um pretty much across any that I've seen um where the plan and part of the strategy to hire a food service management company is to start downsizing personnel
032and for the food service management company to start hiring those those employees as they transition out of the school system because just like we've talked about with other budget constraints and requirements. Our fringe benefit packages are here and public, you know, private industry packages are here. So, part of the way to try to get that program to break even is to eventually have all of our school nutrition staff employed by Chartwells. That's really one of the biggest strategies in any food service management company proposal. Obviously, other top priorities are to get as good or better quality food, to be more enticing to students, get more students to eat, to have well-rounded meals, to have a management company with, you know, tens of years of experience managing your program, to try to introduce new things, all
033those type of things. So, that said, there was a base contract in the original year. This is the third amendment. Um, one amendment was just done basically to include the fresh fruits and veggies program. um when that got awarded um I made sure that was in there this year. But this is actually identical to the prior addendums as they were amended. Um so from the beginning part of that pricing proposal has always been a fixed price per meal. Now that's per meal equivalent is what a lot of people back to that you know gray area that you know is said out loud and people don't think about exactly what that means. So basically lunch is a meal and two breakfasts are a meal to make a per meal equivalent. So that's the price Chartwells charges
034us for the entire preparation of however many meals we end up serving to qualified students on those days. So there is not a way to have a total price. We could tell you certainly at the end of this year how that came out and what that pricing looked like. Um, but it just completely depends on how much is served. Um, snacks are a whole different component. If we opt in some of the programs to serve snacks, that's a whole different pricing structure. But basically, that's kind of it in a nutshell. And that this is just simply an addendum that we have to pass every year to continue operating with Chartwells. And we have to do one each year until we decide not to do it anymore. if we decide to go back to our own
035management of the school nutrition program. And Anna, did if I missed something, please feel free to Okay, I I do have a question and I I apologize if you covered this just then. And I was looking back through my notes to see if I could um find this answer already. Um is there an impact to this contract if we qualify for universal meals? Okay, so there's an expense side and a revenue side. So right now our revenue side is made up of paid meals by students or adults and those that qualify for free and reduced meals based on their um free and reduced lunch applications or direct certification. If we the expense side remains unchanged. So basically the contract with chartwells is almost unchanged. What changes is the revenue side and our opportunity we hope
036to increase participation which would bring more revenue in the program to offset those fixed meal costs that Chartwells is currently contracted to charge us for the meal preparation. So what we're hoping is is those that gap gets bigger more revenue cost about here and we we keep making that gap grow. Um, but they did increase and it is in the contract each year for them to increase that per mill equivalent price by the CPI index. And the last couple of years that's been a little steep. We're hoping that continues to move back to a a more modest increase per year. But I have as a cost-saving measure also asked them to continue to separately invoice for salary and fringe benefits because in most cases those roll right into the total cost of their operation and
037then the CPI is applied to the entire operating cost and because of those high percentages the last couple of years I asked them to continue to direct invoice us for their salaries and benefits and that way we would save that that increase each year by the CPI. So, we're saving a little bit of money that way as well. Thank you. I think just to draw this to a close, is it possible I think there was a request for the underlying contract to which this is an amendment that could be emailed to us to have ahead of next week. Um, is there any other information that could be emailed us to this week, Pepe? That Yeah, that would be helpful. but also you're saying that they invoice us um directly. So that's the that amount of
038money is just the food costs and and doesn't include the salaries and benefits, right? And so we so we directly pay what they invoice for salary and benefits and we pay our staff the same way, you know, like separate from the food costs. Um um our staff just remained on payroll like they've always been. Okay. And Charles invoices in two parts. Yes, sir. So if they invoice in two parts, really it comes down to at any time we could decide that we want to pay all the employees as Asheville City Schools employees and that doesn't impact the Chartwells contract one way or the other. Well, it would in in the fact that those are their employees. They are not ours and they would have to terminate their employment with Chartwells and be rehired or hired
039by us. Um, so I don't know if they'd be willing to entertain that option or not. We'd have to talk to them. That would be a complete change in the contract. Is do they lose money if those employees are paid directly by us? No, we lose money. Well, I get that it will cost us more that process, but we would lose money. Yes, sir. Okay. Okay. We would lose money. Um, and the employees would gain money theoretically. their their employees could possibly be employed for some days that our employees are currently. The thing they would not be able to do that they would lose that our employees do not get is unemployment in the summertime. as a private employer, they can offer their employees unemployment in the summertime when that is not possible for our
040employees because that is not we do we do not um end their employment in the summer just like any other 10-month person, a teacher, a classified employee doing a custodian job, bus driver. They continue to be employed, but they actually qualify in a layoff type situation with a private employer to get paid during the summer under unemployment. That is really useful new information and I appreciate that. And so that is something that the that our our staff slash their staff um do they know this? Our community of it as far as I or they always have as far as I understand. Okay. I appreciate you. Our staff do not but they do. Yes sir. Um I'm looking at the board. I think a request for more information has been made and will be sent to
041us. Um, we can put it on the consent agenda or we can assume there's going to be more conversation on Monday. I just looking for the will of the board. Yes, the latter. Okay. So, it will not go on the consent agenda, but this contract amendment will be up for a vote um at the board meeting and we'll get some more information between now and then. Um, next is the Encore Technology Group, which all I got rate written down. I forget which one it is. Um, is there questions about this one? 639 or how many routers or or switches is that? That is a lot. That's going to essentially put a new wireless access point in every classroom and instructional space in the district. And this is because our we have end of life issues
042or um tell would you tell us about the replacement cycle for these items? This is using the -ate category 2 which has a five-year funding cycle. We are at the end of the funding cycle. We are maximizing the use of those funds to futureproof our network for what comes next. There is a new standard in Wi-Fi that is emerging and when we have these in place with the right switches and controllers, we can better manage noise in the air and give a better uh experience to students when they're on the internet. Are we ready for this to be on the consent agenda next week? I just wanted to reiterate after the previous conversation, I mean, understanding that it's -ate funding and DPI connectivity initiatives will cover this cost, but we're looking at $460,000, right? So,
043just like again, I I understand, but just want to be aware like as as things go out into the community, sometimes nuance gets lost and just be aware of that. This is very clearly one of those circumstances where either we use the money in a way like this or we lose it. Yeah. All right. We have agreement that this will go on the consent agenda. Um so next is exterior experts which is a contract for painting at Isaac Dixon. Um, I know that one board member has been in conversation with um, April Dockery and may have gotten all the questions answered. I guess I'm just asking the board, do you have any additional requests for information about this contract? I was wondering um, did we receive other bids for this? Sorry. Yes. Uh I think
044five bids. One we had to disqualify because they emailed it in instead of concealed envelope, but there was five. We explain this was a formal request. Yeah. This was an RFP that went out for two weeks for formal requests for uh proposals. They had to be sent into central office sealed. uh a time was set to open these publicly and uh they were the lowest bidder. Uh in the process of determining where they qualified, they do a ton of work for a lot of school systems down east for about 15 years. So they're very adapt in moving in or working in school systems. Um so I feel pretty comfortable. We've never worked with them before, but I feel pretty comfortable with them. They spent they were the first uh person to contact me and come
045up here and they spent almost three hours measuring walking through the school. They really did a thorough job in their investigation part of it. And my concerns that I expressed to Miss Dockery was just that we make sure we don't have paint fumes smells from the internal painting that disrupt the students and particularly the EOGs. And I think that's something that you guys are going to take care of. That's fantastic. So, just to let you know, the state contracts out state contract paint each year. Uh, currently at Sher and Williams, they are required to use a low VOC paint, which there's not a lot of toxic fume. You're obviously going to smell it some, but there's not really a lot of fumes out there. In this case here, all this inside work is going to
046be done during the summer. The exterior can start before kids. Obviously, nothing will be going on during testing, but the exterior part of it can start during uh prior to school uh letting out. Thank you. That really helps. And and also that we're going to or they are going to take care with the existing murals. Yes. Which are near and dear to some of us. Yeah. There will be some touch-up. There's some scratches on them, so there'll be some touch-ups, but yeah, those will those will stay. And all those murals were done with Promar 200, the same paint. So, correct. Yeah, that's correct. Thank you very much. Are we good with it going on the consent agenda? Yes, we are. Um, Tarhill paving and asphalt for Lucy Herring there. Pepe has asked questions. He's gotten
047some feedback. Are there any additional requests for information? Uh, I definitely because we have two different contracts, one above the threshold and one below. Whenever that comes up for a company, I want to see all the contracts because the cumulative is above the threshold for board approval. So, if we can get that in the next week where we can look at that, that'd be great. Yeah, I don't understand. Well, right now we don't have a link to the Claxton parking lot repaving project. So there's a two separate way we have to the way we put those out or request for proposals as projects that we know is going to exceed a certain dollar amount. So the Lucy Herring project costs considerably more. It's a larger geographic area to fall. There's more things that need to
048be done. The Claxton which you're seeing is less than the threshold. So that's just to let you know. Um but we did put out the RFP for this. We only had one vendor for this particular one that came, one proposal came and we were able to move forward with them. And I think what you're saying, well, does that answer your question? It is just if we have what I want to avoid is either the reality or the perception that contracts are being split up to be below a threshold. Oh, I understand. Thank you for that clarification. Uh also just to make you aware there are certain contracts that by law really have to be separated. I give you an example asbestous is one of those. Um the way that works with the state you have
049to get a separate permit per address. So it's kind of hard in our department to separate doing these the paving all as one versus the asbestous. So it's almost easier to just treat them all separately as separate addresses. But uh but yes, we can get that information on that other contract for you. Does that help? It's just so that the board can see it. Absolutely. Absolutely. Okay. Thank you. Knowing that additional information will be shared. Are we ready for this to be on the consent agenda or do we anticipate further discussion? We are ready for it to be on the consent agenda. Okay. Um, last is Trafera. Um, sorry, I'm just pulling this up. And just consistent with what we've been talking about. This is our money. This is not -ate or DPI money. Um,
050and so board members, what questions do you have about this contract or information would you like to have? I just want to understand why you know tell me why this is necessary right now. So the 900 student laptops represented here are what we need to be able to retire our 5-year-old student laptops and replace them with new ones. So, um, these devices will go to essentially our freshman at Asheville High and Silsa, to new students who move into those schools, um, and to our sixth graders at the middle school, and then some for grades 3, four, or five. Um, this is a not necessarily a question that can be answered right now. I just wonder. I feel like we went to laptops and we went to a lot of use of technology and using these
051Chromebooks in three through six, say. Um, and I I just want to make sure that we're consistently revisiting whether or not that's a good idea and whether or not those are being used consistently. um because I know that there are at least some teachers who don't use them very much. And anyway, I just it's something that I it's a huge expense on the part of the district. If we think it's necessary, then we think it's educationally necessary and obviously we need our students to be proficient on computers. But I just think that it's um I want us I want us to always be asking those questions and not assume that because we've had computers available to our third through sixth graders or whatever that that's always that one computer per student is really necessary. Um
052on the retirement question specifically, do those five-year-old computers need to be retired? the the way we have things structured is the we buy a Chromebook and intend to run it for four years and we buy it with a four-year warranty. That's one of the reasons the price is a little bit more than you might if you just bought off of Amazon. Um so in that fouryear time the student accidentally drops the device, it will get fixed at no cost to us. There's a lot of value in that. At the end of that four years, they come off of that warranty and they're old and they've had a lot of rough use. You know, the students have been using the devices for four years. What we do in that fifth year is we use those for
053loaners while devices are out for repair and some we cycle down to the younger grades. By the end of that fifth year, occasionally we'll find some that are still worthy of being used, but they are old enough and rickety enough that really they're not very functional. Um, I don't know how else to answer that other than I wouldn't want to use one of those devices. Have a hard time giving it to our students. Um, I appreciate that and I don't really doubt it. I just look at the price tag and because of the same reasons that we've articulated earlier, I need to hear uh I mean I have a computer at my house that is 20 years old and I still use it. But admittedly, I have not been um 10 or 12 years old
054while I was using that and I wasn't throwing it around and you know, so I hear all of that. But I just think it's important for us to ask those questions right now because this is a big commitment and this this could represent a significant portion of positions that we may have to cut this year. And so I think it's really important to ask the question of whether or not that we have to do this right now. I certainly appreciate that and I will um let you know that the what we're doing here is changing devices. we've been using a certain type of device and this marks a change to another company, another device. Um, with that change comes a reduction in cost of almost $150 per unit. So, times 900 units, that's considerable saving
055over what we could have paid had we not made that change. Um, that device type two years ago cost $168 less. And when I saw that price increase, you know, I started looking, I was like, we can't spend that much on student devices. we need to do better. Um, and so this device has a lot of the same features, same size, fits in with our environment, and has a slightly faster processor and double the amount of memory, which for a student device, 8 gigs of RAM is a big deal. Um, that's going to really help us get the most out of those devices in year three and four as the internet continues to develop. Um, I'm not specifically answering your question about are we sure we really need it. Um, that is a much larger
056question than just how much these devices cost and how we're sourcing them, etc. So, and I appreciate the information specifically about how much and why. Now, I would really love to see if it hasn't been done already, and this is a CNI folks or whoever, I really hope that we are asking our third through fifth grade teachers whether or not they need these devices. I would like to know um whether this is something that we are consistently still using or maybe even third through sixth. So if they are needed then great but if they're not let's go ahead and have that conversation or make sure that they are ask that that that is being asked and and maybe it's just me that's wonders but that's a very fair question and a lot of times when
057that question comes up we do kind of circle back to end of grade testing is using these devices and so even if teachers aren't using it by choice for their instruction there is a component of preparation for that event that needs to happen in the classroom. Yes. And that wouldn't necessarily mean every student had to Indeed. Indeed. All year long. Um, okay. Thank you. Amen. I got a question. Oh, hey, can that be a grant? Can we get a grant to pay for that or is it too late to try to get a grant for that? I'm not aware grant that we could get specifically for for this purpose. Um yeah. Okay. Second question here. uh your inquire technology group that fund that you got in that could that be part of this TRIFFAR also
058if you so the the -ate rules say you can only use the funds to distribute the internet within your within your school um which is what we use it for not for student devices you're not allowed to use that - money for student devices it's just a regulation of the Okay. I did know. Yeah. Thanks. Can I ask a question of Heidi? Um, for an amount of this size, is there a certain fund that this has to come out of or is it is it just general that this could come out of any general fund? Well, the state doesn't all lot us any money for equipment or technology except for what Matt already outlined on the 073 match and a small amount for 015 school technology which you remember how much it was this year.
059It's almost nothing now 40,000 I think so. Um so it would come close to meeting this need. Um so here the strategy has always been to incorporate that as part of the capital budget every year um and to keep those um refresh processes going. And just as a frame of reference uh Rutherford was a much more high poverty district than this and our refresh cycle was actually a lease and it was three years. So the cost here is significantly less for these devices than it is in many other districts. I would just like to say again that doesn't necessarily address the question of whether we should or shouldn't but just on the cost side of things and and that was a great savings Matt identified on getting these different units. So, but it was basically
060reserved to local or capital or our choice. Okay. Okay. Unless Melissa just happened to find a miracle grant out there that we could apply for for these. Okay. Thank you. Do you have another question? I do want to echo what Amy said. I think those are good points that we need to look at. Um whether it is uh what is best for our students needs to have uh particularly like you know the three through six and I understand the end of grade testing needs. Um I this connects this brings up for me Dr. Furman. Um what I have seen elsewhere where students don't have devices and there is not I don't know that we're mandated to have a um uh a work from home uh plan for students. uh and it may be not having
061the devices and having inclement weather days that are not remote learning days would allow us to have more in-person instruction. And so those are things that come up. I know it's not related to this. Um what I'm hearing from board members is understandably some um concern about the price tag. in present climate. So we there have been some requests for additional information that are shortterm as in within the week. There have been some requests for information longer term to take a deeper dive into do we need as many. Um I note that the Chromebooks would be purchased in July which I assume is so that these freshmen and these can be onboarded. I I think what I need to know from the board is understanding the concerns. Are we okay approving this now? Do we
062um we don't have to put it on the consent agenda. We can put it on the regular agenda and get more information and have further conversation. What is it the board would like to do? And how before I ask you guys that um just for timing purposes, when do you I'm just looking at you Matt. If to purchase them in July, do you need the contract done in May? Probably. The vendor we work with um will prepare the order if I let them know it was approved by the board um as soon as you approve it. and that will allow them to ship them as soon as possible and give my team a you know couple of weeks to get things ready for the incoming freshman and sixth graders. So it would we would be
063hardressed to order these um or to get the approval at the end of June and get them turned around in time to prepare for students by the beginning of the school year. Okay. I think for my part, I'm probably fine for it to go on the consent agenda notwithstanding my questions. I just want to make sure that those questions are being asked. I want to make sure that uh you know and if if it turns out I guess I'm going to just trust you, the staff, Dr. Ferman, and your team to really ask this before we place that order. find out and maybe you already have the information. Um, but if the questions haven't been posed of the teachers directly and the principles, but especially the teachers, but the principles because they speak for the
064teachers, do you want these? Do you need these? Do you use these? Are they valuable? If they are, then it's an investment. We need to make it make sense and the timing is good and the price is good. I'll just speak, you know, anecdotally, Derrick's not here. Stephanie, I was going to ask them. Um, but when I'm in classes at the high school, I mean, not talking about the high school to be these, right? These are ones that would be going to our rising nth graders. Understood. Except that if they're going to the rising ninth graders, then that means their computers are going down to the younger ones, which might suggest that they could keep those and not buy these if they didn't have to go down elsewhere. Does that make sense? It does. And
065what I understood from Matt, I'm not trying to be argumentative, but what I understood from Matt is the life cycle of that these are ready to retire. So there would be a shortage if we didn't replace them. Is that right, Matt? That's correct. Yes. So even if then I may have misunderstood. I thought you were saying that you have to pull down the ones that are at the high school now down into the lower grades. Am I wrong? It's a both. Let me rephrase the the cycle make it make more sense. Um the way I do it is I look at our uh enrollment projection for grades 3 through nine for the or 3 through 12 for the coming year. So I found that number and I multiplied by 0 27 27 gives me a
06625% purchase a year with a little bit extra for breakage and loss. Right? So that that gives us that four-year cycle. So if we don't buy 25% of that student population, that means some students in that third grade through 12th grade window will not have the new device that our plan is built on them having. Somebody will have to go without and we would probably start at grade three and you know adjust. But um so it's it's both we cycle down and we buy for that grade level at the same time. Right. Okay. But I I I guess the end result in as I hear it is if you had to go for if if it turned out that three through five don't use them very much and there was an reassessment of whether or
067not it was necessary for every child in those grades or three through six to have a computer. I'm guessing three through five is more likely then you could perhaps avoid buying quite so many this year as you otherwise would. Certainly if we decided grades three, four, five don't need one to one level of access, then we could buy fewer computers. Yes. Thank you. So, thank you for that. And well said. I still need to know, is this going on the consent agenda? Okay. Um, not everybody seems to be on board, so let's put it on the agenda next week and we can take a vote up or down on it. Yeah, I' I'd just like to echo Jesse's question about grant funding and and to take that into consideration as a potential stop gap for
068next year. Um, and along with the information about whether grades three through five are absolutely critical and I know that's a short timeline. I think let me say to you all what I think you're saying. It may be that we approve this because the timing is now and we need them now and this is the way we've done it. And we're asking that looking ahead we have conversations about do we need one-on-one at the lower grades? Do are there grants available? I I can't imagine there's a grant that we would get in time to to do this, right? And so we are expressing some interest in making sure that when we get to this time next year that we've thought about these questions. I mean, that's what I'm hearing from people. But yes, I would
069say that yes on the grant funding because I agree that there's no way we can get that by next year. I don't think it's unreasonable to ask this to the question of our lower grades so that if an I'm not I'm okay, as I said, with having this on the consent agenda because I trust staff. But I'd like those questions to be asked. I'd like us just to revisit whether or not we need these in the lower grades at the same one one ratio that we've had them and if not then how can we possibly save money on this contract is my question or this order. Thank you. I'm looking at Maggie and maybe that's information we can have by next week. Um so just to clarify it's not going on the consent agenda although
070we're generally understand it's important. There may just be some more information next week and we can discuss it. I'm seeing people not. Okay. Excellent. Moving on. We have two policies for second read. So before we move into the two policies for second read because it's also information only. So, right before we came into this meeting, I received an email from Coach Washington with some questions um about the cheer procedure. And so, um I would like to ask the board to remove um procedure code 3620P so that I can work um some additional time with with Coach Washington to get some additional concerns addressed. So that takes us back to to policy 2110 and 5030. Are there any questions? I'm sorry. Um, what questions do you have about 2010? You want to put me in the
071queue last? Sure. Other members, any questions about 2010? Our old friend 2010. Okay. Hearing nobody. I'm sorry, Sarah. Oh, I'm sorry. Sorry. I don't know why I didn't notice this before. I think this district has done a really good job of um finding personal pronouns that often are he and she and changing it to they. And I'm noticing in under qualifications a qualified voter and resident of the election district from which he or she seek. Um I'd love to see if that's a possibility to change he and he he or she today they I'm sorry that I know we're on second road but the second read but that has the added benefit I think of making the verb agree. Okay. Um, okay. Pepe, your questions. Request for information. I've got your email if you want
072me to Thank you. I was uh looking for that uh email that was sent. Um there we go. So, I'm I'm still having the same uh problem with this. um uh under uh general statute uh chapter 11-4 chapter 11-11 um it is so I chose to affirm um but our general statutes the default is to um solemnly swear or solemnly and sincerely swear with the so help me God and I don't want to be in the position of our policy policy saying that we have to affirm board members in and we're not going to have swearing in ceremonies. We're going to have affirming ceremonies and that be inconsistent with um with the general statutes and cause some consternation uh with our friends in Raleigh um or um consternation with somebody's uh conscience. So I think
073it's a really easy thing to give the option to swear or affirm and the option to say so help me God. That's an easy one. Um and I'm also thinking that we need to discuss um whether to end the compensation for schoolboard members as of November at the end of their elected terms instead of having overlapping payments in December. and we should discuss having new members who have taken the oath of office seated for the first scheduled meeting of the board in December following the general election. And I think this is the appropriate place to do this. So maybe we have some discussion and maybe I'm outvoted on uh next week, but um I just want to put that out there. Here's what I'm I think um Anna Gillespie to the extent that um changes
074are modest the pronoun change that doesn't prevent this from just moving we can make that change and keep going to the extent that the first version that of this that was brought to us said just to remind Pepe it did say seek and affirm and then you asked us to change it to be consistent with what was read which I think is the only reason why we got to this. But now I think you're asking that we put seek and affirm back in which it not seek. I'm so sorry. Swear. I did mean swear. Um but with the exception of it saying swear and affirm which is the language we had before. If we put that back in is that minor does it take us off track? So I mean with it being a policy
075if the board is in agreement with it with this being something that you guys have already talked through a lot you can have the option to move it forward and move to vote but the board has to agree to do that. It has to be like a vote to move it forward not send it back for another read. So you can vote to move it forward without another read. And just to get this clear, so on that so the he she they not a problem on this if if the board is in consensus that the language here modified to go back to the swear and affirm language that we had before. If we are in agreement, we could say yes, that can go on. Yes. Okay. So that's one thing. And for clarity, there was
076a missing paragraph on the on the initial version. Apologies. There was a missing paragraph. So, we've added So, we can talk about that. I'm still looking at Anna. Compensation is not in this policy. Compensation is not in this policy. So, just putting that out there as a fact that this doesn't have anything to do with compensation. And then the last thing, Sarah, compensation is covered under 2130. It's compensation has a separate policy. Okay. It is covered in the sense of when a board member is seated which is covered in this policy and so that was the last thing I was going to get to is and I and what I am trying to get from the board is what you have appetite for here the last task in front of us is whether we wish
077to revisit the membership in terms of office I'm sorry the I can't find it and I'm sorry where is it it's Um, so Sarah, while you're looking for that for the um when a board member takes um steps into their new role, um the reason December is in there is because House Bill 400, which was the House bill that um led to Asheville City Schools becoming an elected board. In section two, the third paragraph, the third sentence up from the bottom of that paragraph says that it will be the member shall take office at the first regular meeting of the board in December following their election and the terms of their predecessors shall expire at that same time. So that's why because of that house bill that December is is in the policy. So board
078members, I I have I'm very keen to resolve this one way or the other and I need you all to tell me what you want. I I'm fine with I don't really I'm fine to add back in swear as an option. Um that's fine with me, especially if it can be done and we all agree. going forward. So, it would say do solemnly and sincerely affirm or in parentheses or swear, right? That's It used to be the opposite. Okay. Swear or affirm. I could care less. Yeah. Oh, I see. That's the one that's down there. Anyway, that's fine. Um I think the language about the meeting in December is is consistent with what the House bill said. So, that makes sense to me. others. I concur that we could do that right now. Everything Amy
079just said around the oath, I agree. I'm happy to have it edited in that way right now and um agree that alignment with what's in the House bill, which is December and the pronoun change that George requested. I would say we could agree to that right now. Liza's nodding her head. George, just to be clear what I'm hearing so far, and I haven't gotten to this side yet, but pronoun is good. Um, where it says affirm, it would say swear parenthesy affirm in a couple places. I'm hearing so far folks are good with that. And so far, I'm hearing folks are good with board meeting held in December to be consistent with state statute. Okay, Jesse and Pepe, tell me what you're thinking. Really? because it's going on the consent agenda. It's not, Jesse. I
080just need to figure it out. Um, everything that you folks are are on board with. Yay. Um, what I want to avoid is we had with my seating confusion and consternation because we call the second meeting of the month a regular meeting, capital R. And in the statute, there's a lowercase regular. And I don't want the next person who's seated to not be able to be a part of the work session. One work around is we simply schedule the work session in the in the regular meeting on the same day. But I want our new board members or re however that that happens to have access and participation in the close session at the at the work session and and be fully apprised so that they vote on everything. So any amount of clarification um
081you know it could be first scheduled board meeting in December or anything that we that we think is agreeable just so that there's clarity so we don't wind up having confusion over the word regular or consternation. Um may I make a suggestion related to that? What if we just said that um that first board meeting in that first work session in December and I'm Dr. Ferman looking at you to see if this sounds okay to you. The board will take no action on that day on that particular like today we took action on a contract that's unusual. Most of the time we don't take action during a a a work session. Right? Am I wrong about this? That is correct. Okay. Everyone's in a blue frequently. I mean sometimes we do but some but most
082of the time I feel like we don't. So I'm just suggesting that to avoid this challenge, we just say okay, we won't take action that day. So the new p the person coming in is allowed to be present and we can agree that they can be present. Um but there will be no vote cast and therefore there's they don't necessarily the only issue then is closed session and um I I don't know whether we you know I don't know if there's a way around that or not like one one way that I could imagine it is that you can add that closed session to the regular board meeting the week later and that that closed session can happen at that board meeting. Um I don't know. I'm just trying to work around it without having
083to um to change. So, one of the the elegant things about the way it's done now is that you have an outgoing board member who comes down off the dis or whatever. You know, there's sort of a a nice changing of the guard that happens at that first public meeting where we have the dis set up and everything and I like that. Um and so I'm trying to figure out how to avoid having that. Does that make sense? So, we did that for several years um before you were here because there was uh with the start of um Joyce Brown being on the board, she requested doing the work sessions and the regular meetings on the same day and so you can still have the all of those ceremonial events. I don't like the idea
084of the work session and the look I don't know that I'll be on the board the next time this happens but I don't like the idea of a work session on the day same day as the regular session because our work sessions are already too long and there is no way we should be here for five or six hours as opposed to the three we'll we might be here tonight and then another two for the regular meeting and every other school district because it says the first uh meeting in December for other districts. They all do their outgoing celebration or their cake in November. So, it's not unprecedented. So, and as it's written under C right now, it says before taking office, newly elected board members will take and sign the following oath, right? Does
085that necessarily mean because I remember when I came on, we had two. I did a a swearing in sign and then we did something publicly. I and I and I don't disagree with you, Pepe, that I think it feels cleaner to me that if the first time this board meets, whether it's work or regular, that the that the newest newest board members are a part of that. It feels weird to me to have a work session where you've got lots of information being shared and then new people have to come up a week later to vote on stuff that they weren't necessarily a part of. So, is there a way to say um I think it's just to me it feels like words smmithing at this point. Um or affirmation at the at the first
086meeting of the board. Like I know that feels very, you know, it's it's just a subtle change, but to say at the first meeting of the board in December. So, that's what Pepe's asking for. It is up to the board to decide. I just want to be clear about one thing, Anna. That means we would be swearing people in at a work session, not at the board meeting. So, it's going to feel, right? But could you also then go through because again, like I was sworn in at a private thing and then you have like the ceremony that Amy's talking about. I understand. I am happy to do the will of the board on this. I feel like this policy is all about us and I don't like that. I'm ready for us to move
087on to something more useful. So, I just need you all to decide, do you want people to be sworn in at the board meeting, excuse me, at the work session, the first meeting of the board in the month of December, whatever kind of meeting that is. Is that what people want? And then that's what's going to happen because we're going to be super clear about that. The statute says that they must be sworn in and the statement filed before they are seated. So, we do that anyway. But if we can insert the word first before the word board in that um that first sentence under C oath of office, that satisfies me. And I think that's what George was talking about. Okay. So, everybody's good on the pronoun. Yes, everybody is good, I think, on
088adding the word first board meeting held in December. And we're all going to accept what that looks like. I I don't care what it looks like. We just we're not going to talk about this again. Whatever it looks like, that's what's going to happen at the first board meeting. And then the third thing was add swear affirm everybody. Jesse, you have any concerns about this? Yes. No, I'm good. Okay. And was there the part about so help me God as an option in parentheses? So, thank you for saying that was referenced. says that tracks and we just weren't saying it but when you say swear or affirm you have to say that so at the end it would say so help me God parenthesy omit phrase of affirming thank you for catching that tracks yeah
089okay Anna is that enough that we can say we're all in agreement or you think I got to go we got to go to second read again no I think you're fine if you're all in agreement just for the record can we get a vote saying that you're willing to move forward forward on it without another I I I move that we uh that we go forward without a second read as we have all discussed. Second. All in favor? Any opposed? Unanimously approved. Thank you all. Okay. And we will send that out with the corrections tomorrow afternoon. Thank you. Okay. Mindful of the time, folks. We have one other policy to discuss. Um, we talked about it last month. We have it here in front of us for second read. To be clear, it is
090about the use of facilities. At our request, it now allows for-profit organizations to use it. That has never happened yet because we haven't approved it. And that is the change in front of us. And so I I do want to differentiate between the change that's in front of it and then additional changes we may want to make to it which we don't necessarily have to make. Now are there questions, requests for information about 5030? I would be more comfortable putting this on the consent agenda if we had a date to revisit um the school related groups and particularly PTOs if that is something that is agreeable to the chair and vice chair Maggie where would you I'm thinking about the calendar that you shared with us Does that fit in somewhere with other topics that
091will be before us in the coming year? Um, not necessarily, but I mean we can put it where I mean I'll just make a note and we'll put it on wherever and bring it back up at that point. What do y'all think? I think that's the appropriate way to move forward that we need to get this policy approved with change and then come to agreement. You've got on our agenda tonight long-term ideas. So, it's the perfect space for us to then say, let's let's put this on the long-term list. Okay. Is that sufficient? I would rather know when, but I guess that's a different agenda item, but uh Okay. Right. I mean, knowing that I mean, I guess I I tell you as board chair, I don't know that if you can follow up with
092me if you think it's taking too long, but knowing that we'll look for the appropriate time for it to be part of a larger conversation, if you can live with that for now, I think that's probably the best we got. Okay. So, any other comments about this or can it move forward for approval on second read? I'm seeing that we can go on the consent agenda. Geez, that surprises me. Sorry to disappoint. I'm happy about it. I think they're both on the consent agenda, right? Yes. Excellent. Okay. The other three procedures are information only with the removal of the cheer procedure. Okay. I think Thank you very much. Um, at this time I'm going to turn it over to Maggie to the 2526 year at a glance board of ed calendar. Um, yes. So, what
093I requested that the board do is think about some of those big things that they want to address as a board for the upcoming school year. Um, knowing that, you know, I put the budget stuff on there, trying to be mindful of when we do some of those longer work sessions, knowing that we also have a retreat scheduled for September and March to take some time to do some front loing and a little bit of a longer setting if we need to to talk about some of these bigger items. But um just really wanting the board to share what are the topics that you want to cover um in these and then I've selected you know kind of the next round of reform policies to start looking at as a board as well. Um so
094I have some of those for us to consider and when we might calendar those out. Um so just looking for what are some of the topics that the board would like to discuss as um we start planning out and putting all put these big topics on the calendar so that we can try to keep these meetings to a a a reasonable amount of time. I wonder if you could start by telling us a little bit about how you envision the products of strategic planning that we're about to have playing in. What what do you hope that looks like in terms of our work long term? Would it would those come onto this calendar in some way? It it will, but more as updates. Um so hope we're working with the Dr. Lavender and Julie Keni
095to get that um graduate profile done by June so that the board can review it and hopefully take action on that in June. Um so getting some updated time frames on that. Once we have that graduate profile approved then I will be convening some small workg groupoups with my team to start moving the action planning pieces forward. So next year that first part of the some first part of the school year we'll be putting teams together to address things like let's say you know we'll have four or five buckets of work to be done. You know one is usually human resources and retention of staff and staff development. um one is usually operational efficiencies and budgeting things. One's typically about you know student achievement. So we'll form these smaller working groups to start building the
096plan of okay what is the work that we need to be done. So really as we look at strategic planning coming up um you know June will be a big time for next month to look at the graduate profile review that provide some feedback and then then it's a lot of work at the CO level to put those action plans to start building action plans for the different buckets of need that will also have been identified um through this um analysis piece. So and that is just my group working and then providing regular updates to the board as we get those as we move forward with that work. So it's not going to be a lot of you know sit for the board and get big work done but more hearing updates and providing some
097of your your overall feedback on the work that's being done. Can I make a request to add to this? um would be taking a a look at data on student achievement and discipline um beginning of year, midyear and end of year. Yep. That is actually part of what we look at with our normal work planning. So yeah. Okay. Um I would like uh to this goes along with the facility study I suppose. Um, I think we need to look early in the year at whether or not we need to consider any more school closings that Yes. So, as we look at identifying the scope of work for that feasibility study, that will be part of that. That study will go on, we're hoping it finishes up December, January, and anticipating that that's one of the
098outcome recommendations for the board to consider. is that you Whoopsie. Yeah. So, we know that takes time and we know that the more time we have to consider and give community input and all the rest of it so that we can hear and consider and think and I guess what I don't want to do is end up at the end of next year. Yep. And have the county commissioners ask us why we haven't assessed that more carefully in time to do something by the end of next year. So, let me clarify. They will be part of their process during August, September will be community input. So, they're going to do they'll look at the data. They'll come up with a couple scenarios. I'm envisioning and then they'll say, "Hey, we're going to do community input.
099Give us your feedback on these scenarios." Those scenarios very well could be you've got to consolidate to four elementaryaries. You should consolidate your two high schools. So, that will be part of that. So when the board does take action, it will be in December or January. Yes, that is the that's the route we're moving down. Okay. Thank you. And then the other piece that I was curious about is a dual, you know, we're losing a number of students to dual language immersion program. Yep. We see this every time we get a um an enrollment report. So within that conversation, it would be interesting to and that may I don't know if that's a board thing or a or a staff. You youth have already been in conversation with um Shannon Bagot about looking at a
100dual language program and what that looks like to add that and then start it and then scale it across five schools. Um because I am a proponent of making sure that whatever program we offer students is accessible regardless of what school they're at instead of it being a program that they have to fight to get into one school because they want to be a part of that program at that school. So as we look at adding different types of programs and opportunities for students, there should be an understanding that that's an equitable access for any parent um to decide like, hey, I don't have to choose this school because that's the dual language school. They should be able to have that opportunity at every school that we have. Okay. Disagree with that. I don't mean
101to Hang on. I'm sorry. I'm not quite finished, Pepe. Um the the third thing that comes to mind is the impact of the desegregation order and whether or not we we talked about this last year. Um, and as we imagine what our district might look like in the wake of a um of a facility study and again like not anticipating exactly how that would go, I'd love to have the freedom to consider whatever we think would be best for our students of color. And if um if getting out from under that desegregation order would be useful, and it may, I'd like to talk about that and figure out how to make that happen. Before I have other comments, I want to clarify something. Um, Maggie, you've asked us to give suggestions about things we want
102to talk about, and that's what you're hearing. Yes. From folks. And Right. Yeah. I didn't do anything wrong. No, no, no. I What I I So, I have one thing I just actually want to say about the um data that you talked about and you talked about they might come back and say we do this or that. they might also come back and say you don't need to do anything. So, I wanted to I just felt the need to clear the air on that. Then I know that some of the things that you said other board members don't agree and I think there may be some things other board members think we should talk about and others won't agree. So, I'm just clarifying for us that right now we're trying to say what we think
103is important and I'm not sure that the purpose of tonight is to debate what other people say is important. I just want to be clear about that. Yes. So, gathering information. So, um, Amy, I'm going to let you finish and then let other board members speak, but were there other items you had? I think that's all that comes to mind right away. Thank you. Okay. Other Would you like to go? And then other people have things to say, too. So, but again, just to be clear, we're not necessarily debating. We're just offering other ideas. Okay. in September and October. Um, two priorities that I would have for the fall months, early in the year, um, to focus on a commitment and a plan for early childhood education, understanding that it was the county that asked
104us, drafted the plan, and asked us to create the early childhood education program at Asheville. uh at the Asheville City Preschool building at 441 Haywood Road back in the mid 1990s and they had made commitments on funding that program. And I really want to get back to those commitments and get back to that cooperative relationship so that we can expand early childhood education. And so having that in September or October seems like the time to do it so that then we can have staff putting in the correct uh grant proposals for the Bunkham County Early Childhood Education Committee in the spring and also with the dog trust and anywhere else we can get funding for that to close the gap. also understanding that Head Start may be under fire in the current administration. And then
105separately um in September or October, I am hoping that we will spend some time figuring out ways to expand enrollment. Um and part of that is conveying stability in what we're doing. And for me, the sooner that we can get past the idea that closing schools saves money and we can work through the numbers and look at the losses and get past the myth that we have to have reduced enrollment because at our presentations to the county commissioners, Bunkham County Schools, Bungham County Schools was able to show that they actually increased enrollments So anything that we can do and I think we need a month to really look at this to look at how do we whether it's a moratorum on out of district fees whether it is a moratorum on school school closures or
106whatever else staff and community can come up with having having time for that is is really important to me and I think maybe to some other board members other input for Maggie. Maggie, I really appreciate that uh you have started the um the student advisory core. I would love and and I know that like it's a regular boarding meeting where we want to uplift everything that's happening, but it feels like work gets you know work sessions. So, I'd love to have some opportunities to be meeting with some students or even some educators and whatever. So, we're getting some [Music] um I love all of our voices, but so we're getting more voices into this room during work sessions. I don't have a specific month or anything, but that's just something I'd love to see. Yeah.
107And so, what I'll be working on right now is I've got a survey. So, I it felt like it's too close to the end of the year to have students start to sign up now. So they're going to sign up to come to work sessions starting in August. So there'll be two representatives from the middle school, two representatives coming from the high school. They'll have a report out on information that they will share with the board um at the work sessions. And we'll we're working on a way to move forward studying some other districts that have student representatives sit on the board to make sure that we've got a good process in place. I'm not there ideas. So Maggie just tell us what you will do with what you just received. Yeah. So I think
108for the first thing is to really look at what these items are. Some of them I need to discuss with legal to say okay what's the process outlining with my team what is the timeline look like to really dig into these in an approp you know a really deep and authentic way um and then bring that once I have that timeline done bring that back to the board it should be able to bring this back to um the June work session for review and further discussion um and then what I'll do as well is I've kind of picked three or four reform policies for us to work on we've done a lot um this year with the grading ing and promotion that we're hopefully going to wrap up soon. Um I think it's time for
109us to really look at um policy 3000 which is goals and objectives for our educational program as well as some of our curriculum um policies to really dig in and how are we aligning our curriculum to make sure that it is a highlevel rigorous curriculum being provided for each and every student across the district um so that our students are getting what they need. So, as I've been digging in, I'm focusing really in on our um kind of curriculum type policies. So, I've got three that I'll share for the board just to start reviewing. Um and then if you go through the policy manual and you find one you think would be more important, I'll just leave that for the board to kind of bring to my attention. So, then by June, I'll have calendared
110these out and bring that to the board for um kind of outlining what our work will be starting in August. somewhat connected to Amy's comment. Um, Miss Persche, can we get a count of by grade of the students that are in the dual language programs so we know how many are already out of district for that? Okay, that's helpful. Thank you. Did you get what you need from us on that one, Maggie? Did you get what you needed from us? Okay. No, you're good. Um, so now I'll let you talk about the reform policies. Okay. Um, so yeah, still chugging away on the reform policies for grading and promotion. Um just that quick refresher that reform policies drive that um really real transformational change and can are really directed at making big improvements with our
111student achievement outcomes um and other outcomes that we want to measure for our students. Um as a reminder we are looking at grading and adding to our grading policy that these five values or principles um that all these five things will be represented in our grade. So as you look at a grade, you would know it's accurate reflection of standards um and so forth. Um just a review of the internal feedback um from staff that we reviewed this with district and school leaders, educator advisory councils, and then principles led a session at their schools to gather feedback. Um and the high level of that uh feedback is that they've seen close alignment in these five principles to our achieving our three promises and that there seems to be general agreement that these five principles while
112supporting district-wide alignment in grading practices also doesn't micromanage what and how our staff grade um to also incorporate um autonomy for our staff and their instructional grading practices. um did meet with our student advisory council um and they were very supportive of these five principles being included in board policy. Um both high school and middle school groups felt they said they feel their grades are accurate and they do feel that grades reflect uh mastery of the standards. Some of the growth areas identified by the students is they would like to get their um graded assignments back a little bit faster. Um but I I get it. our teachers have a lot to grade, a lot to score, and they're very dedicated to giving good feedback um was one of the areas. So, but also seeing
113what, you know, thinking about what how do we support our teachers so that they can get um grades done faster. Um and then the students just really blew me away. They had a very strong desire all the whole both groups on when they get an assignment or an assessment back to have a time to to process how they did getting an opportunity for reteing to review the content that they didn't master so that they can demonstrate mastery of that content. And I was just very impressed with their desire for that and not just taking a C because that's what they got, but wanting to know and they even said like even if it's not like I can't move from a C to an A, but I want to know what I missed, why I missed
114it, and understand that content. So I was really impressed with that um comment from our students. I got that both at middle school and high school. And then the other thing that I think was really impressive is if both both levels students were asking for teachers to use more rubrics when they grade so that they have that clear understanding of the different levels of achievement and then what they can do to get to those highest levels of achievement. Um so that's the feedback that I got from our student advisory committee. Um and then looking at policy for 3420 which is regarding promotion. um which I always think of this one as this is how we set that high expectation for every single student and we also are creating this mutual accountability between the students, the
115schools, the parents, um caregivers and our district and linking that into our theory of action. Helping create that standard of high expectations for each student, creating ownership and agency for our staff by setting goals and then also honoring the expertise of our staff. Um, and for policy 3420, there was some feedback last time. So, I adjusted some of the language to try to match um, the sentiment that I heard. So, getting um, wanting to hear the board's feedback on the adjusted language. It's really number three um, that I tried to separate out in some more bulleted statements to kind of capture and tease out those specific things that were kind of all clustered into one area. Um, so number three talks about creating a district-wide accountability process that's established in order to verify each student
116has access to instructional materials and highquality classroom instruction that is aligned to corresponding state, national, local grade level standards. um that each student has the opportunity to reach or exceed grade level mastery of the standard and that we are early we have early identification of students who are not on track to demonstrate mastery of the grade level benchmarks and that appropriate supports are in place to avoid retention. As I will always say, I don't put promotion benchmarks in place to retain students. Those are in place so that we can hold ourselves as as district leaders and staff accountable to monitor how our students are doing and provide those supports as needed so they can remain on track with their peers. Um also included the draft of the procedures um for um the benchmarks um and
117I shared kind of give you an overall summary of what this draft entails. Um so kindergarten through second grade creating you know teacherdriven mastery of assessing the mastery level of where students are. Third grade that same teacher is the the really the key for assessing that mastery of the standards for their students to make that determination. State law we do have to um have students are by law required to pass our score ongrade reading by the time they um before they can be fully promoted to fourth grade. um at fourth grade um that's when we start issuing real numerical grades to students. Um so asking that our students in grades um four and five are passing three out of four of their classes. Two of those having to be math um and English language arts
118and in fifth grade adding that students would score grade level proficiency or higher in math and language arts on their end of course or end of grade assessments. um and modeling that in sixth and seventh grade where sixth and seventh grade students will demonstrate mastery. They're passing five out of six of their classes. Um two of those must be math and language arts. Um eighth grade mastery of the grade level standards similar to sixth and seventh um but scoring grade level proficient um on the math and ELA end of grade assessments. And then there is a new requirement from the state that students have to complete a career plan at the end of um before being promoted to nth grade high school. We are not planning on changing that is ruled by the graduation um
119requirements that are already in policy. So not anticipating a change there. I did review these with principles um educator advisory council and district leaders. The initial feedback is positive um from these about setting this strong standard for achievement for all of our students and incorporating with that how we are providing those supports layered in to make sure that we are holding ourselves accountable for that's our job to have our students meet those high standards. That's what we're here for. So the initial response has been um has been positive for those as well. A big part of the promotion um or promotion benchmarks is adding this layer of communication and intervention. So setting out very clearly how we communicate and verify that our parents and students know what those benchmarks are, know what the school is
120going to do when they identify students who aren't meeting those. Um and also set some accountability measures where I'm getting reports from each school on every student in the building instead of hey, we're just thinking these are the ones that might need it. It's a way for us to have that double check and do a systematic review of how our students are doing or not making um the progress that we want them to do. And then also a very clear alignment of um what are the interventions? So as students we decide if they're if we see they're not making progress, what are our systematic processes in place? Is it after school tutoring? Is it um coming in to get support from a teacher? Is it summer school? So, what are those programs going to look
121like so that we do have the opportunity to get students back on track? Communicating that early and clearly with our parents and the students so they know what to expect um when we say, "Hey, you we need you to come to the afterchool program. It's going to start next month. Here's the dates, transportation." So that they're ready and and aware from the beginning that this is a partnership between all of these because we're doing what's best for our students. Um and then the last one just making sure that we all not making sure but implementing a a very clear communication process with parents. Um just what I'm as we've started to gather feedback I've heard so multiple times that's coming up on the feedback surveys that parents are just very unaware of grades um and
122have a lot of questions about the grading process um and if their students are on track or not and just being like well I don't know are they on track? Um, so really making that clear and communicating that directly with our parents and the students as well. Um, already talked about high school that's got graduation requirement. It's going to continue to stay the same there. Um, and then just open for discussion or comments about the wording on the updated language for those policies. I got one unless someone else want to go first. Maggie, I don't see nothing about the academy the process how a student. So that is going to be incorporated in the steps. So you know once the their procedures there it's not in there but that's one thing that um the two
123principles at the high school and Krie and I will talk about is when students aren't getting on track what is that and that's going to be a school process. That's not something I'm going to put in our district procedure. Don't you think it'd be wise to put it so that people would know families and teachers and I want to work with the principles more directly on what those processes are. So I don't think at this time we want to know that there's going to be a process but then the specifics are going to be those school level decisions um that I work with the schools on building those and they might be different by school. That's another reason I didn't want to cast a a un like a here's what we're going to do for
124everything. that might be different based on different situations. So, I just felt needed a little more time to work out what those specific interventions are. Some schools may decide that they want to offer like a two week um like, hey, we've gotten to this first benchmark. These are the five students that aren't on track. Instead of going to maybe a special class for a week, they're going to go to a reading remediation class or reading support class for a week to get back on track with reading. So want to talk with the principles and get more direct school level communication before we come up with what are those specific interventions going to be. Are we going to be able to see that by chance? Sure. Mhm. Yep. Hey, thanks. You want to put me in
125the queue or shall I just go? Okay. Um, this it looks really great. I want to thank you for that. Um, I have a a bunch of different scattershot questions. Um, and I'll throw a few questions out and you can just pull in whatever strings you want. I want to know whether there are students who whether the groups that are advisory are just successful students or are struggling students also part of your advice cohort because the experience of high school middle school can be really different for students who are who are struggling. Um, and I also, um, gosh, a lot of stuff happened in 2016 at the board level. And, um, uh, there was a, a presentation that April Dockery did, um, about changes in the definitions of the different levels. I know we've talked
126about it before where we used to have even quintiles for levels one through five and levels three through five were considered proficient and that changed at that point to the 50th percentile being the cutoff for non-proficient and proficient and so when I look at this I don't know what those numbers are now I think you had shared or maybe Shannon had shared some information about different tests and how they define proficiency. And some of those tests that we're using defined it as, you know, the person in the middle is proficient and everybody to one side is non-proficient and everybody elsewhere is proficient or on the other side is proficient. And that seems to me the wrong metric to judge kids. So when I get to the grade three standards, um are we it I think
127it'd be helpful for the board and the public to understand those assessments and maybe we have a presentation sometime this fall that covers that and I don't think Shannon covered what is the percentile cut off for proficiency on those EOGs and EOCC's. Um, and that would be helpful to know because I having been in that presentation now nine years ago. Um, I cringe every time a child is defined as non-proficient and I think that a better metric may be looking at like what I want to know is what our gap is between black and white kids and other kids in that bottom quintile or quartortile. Like I want to know who we're actually failing and I want to know that just because somebody is 49th percentile or 45th or 40th percentile does that's mean that
128we have to hold them back a year. So is that a Yeah. So and what I'll add to that is yes. We can definitely give you the assessment blueprints if you're interested in looking at all that. I can share it with the board. Um they're on the um DPI website. they're accessible to everyone. Um, those blueprint scores. And what I'll say is for every time there is an assessment as part of the promotion criteria, um, there's a caveat. So, if a student had scored, let's say they didn't get to that passing or grade level proficiency line, which is level three, if they have scored a 70 or above both semesters, they will automatically they won't the test won't count. So, we also don't want to say students didn't perform well on one day on one
129assessment. If they're doing well academically, we would go ahead and say, "Hey, check. They don't have to come. We're not going to recommend summer school because they've demonstrated in class their mastery of the content." Um, and the other caveat is students that have special needs, um, individualized education plans or multilingu language learners, um, they are promoted by their either their IEP or their multilingual plan. So those students kind of have a separate caveat that they're assessed in a different in a different way. We don't hold we don't yes we're holding them to a high standard but we know they also have multiple things that are impacting their proficiency. Being able to look at those numbers what the cuto off is for proficiency as far as percentile goes. Mhm. Um what I don't want to do
130is have a situation where we are penalizing kids if they are not above average on every test because every kid can't be above average. So the assessments that the students take are not norm referenced. They are criterion referenced. So that means students are demonstrating different levels of understanding on the standard not as compared to other students. So when we look at this the score range for how they determine grade level proficiency or not, they're not comparing how I did to Anna, that's not what they're comparing. Now there are norm reference items on those assessments, but that's not what we would be using. We would be using the criterion reference score, which is that level one, that level three, four, five, or the level two one. And those levels used to be based on percentiles. I
131just want us to follow up and see what they're based on now. Sure. Actually, I'll say it out loud. I mean, yeah, thank you, Maggie, for working diligently on this. I appreciate that you've got in mind whatever state statute or whatever the state demands, but also making sure that um we're doing what's right for our students within this district. Yeah, you're welcome. All right. And I'll just say we've got like only 35 responses from the public, but overwhelming support of the five principles and the setting the high standards with the um benchmarks. And Maggie, thank you. And I just wanted to say I felt like this has been really um a good process to watch and I'm was excited to hear curriculums next and we look forward to seeing what comes of that. So, thank
132you for all of that. Um, the 35 responses are to what? Oh, I sent out a in the cougar call and then I sent out another notification to parents today. I did a short video for parents to watch explaining the reform policies, what we're gathering data on, and then a short survey as well as the resources if they want to dig into those. Okay. Uh, something to echo for us to echo out to our contacts as well. That'd be great. Okay. Um, last discussion item. I don't think there's a whole lot of discussion about it, but we pulled the March 10th draft meetings off of our consent agenda um, last time and it's here for discussion and um, I think the issue I would board members please let me know if there are parts of
133the minutes that are incorrect. That's what I want to clarify so that we can then approve these minutes. Do you think something's incorrect? Please let us know. I think that it is incorrect that um these funds even with initial communications um are primarily for repair of infrastructure. And I've see that uh there's a lot of different needs including um building out housing um and uh supporting higher education and supporting economic development. And so I just think that that doesn't need to be in the minutes. But other than that, um let me just can I jump in and say something in response to I'm confused. Are you saying that the minutes are incorrect or that you want to add to the minutes something that we didn't actually say on the day? The minutes right now are
134selective and promote something that I think in hindsight is inaccurate and I don't think that it's helpful for us to enshrine inaccurate information. Okay. Can you It's not about enshrining inaccurate information. What is accurate or inaccurate is what was said at the meeting. Is there something that was that the minutes reflect were were said that was not said? I'm I'm trying to understand what your concern is, Pepper. I mean, if you're going to put in um that bit, uh what's that bit? Be clear that uh the current draft of the grant application primarily targets higher education. Dr. Ferman clarified that initial information suggests the grant is intended for capital projects damaged by the recent hurricanes. Okay. And did Dr. Ferman is that accurate as to what you said at the time? Okay. So just be
135I guess what I'm trying to be clear about is that just because we might later look at something that was said in a meeting and think you know that's not as fully you know that we'd really love for the public to have more information about that does not render we can't approve minutes based on what wasn't said or wasn't if Dr. Ferman said that then the minutes are accurate. Well, why don't the minutes say what I said based on uh attendance at the meetings about the other possibilities for funding out of those funds? Because the minutes don't necessarily reflect every single person's statement. These minutes are not exhaustive and I think I guess I I just don't the minutes are not inaccurate. If Dr. Furman said that and I don't expect the minutes to reflect
136every comment that every board member made because that would be not tenable. That would be too much. So my I personally am comfortable with these minutes. Um because I I think so far I haven't heard anything that's inaccurate that's in the minutes and the this section indicates that member AIBO requested the letter specifically to advocate for the inclusion of childare preschool and local educational agencies. So that's there what you advocating for what I what I asked for response is her understanding was it's really focused on higher ed and that's what's here is both of those. No, it doesn't actually say that she said it was focused on higher ed. You're right. The current draft primarily targets higher ed and Dr. Ferman clarified that the information suggests the grant is intended for capital projects were damaged
137from that. Yeah, I just don't think that that everything from the current draft of the grant grant application through the end of that paragraph is um uh appropriate for the minutes. So, but what makes something appropriate for a minute or not? My understanding would be whether it's accurate or not. This sounds like it's accurately what was discussed during those minutes. That generally minutes reflect. Um, hey Anna, what do what do minutes generally reflect? I'd love to hear from a lawyer instead of a person on our board. What do minutes generally reflect? intended to reflect the discussion of the meeting and the decisions made by the board. The form they they I mean accurately is an important piece of that. There is no specific I mean the form can be pretty different depending on the districts
138how you choose. This is generally the form y'all use. Thank you. I'm good with these moving forward and putting on consent. I think we've heard from several board members. I there may not be agreement on the minutes and how they're presented. I think the majority of the board members are we can put this on next week's agenda. It doesn't have to be on the consent agenda and there can be a straight up or down vote on whether these minutes reflect the meeting accurately. I we have heard from one member who thinks some com some sentences should be omitted. I've heard others say they think the minutes are accurate. So I I don't know what else to do but move it forward for an up or down vote next month if that is amended. I think
139that's fair. Okay. So it won't be on the consent agenda, but we will approve we'll have a straight up vote on the March 10th draft minutes. Everybody good? Mhm. Okay. Excellent. Okay. Last items are four first read policies that we've all had the opportunity to review. Kim, so we're currently um I've shared this uh previously. We're doing an audit of all the policies. The first two policies are ones that we're just cleaning up. The second two came from Campbell Shatley to address some changes in general statute. So, the first one, 3535, is just merely changing the title to reflect um Shannon Bagot's um title. And we also added um after the superintendent or their design. Any questions on that one, folks? Okay. Visitors to the school. There is one um error that I take ownership
140in that I need to correct and I'll have Lisa send it tomorrow when she sends the um the election policy. But um in 5020 it's the removal of the COVID language and I apologize for not taking out those last two uh sentences. the one that says school employees will conduct symptom screening and these temporary restrictions shall remain in effect. So those two sentence those two sentences need to be redlined as well. But again, this was just to clean up from CO. Okay. And then um the 8305 federal grant administration um this is just um this came from Campbell Shatley and you can see the red lines there um with an addition this impacts uh hottie's department and the threshold of 10,000 below and um the threshold to 50,000 and then 9110 10 again is another
141um change. Uh this one came from Campbell Shatley as well to reflect again general statute changes and you can see um the red line there and 2A and that um talks about project exemption formal procedures. Again, we still have 6420 where we have that $90,000 threshold where anything would need to come to the board. Okay, board members, questions. Uh, this brings up to me that recent change from, I think it was a $20,000 threshold to a $90,000 threshold. Um, recent meaning within the past couple years, I think it was under Dr. Cosby. Um, or it may have been under um Dr. Freeman. Um, I would be more comfortable going down maybe not to 20, but um, 50,000 would align with this as far as what the board reviews. And so that is not specific to
142this policy. It's just something that this policy raises. So I'm going to let Heidi speak to that about the micrasing threshold. So for federal guidelines, the micro purchase threshold for forever had been $10,000. And then during COVID, we had the opportunity to increase that. And here, that was before my time. Um the decision was made to increase that to 30,000 to match the level of the other competitive bidding requirements. So it was consistent because we don't have to put things out for bid unless it's over 30,000. The 90,000 threshold for the board review is actually state law and I don't know if Anna wants to comment further on that. That really isn't a direct impact on this federal guideline. That would be overall procurement policy and that is a guideline set by state law. Yeah,
143the change here was really about that uniform guidance on the federal level, not sort of the local and state level pieces of it. It was really just to address that federal piece of it. And it was my recommendation that we leave it at the 30,000 because that does eliminate a lot of confusion for um people that when they go to make the purchases as to what they have to bid, what they don't, you're certainly welcome to lower that back. Um but again on departments like maintenance and I don't know if April might want to comment on that. it it becomes very difficult at times to get multiple bids on procurement in the maintenance area because right uh and we did go out to RFP on those. So at the point of an RFP, you can
144take just one proposal if you get one proposal, but that also delays all those processes at least 10 to 20 days by the time you get the bid posted, you have people respond or whatever. But when you do the actual quotes to try to get three to five quotes for something over a certain threshold, if if vendors already know they're not going to win, they're very reluctant to put in a quote. And that makes you a either scrap it and have to go out to an RFP process or start all over again which really puts a burden on departments like maintenance and trying to get things done when they're urgent needs to um meet. So I just want to throw that out there as one of the reasons why you would or wouldn't want to
145change the level. Am I hearing you say that you had advocated for 30,000? This has a 50,000 threshold that you can set at your discretion and self-certify. Are you recommending something different than what we're seeing in front of us in the text? The 10 thou I had recommended we leave it at the 30,000. I'm not sure right now the text says 50,000. I don't that is the maximum it could be under federal guidelines is 50. I don't need see a need to increase it, but that's entirely up to the board because I also like you encourage people to shop around and and get the very best price that they can for anything that we're spending federal dollars on. So, uh, did this come from Camelstone? Can you speak to the 50,000? We actually had like
146an entire internal team of attorneys put this guidance together and send it out to all of our clients. Um, but so essentially the reasoning for that was just consistency with the federal guidance and across the board for the state. But so keeping it at that 50,000 was the recommendation just that way you didn't have to sort of like change it up when it came to other purchasing requirements. That way it was all consistent there. That was kind of our thought process. I believe I'll be honest. I was not part of the team of attorneys that made the recommendations, but that was my understanding from the discussion. So it could say 30 and no harm would be done, but it would be out of sync with something that well actually 30 syncs it up to what
147the regular procurement policy is. 50 would allow more flexibility for federal funds and generally we've tended to be more restrictive with federal funds is why it worries me a little bit increasing it but we can work with it either way. It's just a matter of communication. But yes, it's entirely within the board's authority to decide. I mean, I I don't think I'm understanding the conversation, frankly. So, I am I don't really understand any of what you just said, and that's not your fault. That is me. So, I understand something about consistency with 30. I tell me the um below which less formal. Okay. On an annual basis the finance officers authorized to conduct self-s ser provide documentation. Okay. So right now somebody explain this to me. Okay. So back when the original federal guidelines were
148set the micro purchase threshold where you don't have to get any quotes at all if you buy something was $10,000. Well, in COVID, people needed to make purchases so quickly and a lot of them were large and it didn't need to be delayed. They gave us the option to increase that up to 50. Some districts left it at 10. This district moved it to 30. Now, the Campbell Shatler recommendation is because it's allowable, I think, by federal guidelines to go ahead and increase it to the 50,000. And but you all would need to understand then if that policy says that then anyone buying anything with federal funds would not have to get competitive pricing on that unless it was over $50,000. Okay. And your feeling is that that's not a good idea because to me
149like I just imagine greater flexibility is a good thing but I also understand that competitive pricing is explaining rules to people. I try to find a common ground. And the other rule for local and state purchases is 30. Uhhuh. I see. And it's been 30 years. So I was just thinking why change it, right? Working. But okay. So does So there's no So Dr. Ferman, do you have any sense of 50 being better than 30 or 30 being better than 50? It doesn't really matter to you. If we go 30 instead of 50, do we create any administrative problems from a policy standpoint? I think often we're not looking to make our policy so special and unique and separate from the standards. Any any headaches we create? No. No, I don't think so. I mean,
150because a lot of districts kind of set those rates and things. I mean, at different places, so that that's usually something that's pretty that's less standardized as far as policy goes. Honestly, I think it's high you would have the better I sense of if this implementation annual requirement to reset the amount didn't exist. It was 10 period forever. Never ever ever. And now I guess because there was the chance to raise it. They make it an annual requirement to revisit it. And honestly, when Kim brought this to us last week, that was the first I realized there was an annual requirement to revisit it. I thought once it was set still it was set until the board decided to change it. And Heidi, I'm hearing you say that prior to CO it was 10,000 for
151federal but 30 for our other funding which created a an administrative challenge. And what you like about it is now regardless of the funding source micro purchasing is 30. I'm so who has to approve it if it's over 30,000? Well, there's I'm asking I mean the last one. Yeah. Okay. Do we have do we have any force over 30,000 here? So more what it is is it changes the process by which you spend the money rather than the approval process necessarily because if it goes over that micr purchase limit then you're looking at if you have to do like an RFP or an RFP or any of that stuff. Um so that's really what it's changing not the approval process just how much effort goes into actually getting the contract in place. Okay. What's your
152consistent amount? 30,000. Let's make it 30. So, so you're in favor of it being 30,000 for whichever. Okay. Okay. Yes. I'm I think Are you That's my inclination, too. Is it something new or about the 30,000? I want to just I want to talk about the 30,000. I think we're all in agreement that it should be changed to 30,000. So, is it about 30,000, Pebby? It's a wording thing and so I wanted to say Dr. second um or whoever is doing the editing, can we change it to 30,000 and then in have in parentheses so that we have the information in the future that just in parenthesis the federal maximum is 50,000 and that way we've got the institutional knowledge there in print. I have concerns about that because what if the federal maximum changes
153like we're now having track I stand aside. So yeah, we have the track changes. We can go back and tell you anytime why we made a change. So there's Yeah, we're we're good. So if we change it to 30,000 Anna, what does that do to this policy? It goes back on first read. We could vote right now. Yeah. Ex I was going to say the same thing as the last one. I mean, I wouldn't say it's a minor change given it is a $20,000 change, but I would say like as long as you guys are okay with moving it forward, no reason to send it back. Do it. I move that we um What? Do we have anything over 30,000 at this moment that we need to go ahead and approve before we make the
154decision? All right. I I move that we modify this policy to substitute $30,000 for $50,000 and that we move it forward into second read. And I second all in favor say I. Okay. All in favor? It's unanimous. I'm going to second read with the amendment. Okay. Just to call the question. I Okay. I think we're all fine with educational guest speakers and visitors to the schools. I'm seeing nods. I wanted to just what are we all fine with the first two? the first two first two COVID and the other one what I needed clarity on and I don't know if it tracks or not 9110 which is different federal grants right or it's not grants it's architects I don't okay so it also refers to 50,000 does it not it it's not an amendment but
155it has okay this could be completely different projects with an estimated professional fee of less than 50,000 we're adding a sentence is this apples and oranges I just wanted call the question about whether this is something similar. So for 9110, the only update on 9110 is under 2A. After certifying and writing that the project is exempt from the formal procedures in this policy, the superintendent shall proceed pursuant to this subsection. So I think I can provide a little more information on that one. Um, so that is again for the consistency with the other policy, but that is like to make sure that we're meeting our requirements that the form, you know, because we've talked about how when you're under the microurchasing threshold, you don't have to go through the formal procedures for bidding and whatever
156else you got to do to get a contract going. This is just saying that if it's under that microurchase threshold, then we'll make sure that we certify in writing that we didn't have to do the formal process. So that's where this comes in and that's why that's why it has the less than 50,000 because that was the micro purchasing. So should that be changed then to 30,000? It's a really good question. Wait, as we as we but that wasn't a change. It was not. So prior to today, this was 50,000. Mhm. And we were using 30 out of COVID for bid bidding. So the two were not. I thought the 9,000 series of work policies were independent because the architect policy is unique in the way it's and it's not a federal purchasing. Right. See,
157it seemed to me that this is this sits outside of what we just discussed and it's a we're not talking about federal funds. We're talking about a very specific sort of professional service that has to have its own rules. Yeah. And this is just saying we don't have to do the formal procedures for that. Are we good with this policy? Okay. So, Pepe's shaking his head. Now, I would like to see if there is consensus about making this 30,000 as well because Well, I just heard that question asked and Heidi explained why it's different. It is different. But are you asking the board if we have I'm asking the board if there's board members. What do you think? I see a no, a yes, a no. So shall we I it has to go forward
158on second read with a change or without a change. Um Anna, do I take a vote today on what the majority wants it to go forward with? Is that the way forward or does it go forward as presented and it comes off the consent agenda and it's voted up or down? I think procedurally it would make more sense for it to come off the consent agenda and then have a straight vote on the changes next week. Okay. I have a a specific question around the wording um just to ensure that we're not in conflict with the policy we just discussed under section B where it says any purchase of services using federal funds must also be made in accordance with the terms and conditions of the federal award and all applicable applicable requirements of federal
159law so on and so forth. Um I just want to ensure that we're not contradicting ourselves. I don't think so. I mean, I think that you're just saying we're still going to follow the federal requirements under that, but that's like a separate thing from saying like and it does go into us saying we're going to make sure we certify that this wasn't required to go through the formal bidding procedure, but it can also be a separate thing. So, I I don't think there's an issue there. I have a question. It just says we're going to follow the terms and requirements for federal funds. Okay. I think I with the concern here over should it stay at 50, should this also change to 30 just as we did before. If you're comfortable doing so now or
160later, I'd love to hear from Heidi's perspective how this does or doesn't impact how you do your work and what would be your preference in terms of you having to comply with this. Well, the the 9000 series is only specific usually to renovation, building and construction projects. And those always come to the board anyway. So, they've always been fairly unique. It's not a general purchasing practice like the others are. Um, so I I think I don't know, Anna, has I think this policy has been 50,000. Again, kind of like a forever thing. Yeah, I have no idea when it was made 50,000, but I mean that's the only way I've seen it. So, this is the sort of information that I Yeah, like I'm not comfortable changing it outside of some context for why it's
161helpful to change it, useful to change it, which isn't what I'm hearing from you. And there's a this is a longstanding policy versus where COVID impacted the other. and then we've developed a practice that we'd like to keep. That's not what I'm hearing from you about this. And to the best of my knowledge, I don't think Thank you. this has changed. Yes. Okay. wants the change or not so it can then move to second read or what do I do procedurally I think procedurally that's fine you can call for a vote and see if people are interested in changing it or not okay I was say I yes I think I misunderstood the first time but yes I think that's okay I think we can also think on it for a week well and this
162is first read right correct I I am not positive speaking only myself that I I think there is some duty of the board to take recommendations about policies and ask questions and make revisions and move them forward. I am I would like to I don't know that we're going to learn any more in a week. We've heard from Heidi. We've heard from Anna. We've heard from board members. I mean, we So, I've heard um uh Amy say many times about the idea of making a decision the same day, you know, that that the stuff comes up and the benefits of having a week. Um, and I'm also aware that we had a prior superintendent who signed a contract without consulting the board for $89,900 or something close to that for Facebook services or something like
163that. And I want to avoid um situations like that where something is right below. And it's just this idea of giving a $50,000 blank check or $49,000 at $999 uh blank check for consulting services and being aware that Bunkham County staff just spent a bunch of money on a plan for a preschool building over at Hall Fletcher and getting rid of the Asheville uh preschool building without it coming before the board. And so, you know, there's a point where things don't necessarily come before the board before money is committed. And so, that's where that concern comes from. And that I will stop there. And I do hear you. It is a professional fee that has been this way. And it's only being decided what goes forward for a vote next week, just to be clear.
164That's all. And then next week it could get voted down. And like it's I'm actually not for stalling discussion next week. Only clarifying what comes before us next week because I think we if we're I haven't heard anything else other than should that be 30,000 or not. I I don't think that there's something for us I don't think there's something for us to vote on at the moment is what I'm saying and that it should move forward but we may have further discussion as you just said. So I'm hearing it. So next week should it go on as first read not on consent agenda and we will simply vote yes or no or put it on. I appreciate could I offer that? I think what Sarah is saying is if we already know that there
165is a concern what we're what we don't want to do the duty of the board is not to push it forward so that then it can come off as second and now we've protracted this moment where we have we have voices saying wait maybe it should be 30 and so we take a vote to see are we going to change it to 30 just and then go to second read as 30 or keep it at 50 which doesn't preclude someone saying, "I still don't like it at 50, but use our moment." Now, if we leave it this way, we just open the opportunity that we won't it it could be pulled down at second and then we've we we're pushing it pushing it. So, you it won't go on this. Oh, sorry. I think that
166I can mute this entire conversation real quick. Thank you. Because it's statutory and I just found the statute that says it. That's what I've been doing over here is trying to pull that. But there's a specific statute that says units of local government may in writing exempt particular projects from the provisions of the article in the case of proposed projects where an estimated professional fee is in an amount less than $50,000. So it's statutory. We don't need to change it. That's why it says 50,000 and that statute has been in place since 1987. That statute says may and we can still set a lower limit if we so choose. So back to Rebecca's point, I need to know this if we so choose. I don't I just don't think we need to I don't think
167we've got the consensus to move forward with a different amount at this point. That's clear from the from the board members. I don't this idea that we're going to pull things just because somebody objects to them. That's kind of new with this board. In the past, something moved from first to second read and if it if there was a change or an objection, it didn't necessarily come off of the cycle. It just got voted on. So, I don't think that we actually need to delay anything. Great. So like everything that's on for first will be won't be second read until June. So So just I I know that gets confusing sometimes. So you it'll it'll come back. It'll be a month later before it comes back on and we can all remember this and we
168don't have to say it all over again. Yeah, I hear you, sir. Okay. Thank you. So that's what's happening with that one. Okay. So they're all moving forward. um the federal grant administration one we voted on specifically how it's moving forward. Um okay, Kim, did I cover it all? Yeah. No. So, I just just want to be clear. I'm going to send you um policy code 5020 visitors to the schools with the two that need to be two sentences that need to be redlined. I'm going to resend you um 8305 tomorrow with the change from 50,000 to 30,000 and then the changes that we talked about with board member elections. I'll reflect those and send those tomorrow afternoon as well so that we can keep those in the same place moving forward. Okay. Okay. Excellent.
169Um, at this time I will entertain a motion for the board of education to enter into a closed session pursuant to general statute 143 318.11 for the following purposes. Under subsection A1 to prevent the disclosure of privileged and confidential personnel information pursuant to general statute 115C 319 through 321 and under subsection A3 to discuss matters protected by the attorney client privilege. So moved. Second. All in favor? I. Any opposed? We will now go into close session.