001You ready, Rob? I'm ready. Yes. Okay. I'd like to call to order the special board of education meeting Tuesday, July 18th, 2023 at 6:36. If we can mute and then do the pledge. Thank you. Um, roll call. I'll do it u by the people I know who are here. Deb, Vic, Vinnie, Joe, Nicole, Stephanie, Shelley, and Mike. Um, Mike, any board correspondents? Uh, none at this time. Okay. So then we go into Nicole. Um the next section of the meeting, the action items and All right. So, the first item that we have on the agenda in this section is bylaw 9314 and the policy adoption revisions um that we just discussed at uh our policy committee meeting which literally just ended a minute before we started here for this meeting. Um, for those of you
002who are unfamiliar, bylaw 9314, um, it gives us the ability, if we wanted to, in this instance, to suspend with our usual two read requirement so long as we state a specific purpose. And in this regard, we're discussing whether or not we want to adopt these two policy items. Um, and we're recognizing the fact that it's summertime, that we don't have regular meetings scheduled, that we are combating vacation times, which makes it difficult to get a quorum. Um and also due to the important nature of the changes that are being discussed in these two policies, um if we do decide to adopt it, we need to get the word out to the groups that would be impacted by this sooner rather than later so that they could be in compliance for the beginning of the
003school year and um so that they can hit the ground running in September and aren't disrupted. Um, in order for us to use um, policy 9314, we need to get a majority vote of the board of ed members that are present. That's basically my summary of what 9314 has to say. Does anybody have any questions or concerns? Can you just give us give us what next steps would be? So, So what I would what I think we would do is at this point in time go through what the two policy policies are that we discussed during our policy committee meeting and and discuss them and decide do we want to act on them tonight without without a second read or using this uh suspension of our policies that's in our bylaws or do we want
004to decide that we're going to go forward as normal and We're going to do a first read tonight. We'll have our discussion and then we'll schedule a second read at a later date. I see Joe's raising his hand. Go ahead, Joe. Just a real quick, if we do suspend the portion of our bylaw via Robert's rules, it wouldn't it just need a twothirds majority vote from the members present in the quorum? That's correct. Yes. Okay. That's what I thought. Okay. Yep. So, can I dive into the uh policies and then we'll discuss what we want to do with them? Sure. Okay. So, the first policy that we have down today is um 1201 community organizations and um I don't know, Mike, do you want to help me out here with how this came about or
005what what we're doing here? Sure. Um you guys can hear me, right? Great. Uh so the purpose of this or the the impetus for this is just to you know it's we want to encourage healthy interaction between the parent run organizations in Oxford public schools. We want we have a lot of organizations that work with the public school system and we want to make sure that our expectations and how we interact is consistent and is very transparent. We want to make sure that all the organizations are treated equally, fairly, and in the best uh interest for students and the district as a whole. So that's where it started from. Uh I believe this is considered a new policy. This isn't a revision to an existing policy. Um but it talks about, you know, an organization's
006leadership. uh and getting, you know, basically parents, guardians, you you want to have people who have skin in the game, whether they are, you know, have active students in in a school that's affected or um you know, I I think some of the concept where if your kid is outplaced, make sure they are able to participate. School administrators, it has to do with, you know, the banking. If if an organization wanted to um hope, you know, they want to exist, but they don't want to manage their banking, can they use the school activity funds, create a uh an avenue for that to be a possible uh scenario? Um and then it's just setting clear expectations for you know minutes and agendas and making sure that these organizations that uh run under the opice of uh
007Oxford public school system that they align with our values and make sure that they're following our policies uh when they work under our umbrella of the school system. So Dr. Miller, Nicole, did I summarize that adequately? Is there, you know, anyone want to add to that? No, that was the impetus for it. I think that covers a lot and really from my reading of the bylaw, the biggest change is that we're asking that um if you want to have a leadership role in a community organization that you have a child in the school where you're looking to be involved in that that organization. um and that you would provide the superintendent's office with a a copy of who the leaders are so that we have transparency and we know who to get in contact with
008for communications. And um that's not to say that other parents or community members can't still participate. It's just that they can't have a leadership role. That was the biggest change that I saw in in this policy. Does anybody have any questions about anything? I do. So, under what under what authority do we have to dictate what an organization that is a separate entity can do with on their leadership board? Can I weigh in on that from from my perspective? My perspective is any organization that exists can exist and they could set their own rules and expectations, but as a board of ed as as a whole, as our entity, we're responsible for setting policy and we're responsible for protecting and controlling what happens within our school system and under our Oxford public school district. So
009if a if an if an organization wants to do whatever they want to do outside of Oxford public schools, they can. But when they want to be on school grounds, when they want to interact with kids, when they want to be a part of the public school system as their group, um working with the kids, working with staff, the teachers, the administration, working on our facilities, they have to abide by our policies when they're in that in that environment. And so for us to set reasonable expectations for um actions and and guidelines and guard rails for organizations, I think it's our responsibility is is to uh have a say and and set reasonable expectations. I don't think it's a it exceeds our our responsibility. I think it's it's responsibility that falls directly on us. Does
010anybody else have any other questions or concerns? Yes. Uh there was a forwarded email um sent to you today. So I'm just curious as to it was received by me today, forwarded to you. I don't know what you discussed in policy. I think that that email brought some very serious concerns. So, if we don't if we don't have whatever changes that I think you mentioned, Nicole, that you made in policy, how can we vote on a policy? We We don't have to tonight. It's just this is what was put on the agenda and as a policy chair, I'm I'm bringing it forward to the whole board. I'm just making I'm just making I'm just want I want to be clear that Yeah. If so, if we vote this policy through, we are voting it. We
011are voting as we saw it before your meeting. Well, whatever the motion is. Yes. The well, the the policy committee discussed adding um two sentences to the policy um to address those concerns that were brought forward by that email earlier today. So that would be part of the policy revisions for this evening. Nicole, do you want to read what that sentence was? So um I I would have Shelley, are you talking about the sentence that was in the email that was passed around or what Shel was discussing earlier? We don't have the Yeah. Yeah. All right. So an email was sent forth with Hold on, Shelley, please. There was an email that was sent forth to all of us regarding some concerns about the proposed language um as it would pertain to outplace students and
012um also uh school administrators who don't have children in in the school system. How would they be able to be a liaison or whatnot? And um a a proposed revision was that we add parents of students outplaced but in the grade levels for the school covered are permitted to be in the organization's leadership. School administrators, teachers, and the board of ed liaison are also allowed to participate in the community organization leadership. My understanding is that language was run by the person who sent the email expressing the concerns and that these that revision addressed the concerns and they were comfortable with it. So, I just wanted to bring up um so in the policy well first of all I don't have access to what's in board docs as far as um and I can't tell you
013why I logged in on three different devices but apparently um since you um sent the um proposed policy to us Nicole um it was revised I discovered in policy committee meeting um through no fault apparently of anybody's but uh regardless Um I don't have the latest and the greatest, but I did say in policy committee that I was concerned about the um um that outplaced language in order to protect fully protect the privacy of students um who uh might be outplaced um you know each school is a small community etc. Um, and I had proposed a different language since every student who is outplaced under an IEP agreement or settlement agreement um is a student who was fully enrolled in the Oxford public schools. I um propose different language um and I don't know if
014you want me to read it or if you just want to um you know talk uh further about um my additional concern is that um it seems there's a lot of controversy um and I had um um suggested at policy uh again I'm only one of three members and um the vote was not to follow through on this but I thought if we tabled it we could Um further um consider um all concerns um about um you know student privacy about um ability to um um you know have um leadership fully to participate um while still um hearing and responding to and incorporating concerns regarding um what um uh leadership um and members really are um um valid for a lack of a better word members and um I just feel that we're not ready
015to forward this uh um to a to a vote of the full board. But those really are my concerns. If you'd like to hear my proposed language changes um which for me are almost in moot point because I feel that we should table this until uh it can be uh further fully vetted. Um for all of those reasons then um I certainly defer to the I have another question. Has any of this been discussed with the administrators in the buildings and what's their um opinions? I've been told yes that it has been but I I don't have details regarding that. And would you be surprised if you knew that one of the administrators is not in favor of this policy change? Were you aware of that in your policy discussions today? No, that was not
016brought to my attention. I Yeah, I wasn't aware. Well, Mike and Rob, you had a meeting. So, can you tell us how that meeting went? Um I can I could say that at the meeting the concepts of what was going into the policy was discussed uh with one administrator. Um but the policy had not been written at the time. Um but the the the concept of what was going into the policy was expressed clearly to that to the administrator that was in the meeting. It was supported. Okay. Okay. But they didn't have the policy in front of them. So that the policy was written after that meeting. It was by when were the other administrators discussed with this Rob? Do you know? Can you give us those details? When the other administrators were made aware
017of this policy because this affects every school, right? It's all organizations. Okay. Excellent. But they all they all have rights in the build. all the bills. Sure. But typically policies are not given. I mean, Rob could of course speak for it, but typically policies we don't look for popular voting by all the administrators before any policy is is put through forward. So, I'm just I'm just saying for past practices, I don't remember the last time we went through roll call of what administrators approved, what policies we put forward. You're making significant changes to organizations that are affecting their buildings and for us to not at least inquire and have a dialogue with them about it doesn't feel right. And I would I would agree. We're not asking for an administrator's vote, but just with like
018any policy, just like the homework policy, it hadn't gone to the administration and the policy came and had all these parameters on homework and the administrators hadn't seen it and that but then they would be forced to enforce it when it might not be how they want to run. you know, one that run that particular thing in their building. So, um, so again, you know, Robert, were any other administrators spoken to about this? Several administrators were included in the conversation. Um, the policy is being for brought forth by board members, not by me. um the leadership of that school was of that's primarily affected by this was included in the conversation and agreed to all the parameters that were putting into this put into this policy. The policy was written from my understanding based upon
019what those guidelines that were discussed at that meeting and administrator was on board at the time and I even had a conversation this afternoon with that administrator and was waiting for um tonight's meeting to take place and understood what was happening and did not voice any concerns to me at the time and that was three hours ago. Joe, yeah. Um, just reading the policy and and going back on some of the history, you know, I I took this position knowing that it's going to take up time in my personal life to improve the district and contribute to my community. Um, I don't think it's unreasonable to establish lanes for organizations that are in our district since there really is no policies. Um, I've wasted significant time um dealing with some of these outside organizations. Uh,
020some clubs that were started illegally that cost the district money. Um, I think at some point we need a starting point. I don't think it's uh uh unreasonable to start looking into this type of activity. Um, being that, you know, I I don't want to get into the weeds of managing organizational money and and getting into the weeds of controlling uh these organizations. I think they do have a vital role. It's just establishing what their role is going to be in our district. Um, and I think that that has to be established. I I I I just don't there has to be a starting point. I don't I don't see what how we don't have a policies that govern that already, but just my opinion. Thank you. Anybody else input, questions, comments? I just want
021to one last thing or or Victor, you can go. Is there an example of this? Is there a what is there some kind of an example of what we're looking at? You know, what group did what or or potentially what group could do something? I mean, I don't I don't really understand, you know, is it somebody comes up and doesn't follow I I don't really understand what where we're going here. I just uh some kind of clear example of something that happened in the past would help put it in my brain. I for personally for me I I I don't think there's it's like roundabout discussions of stuff like you know what establishes who owns property that's brought in on our our facilities. um you know um who has authority to give out um uh
022usage to those facilities. Technically I think it's up to the superintendent and and the building administrator that it affects and I know parks and wreck becomes a part of that. Um you know I I went through the uh elementary school PTO PTA or whatever. I think they do a great job. Um but but again I I I just again my opinion I just don't there's very little policy written on any of this. I mean what's to stop the Lions Club from becoming a part of our district and raising under our district's you know flag I guess if you want to say that. So I I read the policy and I thought the policy addressed issues that I hadn't heard before which I thought was good. And uh then I read the letter that was sent
023and it seems like we somewhat addressed that. So uh I think we're on the right track. Maybe we're not 100% there, but certainly sounds like something that needs to be in place to me. That's all I got to say. One one thing to add. I I agree with you, Victor. And honestly, if we need to have another round uh for policy to evaluate it, I'm okay with that. I think some of the intention for moving quickly was to give organizations the time before the start of the school year before it need goes into effect. Um but if the if the board wants more time on that, I think the board should take the time. We want to get it right. We want to set guard rails. The only problem I see the longer we wait
024is it goes into effect closer to the start of school. So, you know, does that create a a an unfair burden on organizations to comply? Um, that's that was the concern or the reason or the impetus to move forward at a faster pace uh is to give organizations the opportunity to make adjustments to be in compliance. Um, but if we want to take more time, I'm in agreement with that. Um, I think we need to there needs to be some form of guard rails and I think it's in the district's best interest to be upfront with those guard rails um while working with the the organizations that that fall under the district. I have one more thing. So, I have one more thing. So the these two organizations which let's be clear it's the booster
025club and it's PTO both have their own set of bylaws. Their bylaws talk about time and positions who can hold positions. Um and we're trying by some of the wording in this policy that we're we're looking at. We're basically taking away their their by law because we're saying, well, you can't do this if you don't have kids um in that organization. If you're in that organization and your students are not in that school and they've graduated or they're outside of the school district, you can't be part of a leadership team. But part of the problem is is that the some of those group people, president, vice president, they have to be in position for a period of time. Treasurer, you don't want somebody walking in that has not been part of the organization. So by
026limiting that, you may have someone who's who's outside of your scope, but then then you're not going to have someone who has experience doing the work of that committee, that board, that group. And I think that we're we're not look I know you guys want your guard rails and that's that's up to you guys, but I also think that we are interfering with their bylaws. I believe that we need to really be careful and cautious about how we word it, what we're doing. If you want a group to be, you know, more compliant to what your rules are, then have that discussion. But pulling a policy in in July during the summer when people aren't around, this doesn't feel right. And you do have to be respectful of their own bylaws. Mr. Counter or Joe,
027you you raise your hand first. I I don't think in this policy it's unreasonable. I you you you're saying leadership roles they they still could be a member of their organization, can they not? Not with some of the bylaws you have to be in a position in the executive board for six months to a year. So I I understand what you're saying. And in 30 years ago in my firehouse, we had what they call the black ball system to vote be voted in. We had to change our bylaws because that was technically legal. So the state, you know, the state government state law passed and said it has to be a majority paper ballot or handwritten ballot and we no longer use the black ball system. So unfortunately I I agree in the sense that
028yeah, they're going to have to change their bylaws. I mean, I'm not saying cut leaderships out. I don't I don't think that would be right. Um, but they can still participate in an advisory role as a member of that organization. They just can't be a leader of it. Correct. So, you're okay with somebody walking into a a PTO or a booster club meeting who has not been part of an organization to take over being their treasurer and not have any experience. I would be more worried about something like that than whether or not their kids had graduated or not. Can I make a suggestion then that might address both issues by Deb and Joe? Um, what if we put it out there that we're looking at making this change, but it's not going to be
029implemented immediately at the first of the school year that we give them a six months head heads up, a year heads up, whatever it needs. so that the community organizations that are impacted by this have a chance to revisit their bylaws, make changes to become in compliance. And it gives us a chance to slowly roll this out so it's not doesn't have that feeling, Deb, that we're trying to rush this through in the summer when people aren't paying attention. That it's completely transparent that these are our concerns. This is our idea on how we're going to fix it. and we're going to give you time to get in get in into compliance with what we're thinking so that we can continue to be partners for the best interest of the kids. I don't think the
030language is ready for even that kind of discussion. Well, I think Shel, if I hear what she's saying, I think you're saying that, you know, that's kind of like running in the background that the the organizations would run as they have been with the understanding that the this is what people are looking for as far as, you know, like you say, guard rails and so you kind of work with them in order to put those guardrails in. Is that is that what you meant, Nicole? Right. Right. So maybe as of September 15th of this year, we're just asking that every organization who does business within our schools gives us a list of who the leadership is and starts providing us the um minutes or the agendas from their meetings. That could be a first step.
031And then as we roll this out, maybe six months from now, we start to implement the okay, now we're only going to have leadership for people who have students in the school. They could still be advisory members. They could still participate, but they can't have that leadership role. So then it gives it addresses Deb's issue of gee, do you really want to have a treasurer who's never balanced a checkbook before? Seeing how they do X, Y, and Z, they'll have a chance for that mentorship to get to them where they need. So it doesn't impact the the organization or what they're trying to do because what it comes down to, everybody who's doing this is doing it because they want to enrich the lives of the kids at the school. are doing it for a
032good reason and we don't want to squash that. And I also think that a lot of the organizations have a hard time getting people to help. Well, that was expressed in the email as well. You know, I the first PTO meeting of the year was packed. By the last PTO meeting, there were I think there were six of us. So, you know, it's really hard to get people to stay involved in the process and to do all those things you want them to do for the kid. So, how Nicole, how would you want to unless does anybody else want to contribute anything and then we'd have to put a motion on the table. So hearing the hearing the concerns of the members, it sounds like we have the rough framework for what we're thinking. Um
033that this could be our first read. We're we can come back and we could make changes and um I think one of the biggest changes would be that we don't implement this as of September 15th, which I think is what we have in here. um maybe by September 15th the organizations all provide us with um who their leadership is, but we're not we won't start with the immediate requirement that they have to have kids in the school for whatever group they're with. We depending on what the board thinks is an appropriate time to roll this out, we'll put that language in there. So we're building towards these guard rails. It's not happening immediately. So there's not this sense of um urgency that we have to do this in July with special meetings over the summer.
034Could I get a clearer sense then of what the language would look like? I mean it sounds like Nicole, if I understood you correctly that the initial um uh providing list of the leadership and um did you say minutes? I'm not clear on the rest of it. Could you concretize that for us so that we know this is only what's going to be put forth as the um policy at this stage with the intent that other language would and provisions would be added in a stepwise fashion maybe with benchmarks as to when uh language would be added something like that I'm just trying to make it clear in my mind please Shelley do you have any of the language? Um, it was attached with the agenda, but I understand that you were having technical problems.
035So, do have you not read this at all or I I don't want to have to read the whole entire um proposed thing, but I'm wondering what do you have or what don't you have? The rest of us haven't seen it either. So if you there's a change then maybe we could do the change that you we you've drafted and that can be sent to for information purposes. The only change that we discussed I have Go ahead. I have only what you I'm sorry. Uh I have only what you emailed to us. I don't have a more current version. Um, so I apologize. I don't know if there were substantive changes, but I did recommend um one um change uh during the policy committee meeting. I don't know where that went. It sounds like Rob's
036uh langu proposed language is going to um be adopted. And as I mentioned earlier, um I'm concerned about at least protecting the privacy of special education students. um you know by uh just tweaking what Rob said in the way that I uh brought forth that policy committee meeting if anyone would like to hear it or are we just doing first and only those two provisos that you um adopting only those two provisos that you uh earlier quantified and then proceeding in a step-wise fashion from there. I I'm just not clear on what we're exactly doing. It's my opinion, and it's only one of nine, that we use the language that was disseminated to all of the board members. Um, and with the proviso that we add that the one sentence that I read that Rob
037drafted in response to the concern that was brought forth in the email that was shared with all of us. So, it's the it's the original language with the addition of parents of students outplaced but in the grade levels for the schools covered are permitted to be in the organization's leadership. School administrators, teachers, and the board of ed liaison are allowed to participate in the community organization's leadership. Now, I understand Shelley that you have some concerns with that one sentence. I would say for the purposes of right now that we just keep the language that Rob has introduced and then we can come back during the first and the second read and we can add whatever um whatever changes you'd like to address at that time. So just so just to be clear Shelley and I'm
038not sure if this is what you're asking that we are not adopting the policy tonight. I mean well we have to have a vote obviously and see where that goes. We may not be adopting it tonight. It may go into a second read, which means it's going to be a work in progress. Is that correct? That's my Okay. All right. Thank you very much for that clarification. No problem. Um, so if are there any other Did you have your hands up, Vinnie, or No. Oh, no. Just don't do that. Um, so if we have a motion, Nicole, to that effect, Um, sorry. It's it's chaos here right now. Um Um, so I make a motion that we adopt the I'm sorry. I make a mo motion that we adopt the first read of the policy
039that was disseminated to the board regarding community organizations with the one change of parents of students outplaced but in the grade levels for the schools covered are permitted to be in the organization's leadership school administrators teachers and the BOE liaison are allowed to participate in the community organization's leadership down for a first second. I'm confused. We we we don't adopt first reads. Are you saying that we move to this? They I think the motion would be more that we move to um move to a second read. We're not adopting um this policy as a first read. We're just moving it to a second read. Is is that right? Um maybe I'm unclear. I I think that makes sense, Shaw. Yes. Typically, we don't have to vote on our first read, but in this instance, we
040did have the issue of the bylaw 9314. Were we deciding did we want to do this in all one onefeld swoop or did we want to do this incrementally? What I'm hearing from everybody is, or at least my interpretation is that we'd feel better doing this incrementally. So, this is the language we're working with for the first read that I just put into the record, and we'll be able to continue to work on this. Hopefully, during our next meeting, it'll be a second read, and it could be adopted at that time with everybody's input. So, again, in in your motion, I don't know if you wrote it down, but it does not say adopting, right, Nicole? It did. Motion to adopt first read with one change. Okay. So, I think that's that's the language because
041we're not adopting the policy. We're we're actually we don't even wouldn't it just be um a recommendation to suspend policy 9311 and then that would be that vote and that would determine whether it's a first read or a second read or you could suspend it. We never voted on uh the motion for bylaw 9314, right? But we never we never motioned to adopt it. So I don't know if we could make a motion to suspend it. So wait one second. That's not what I was saying, Mike. That's not what I was saying. I wasn't saying I'm saying the motion would be whether or not to utilize bylaw 9314 to suspend policy 9311 which is to go right to that means to bypass the second reading. If we vote in favor of that then we would
042have another motion to adopt this policy. If we do not vote in favor of that then the policy is a work in progress until second read. We have we have a motion and a second on the floor. So, we have to either vote or withdraw it. I'll withdraw it. Vinnie, you second withdrawal. Did Vinnie or Mike? I thought second. I I seconded. So, I can second the draw. Okay. So, like I said, if we, you know, if we we I think we should make a motion. Um, and are we doing these these policies separately? Yes. Okay. So, I think the motion would be, you know, to suspend policy 9311 and then it's either yay or nay. Does that make sense? I don't know where where are you getting 9311. I don't know what that is.
043I'm reading it from the agenda. On the agenda, it says recommended motion to utilize to suspend policy 9311 requiring two meetings for the approval of new policies or revisions. It might just be a typo. Oh, I don't know. That's what it's written. Robert, do you have any Is this Is this correct? 9311 should be the policy requiring you to the bylaw requiring you to have two reads before you adopt the policy. So you're using bylaw 9314 to bypass the policy requiring two reads for the policy. Got it. Okay. So that would be the motion. All right. Did you just make that motion, Stephanie, or no? Oh, yeah. I mean, I I think I did, but let me do it. Um, and Deb, it's in the agenda, so you don't have to write. Um, motion to
044utilize bylaw 9314 during the July 18th, 2023. What? I got it. I'm still going to say it though. special education meeting to suspend policy 9311, formulation, adoption, and amendment of policies requiring two meetings for the approval of new policies or revisions. And this applies to the community organizations policy. Is there a second? Second. All those in favor? I. So that's Vic as in I I we're okay. Why don't we use the reaction to do a thumbs up if we're voting for it? Yeah, Shelley, you understand that an I means that only going with a first read. Oh, no. I'm sorry. I it it was breaking up a bit. I apologize, Stephanie. Thank you for that correction to my understanding. Uh, no. I I'm I'm not going with the motion to just do a first read.
045Can we revote, please? What' you say, Deb? Can we do the vote so everybody knows what we're vote? How we're actually voting? Yeah. You know, why don't I just read? Zoom is hard, so I'll read your name and you tell me your vote. Yay or nay? Deb. No. Vic. Oh god. I'm I'm going to go with Debbie. No. Yes. Vinnie, no. Joe, no. Nicole, no. Stephanie, um, no. Shelly, she said no already. No. Okay. And Mike, no. Motion does not pass, which means that the community organization policy is still a work in progress. Okay. So, we will continue to work on that and hopefully get it back to for a second read at our next scheduled meeting. All right. The next item on the agenda that we have is the school uh use of school
046facilities. And the biggest change in that is we're taking a lot of the COVID language out of the um out of the policy because it doesn't apply anymore. We don't need it anymore. We're trying to simplify. Um, we've discussed this during the policy committee meeting and we were all in agreement that we wanted to put it forth for a first read tonight to answer any questions or concerns that you guys have and um hopefully get it approved for the next meeting. So my only question would be so that's the things that were redacted are the only changes in that um maybe Joe knows that there were there were few the the co language is removed from the policy. We um clarified the order of how um facility use gets approved. It was a little bit
047um vague language as far as the role the principal has superintendent. to clean that up to make it straightforward. And we added a fee structure for the use of for either single event or for a season for the use of the inside concession stand at the high school and the outside snack shack. So what were the what were the fundamental changes? Is there anything major? Those were the changes. the the prior policy did not have a fee structure for the use of the contestant standard, the snack check. So, we added that in there for a single event and for um a a season based on the tier structure that's there. Um we also changed the language to make it clearer on um the approval process for the use of facilities and we struck out all
048the language that was added for CO because it wasn't necessary anymore. So, Nicole, if I heard you correctly, you're you're you're not proposing that this go through without a second read, right? Um, I mean, it's up to the board on how they want to handle it. Um, I don't see it as a as a a major issue that's timesensitive. I don't think that there's been major changes that need to be implemented immediately. So, I don't know why we would want to force this through without a second read, but again, I leave it up to everyone else to for their input as well. I I didn't know if you guys discussed that at policy. That's all. Uh that specifically. No, when it came when it came to timing, we really didn't want to be the ones
049to make that decision without talking to everybody else. Okay. All right. So I guess we can make a motion and then have if there anybody has any further questions or if anybody has questions right now on the facilities use of school facilities policy. Um of course I do. Um, sorry guys, but you have usage of the snack shack and having been very involved with that in the past, um, that has been allowed to be used by the first selectman by an organization who has equipment in there. So, I think that um by saying that we're now going to charge for that that part of the building, um I think you're going to you would have to have some kind of a an arrangement to use the equipment or figure out what you're going to do
050with the equipment if that's what you're going to do. You can't you can't just all of a sudden decide that they don't get used because that has been allowed to be operated by the first selectman. There was 2015 there was an email sent to the committee that was working on the process of that building. They they built that. They put up the that wall was put up by people from youth football. But those walls, those ceilings, those floor tiles, those countertops, the refrigerators, all of that stuff does not belong to the district. So, just want to bring that to your attention. Can I follow up on that? Because I I also have strong opinions on this topic. I believe that Snack Shack and all buildings are owned by the town, but we oversee them as
051as a district. They are school buildings on school property that's also owned by the town. It's all we're all public schools, so it's not privately owned anything. Um, but I think the the aspect of fairness is to allow other organizations access to some of these facilities. Um, I don't think the first selectman when writing that letter, which I have not read, uh, I think Deb, you you sent you said that there was an email, but I don't think the intent was to deny anyone access to it for for use. Um, and I think having the opportunity, and I'm not saying that the equipment inside should become fair use by everyone, and I'm not saying that at all. Um, but I think the space itself should be capable of being used by more than one organization.
052Um, I believe just name the organization by the booster club. I don't think they should be able to control who who does and does not have access to the snack shack. Um, I think that organizations that use the Wolverine Field should have the right to be able to rent that facility to use it um based on the fair use policy set in that policy. And I'm Nicole, I agree with your statement of having it be a first read. I don't think the timing has to be, you know, to rush rush rush. But I think I think there is value in saying that that just like the auditorium, we allow the rental of our spaces through organizations in the town and even organization outside the town. Um, and I think there, you know, in a public
053setting, we should have fair policy of what happens in the buildings that we are responsible for. in the past that building the equipment and the usage was rented. There were people that did use it with um permission. So I I just want to make sure that that's clear, too. And um so I mean again, this would be a first read, so everybody's comments here could be taken into consideration in revising or editing the policy. But my my question is um is there and and I just I looked at it a couple of times and then I just looked at it again. Um, I would suggest that there is something in it that's clear as to who is going to be managing this unless I I mean maybe I'm just not aware because I'm not you
054know I'm not involved in football anymore but um or any other organization that would use the snack shack but who would who would be responsible for collect you know scheduling who's using it collecting any kind of fees is I guess I'm asking you is that is that made clear in the policy and I just missed it. I guess I'm asking Joe as facilities. I would say I would say if you take a look at the very first page, community use of school facilities. If you go down to the third paragraph, it says the use of school buildings, grounds, equipment, and facilities will be authorized by the superintendent of schools or design in conformity with regulation 3515. the superintendent or designate may modify the pricing at any time and may grant different terms if found warranted.
055So I think that addresses your concern right there Stephanie. Okay. And there's an existing procedure that's in place. So we use a system called FMX. Any internal external organization um requests access to use any of the school facilities including the facility that we're in right now. The first approval goes to the building principal. They look at their calendar, make sure it's okay with what they're doing, doesn't interfere with any school events or school functions, and then it gets um forwarded to the operations department for chief operations officer to then approve it. Um the secretary gets involved, and if they fall under the fee structure, then they're um build through the finance department. So there's a whole structure in place already for all that. Oh, that's what I was asking. Okay. So that's not this policy
056is not changing that. Not at all. Thank you. Any further question or discussion? So, this is down for a first read. If anybody has any proposed language, please reach out to me um sooner rather than later because I want to be able to fully vet this and go through the proper channels so that when we come back the next time that hopefully we could have a meaningful discussion about it. Absolutely. Thank you, Nicole. Thank you, everyone. Um, so now we were at the update on end of year expenses and approval of final list of expenditures. I guess that's the Mike and Robert show. Dr. Miller, I think you're on mute. I was on mute. I'll turn over to Mike who's the chair of the finance committee. I shared with the board in advance a memo
057that detailed the end of the year expenses and the options moving forward. I'll let Mike kind of summarize where we are right now. Okay. Um, so has everyone had a chance to review the communication that was sent out the the surplus? Um, I I without beating uh beating this uh topic uh too heavily, uh we've had surplus from our budget that stem from several areas. Uh one had to do with cost savings. That was the insurance that we did not we were not able to factor in our budget because we weren't sure if we were going to make the changes with all the bargaining units and we did not know at the time when we were doing the budget for this past fiscal year of what the true insurance number would be. Uh that was
058a very large uh savings. We also uh as teachers retire, as teachers move on to other districts and we backfill whether it's teachers or staff in general, uh the emphasis was put on looking for the most qualified uh but the lower tiered uh levels uh to save money on staffing hires when appropriate. That was done as well as having a mild winter. I know that we increased our budget items uh preparing for last year with the thought of high oil, high propane, high anything utility wise. I know that our approach to it was, you know, double the number and then double it some more. We really increased our number for utilities to try to offset the unknown. uh we had uh utilities uh we had things that were not all locked in place for the
059full year that we had to contend with. Um and then the last was uh an accounting issue uh with a general ledger line item that had a mistake. Um I don't know the explicit details of that except that the dollar amount came to about uh $180,000 uh for that last surplus change. So to highlight that it it totaled uh Dr. Miller, what's the exact number? Do you know what the number of the surplus is at this time? It was um just around a million dollars altogether. That included our original snapshot um of where we thought we would be. Okay. Um these numbers, just to put in perspective, it's not baked into our all of our budgets. The insurance savings is a one-time thing. our new insurance costs going into next uh fiscal budget that technically
060we're in right now as of July 1. Um has the the new insurance numbers, they're not anticipated to change. I believe we're locked in. Would you agree, Dr. Miller? That is correct. We have a locked in rate for all of this upcoming upcoming school year. That's not going to change any. Okay. Um so looking at uh pardon me the board docs we have uh some line items at the last or I should say two board meetings ago uh it was the first board meeting in uh June we approved um Deb do you remember the exact dollar amount we approved uh for for security curriculum uh and I I think we facilities as well. Do you remember what the number we approved around 7:40 745 7:45 7:45 So for this meeting we have um earmarked 745
061that the board has approved. There's uh line items that are available for approval to spend down because we want to take the money and apply it to better the district, the students, whether it's security, curriculum, facilities, maintenance, whatever it takes to in, you know, better the school system, we want to make sure we do that with the funds that we have available. Um, so at this time, I I don't has everyone seen the list? Uh what's the exact dollar amount just to reconfirm Dr. Miller that we have to apply? Is it 180,000? At this point, we are looking to spend an additional $181,674 um approximately based upon the um end of the year on bills coming in and some minor tweaks to some of the purchases that are in the duct to go. So, it's
062give or take a little bit from there. And at this time there are 27 line items. Uh one of which we don't know the cost. So it's I don't know how we can consider spending on it if we don't even know the cost. These line items are POS that exist in the system that can be um we can pull the trigger on because they are in the system and they have uh their purchase orders that are available to be um I forget what the exact term would be but uh punched pushed through executed um based on on uh our recommendations um of what's available. I'd like to make I'd like to make a motion that uh the encumbered money that is existing with the POS and or quotes that were presented in those line items
063be uh done at Dr. Miller's discretion and priority for the district. Uh second and just just to be clear this is this is encumbered money and just to be clear this is money that we cannot roll over into next year. Correct. That is correct. Could you repeat your motion one more time, please? I'd like to make a motion that uh we spend the encumbered money from fiscal year 2022 and 2023 up to the discretion of Dr. Miller in the in the list of line items that is uh prioritized something along that lines. And Mike, did you second it? I seconded it. So for discussion and clarification, Joe, you're talking about 1 through 18 because it it was prioritized and one if we get to 19 were in a negative. So you're saying that that line
064items that were prioritized by Dr. Miller from 1 to 18 is what your motion is. Yeah. I mean, right. I mean, if there's if there's already PO's, you know, obviously PO's cut, it's encumbered money, which is an established yearly thing for municipalities. Uh, I mean, if we don't get this stuff this year, we're going to have to I mean, we're already in a uh in a back seat for next year. So, let's get it. Either we don't get it this year, we're not you know, we're not going to get it next year. So, I understand. I just want to be clear on your on your motion that you're talking about the list that he prioritized. Yes, that's in the agenda. Correct. And if we go one through 18, if we go to 19, we go
065over. So, anything that is below 18 will not be we do not have the money for because there's a negative. Yeah. Right. What was uh what was 19? Just for I'm looking at it though. It was a baseball irrigation system. Can I uh just because I I didn't interpret uh Joe's rule to say 1 through 18. And yeah, I leave it up to the discretion of Dr. Miller to spend that because the concern I have is what if something zeros out? What if let's say the the PA system is backordered? We can't get it for four years or something and that frees up the money. I don't want to have to then come back to the board to move to line 19 or line 20 and so on to spend down or if something that
066that is set at $10,000 costs 5,000 and we could buy the next line item. I don't want to pigeon hole Dr. Miller because I don't think we have the time uh to come back to another board meeting. Um I think by the end of July, no matter what, even with POS in the system, we either spend it or we lose it. Yeah. Um so I'm I I don't want to pigeon hole and say 1 through 18, but I would say that the order that Dr. Miller presented is fine with me. Not I couldn't pick one line item out of here that I thought deserve to be cut to be honest. I just don't know day-to-day operations what is the priority for the district. And you know, and I I mean, to me, I I trust
067the the recommendation of Dr. Miller, but I don't want to I want to make sure that we get it as close to zero as possible. I mean, benefit the kids. I mean, there's stuff that's probably not going to get get purchased, you know? I mean, just like you said, supply issues. That's that's seems to be a common narrative through any industry right now. So, you know, it's, you know, based on need. That's why I leave it up to him. I mean, we know what's in front of us of what he's looking to purchase. I just I I just assume leave it up to him though what what he feels it's is is a priority. Right. Any further discussion? Yeah. Go ahead, Vic. I have a I have a problem with the surplus in in my
068life in my business thing. A plus surplus was almost as bad as a negative. It it's almost 3% that you miss your numbers by I don't truly understand, you know, all your reasoning for these surpluses. You know, some of these things that you mentioned certainly should have been noticed and they didn't come up until after certain other events. So, it almost seems opportun opportunistic to me that this all occurred. A million dollars overage after what we said and what we done to people's lives of reducing this and laying off that and doing this is to me an embarrassment. and to they can say cop blanch that we're going to they can give you know uh jurisdiction over the balance of that money when I don't feel comfortable of why we have that money not every
069salary every person we hired that I ever seen always came in about the same or more than what the other person at least at every meeting was the market demands we pay this much for that teacher even though they're less experienced uh every superintendent every staff person seems to come in for more so I don't see the salary rate savings the insurance things you knew about uh the oil in fuel because of a mild winter you knew about. So I'm not an accountant and I don't read every little line on there but it just seems like there's holes in this as to why we have a million bucks and to give cart blanch the discretion of that surplus to somebody at this time I'm a no for that. Okay, makes sense. To be clear, it's
070car I don't want to use the word car blanch. I think it's it's pretty narrow down to the list that's presented in front of us. So, we're just not buying just random things. But I'm I have a feeling the money was, let's say, for lack of a better term, ill got, you know, ill gotten because we should have known it shouldn't be a million bucks. It's 3%. We we went I sat there at the different meetings saying that we needed an additional million bucks. And I put my name in my thing saying these guys know what they're talking about. We have an outside agency. I don't you know Brook or whatever it's called and we're paying this guy and he didn't pick it up. There's something not right there. We've been projecting. We Sorry, I
071cut you off. Sorry. Excuse me. Let me I read the list. I want all those things for the the field and all that kind of stuff, but I think we got to sit down and think of how to do it where there's got to be more control. I feel that we've been uh the bucket of trust has been diminished as far as handling money. I I will say that we have been projecting since the fall when we switched the healthcare carriers that um there would be a budget savings. Our budget book that we developed in December and January which we published lists out where those savings were. So we've been publishing for six months now publicly that there was going to be a budget um um surplus a result of the healthc care. We've also
072been sitting publicly as early as as midfall um at the board of um ed finance committee and our finance reports the savings and salary um that we had. So this money is has been publicly in our articulation for the last six to eight months um where it's coming from and why and it's even printed in our budget book. If you if you take a look on our website and it's in our budget book it's listed in there. Um the the details are all as transport transparent as we can get. Um the budget savings were indeed from the health insurance and from the um and the drawing that budget down from the health insurance this this current school year or this past school year brought down our base. So that when we went and we increased
073for this upcoming school year that we're in right now, we lowered the entire base to begin with before we added on the increase to the new school year. So it helped both last school year and this upcoming year. Um that budget saving was postbudget development for this past school year because we didn't know we were switching carriers the time we um brought our budget um to the board of finance and to the board of education. We did that because the health in um insurance in the state went up so drastically postbudget approval this past school year. So all that was was not in our control. And because the incre the rates went up so high, we aggressively switched carriers. That aggressiveness switch to switch carriers gave us a huge budget surplus this year that exceeded
074over um half million dollars. That was not something that we had planned for. It's accounted for in this school year um because we knew the the savings um that we were um getting. Um, but when the budget was approved in 2022, we had no way of knowing that we'd be renegotiating our carrier. And we knew as early as October, we've been sharing these figures. Hang on. We always are renegotiating with the carrier. And it seems like all every budget meeting we're talking about renegotiating with the carrier and we're always talking about cutting the bus expenses. We're always talking about fuel expenses and things that we done to save. We talk about that all year long. You know, we talk about savings with the teachers and the salaries and moving them more towards looking at the
075Rubik's cube that they get paid by over to the left side, not having to drift down to the righth hand corner. We know all that. And on top of that, my apprehension is is I think on top of it, you had a line item that you missed for $185,000 or something. You know, an accountant journal entry that was wrong. Well, I don't I'm not an accountant. I dealt a lot with accountants and there's always a lot of words to a simple number. I'm just saying I don't feel comfortable with what happened and a million dollar plus to me is as bad as a million dollar miss. Thanks Vic. Joe, end of my story. I just see that this is a culmination of of years of efficiencies built in to the point where we have been
076building controls in and when I first got on this board spending was out of control. So you're looking at something and I understand Vic where budget is but what was is what was the accounting error that it made up for the 187,000? Yes. So every year our finance system, our finance company, Infinite Vision, um they um do about a half day, about a 5 hour session with the business manager, the payroll person, the accounts payable person, and basically it's a new year rollover. They take the entire system. There's about 30 different steps in the process um or more. And it's very technical. They they basically walk you through everything that you need to press in order to set up the new finance year for the new year. Part of that process is to roll forward
077the money from the previous school year to the new school year to pay the salaries during the summertime because you're paying the 23 through 26 pays during the summer in July and August using the previous year's funds. the the person that did the that work from Infant Vision did a wrong step in that process and it overencumbered $187,000 that should not have been um calculated into the salaries for this current school year. That was a step that got that was done incorrectly by that technician from Infinite Vision. It wasn't until we went to do the final payroll in June that um it was identified as that error. And when we got on the phone with Infinision, they were able to figure out that it was an error that their technician had done the previous year
078um around this time and that's when I caused it. So are we going to fire that person or that accountant firm or whatever? I mean, you know, if you shoot a rocket to the moon and you miss by, you know, 400 yards, you still miss the moon. You know, here you you put in the wrong uh algorithm. You put in the wrong number. I don't care that it's 30 steps. Accountants get paid to look at 30 steps. They charge you for 30 steps. They're supposed to be experts on 30 steps. So they miss $180,000. I don't care if it's a 100 steps. There's something wrong there. If you if you wanted me to do away with innovative vision, that means that we are spending a quarter to half million dollars to purchase a new finance
079system and implement new system. This is not just an accountant. This is the company that owns our finance system. That's the person that did this work. It's a major major company. It Yes, it was a problem. that they that they caused. Um, but removing them from our system would be a significant change to operations and require us to probably spend upwards of a quarter of a million to million dollars to purchase and implement a new finance system districtwide. That would be an implication. You're frying up a straw man. You said a person somebody missed that money. I'm just saying and I don't want you to where where's the accountability? We have so little accountability in so many things that we do from curriculum to staffing to block scheduling and all this other kind of stuff.
080So, uh this this $180,000 stick to my craw with all the other things that I see accumulated from different things I'm involved in. So, you know, I it would have been nice if somebody said we really corrected that or we really did something or that that the excuse that it was 30 steps and he missed it is just to me as you know covering it over. But anyway, enough has been said if you know I'm one ninth so let's get to the other eight. I have something to say. Go ahead. We we as a finance subcommittee did not get numbers for health insurance. We were not given any idea of how much we were saving. Um and I know that we've asked and we've been told we've been we're in good shape. Um don't worry
081about we're we're good shape. You know, we're going to have a surplus couple hundred thousand dollars. Never in my wildest dreams in sitting here talking about this the all of our finance meetings would it have been close to a million dollars. So I feel personally that I am not the person to be on the finance subcommittee. So someone can take my place. I am resigning from the committee. you figure out who else can do it because I feel like this was this was wrong and I don't want to be part of it. All right, I understand. Deb, I don't blame you. Can I ask one other thing? If we don't do anything with this money, what happens to it? It goes back to the town. All of it. Yes. No, you can you don't have
082to you can send a portion back. You can send $5 back. It does it's not all or nothing. You know, the other point, you know, to Vic's point as well is that, you know, kind of few that it was uh, you know, a monumental error uh in supposedly our favor because all nine of us are personally responsible for the finances. So, if this went um you know, if this went the other way, $190,000 in the other direction, then you know, and there are and there are districts that have had that happen. And I don't know what the I don't know if you go to the town and you may a couple and you get more money. I don't know. But all I do know is that the nine of us are personally responsible for this
083budget. And that's why we play very conservative in finances. We try not to overspend early in the year. end up with some stuff at the end of the year because the thing is the thing is Robert once I because I'm not an accountant either. So um I also agree that I feel like I shouldn't be on finance but I'm I'm going off the whole board soon enough. But um you know if you look in May there was a $1.7 million overage of certified salaries. So you had to know who your salaries were in May and to have $1.77 million over what and and it was over in April and it was over in March. So your your salaries are something that are you know you have a really good handle on. It's not an oil
084price. It's not a weather thing. So, I think that it was there all along and maybe it was expected that we would pick it up, but we went along with when we were told we're in good shape and it'll be a couple hundred,000. So, that's that's what happened. So with that um you know and Joe I you know we have a motion on the table to um you know allow the superintendent and and I guess it's to to spend down at his discretion. Um so I mean there I guess that that's the motion and that's the second on the table. So that's that's what we have. Um, so all those in favor, I I Nicole, wait, hold on. I got to find my list here. I think Shel's Shelley needs to be made co-host so
085she can unmute. Okay, do that right now. Nicole. Um, Shelly. Oh, no. I don't know what Shelly is. Mike is a yes. Um, Nicole's a yes. Joe's I'm unmuted now. So, yes, a yes. Um, Vic, can I pass? I Well, you can't really abstain unless you have because you don't want I I want to get Wait, I don't want to give the money back to the to the town and I want the things fixed that we can fix. Okay, I made my statement. I think everybody knows where I think the blame or the lack of control was over it. The money is there. The projects are there. So, let's spend the money. But I'm on record that I'm very very unhappy with me putting my name out in front of sitting at those board meetings
086and finance meetings saying that these guys know what they're doing. We need that extra million bucks. and talking about that I was poed that it was cut and that we I sat there and we eliminated different positions and stuff. I feel very guilty about doing that to the students and to those individuals by accounting errors, but I don't want to take and punish the teams in the fields and stuff like that. So, I will begrudgingly vote yes. Okay. Because I want the money spent. Gotcha. Vinnie. Yes. Deb, no. Um, and I am a no. So, but motion carries. Okay. Next update on the expenses and um so our next is going into executive session. Um, are you still there, Deb? Because you're you're Yeah, I'm here. My camera just keeps going. So, do you have
087a motion? Yep. Motion to enter into executive session to discuss a personnel matter and invite in Superintendent Miller. Second. Second by Mike. All those in favor? I Iain. Okay. We're in executive session at uh 7:56. I'm going to move the people in the waiting room to that are here into turn the live feed off.