001I aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Hey, please take a moment for silent reflection. Thank you. Okay. Item C, meetings of notes. That's a long one. Board faculty meeting at either Sherman Elementary School on Wednesday, October 1st, 7:30 a.m. Four or more board members may be in attendance. Also have board faculty meeting at Garden City High School, Wednesday, October 1st at 2:30 p.m. Four or more board members may be in attendance. Board faculty meeting at Victor Onalis Elementary School, Tuesday, October 7th at 7:45 a.m. Four or more board members may be in attendance. uh board faculty meeting at Florence Wilson Elementary School Wednesday, October 8th at 7:30 a.m. or more board
002members may be in attendance and a board faculty meeting at Buffalo Jones Elementary School, Wednesday, October 8th, 2025 at 4:10 p.m. Four or more board members may be in attendance as well. Item D, approval of the agenda. Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't see it. I'm sorry. Approval agenda of the following amendment. Thank you. Uh D1, additional classified personal actions for consideration items E3. >> Mr. President, I move to approve the agenda as amended. Second move and seconded. Is there any discussion? There is none. All in favor, raise your hand. opposed. Same sign. Motion carries. >> We have John on. >> Oh, yeah. John, can you hear us? >> I There you go. Sorry, John. >> Okay. Item E, the consent agenda. >> President, I move to approve the consent agenda. >> I'll second. It's been
003moved and seconded. Is there any discussion? There is none. All in favor raise your hand. Oppose. Same. Motion carries. John. Oh, sorry. John >> I. >> Thank you. Okay. Item F, unfinished business. F1. Board of Education has asked to consider and approve the change from American Fidelity to benefits direct a life. for the recommendation from the insurance committee uh CFO Jessica Na >> and I I can just answer any questions that you guys have. Um but again the committee heard presentations from both benefits direct and American Fidelity uh put it out for a vote and overwhelmingly supported the benefits direct change. Um and that would be for January 1st 2026 coverage and beyond. So, >> is there any cost savings? >> Um, for employees, there should be cost savings. Uh, financially for the district, it's
004no bearing just because it's all employer dollar or employee dollars. Um, but the presentation proved that um upwards of like even 40% on some of the life policies. Um, they have everything American Fidelity offers and more. Um, and then if if employees aren't in fact happy with American Fidelity, like a life policy that they've had and they don't want to start over, they can port that and uh keep that policy and just pay it directly from their bank account. So, um, I I've sent that I'll send that communication out, let them know that that it um they can they do have that option, but probably encourage them to at least wait until they hear from Benefits Direct through the open enrollment process before they jump to anything. just kind of educate them on their options.
005>> Do we need a motion or >> Yes, they're looking for >> Mr. President, are there any other questions here? >> Does anybody have any questions of Jessica? >> Mr. President, I move that the board of education approve the insurance committee's recommendation to transfer supplemental insurance offerings from American Fidelity to Benefits Direct. >> I'll second that. It's been moved and seconded to approve benefits direct change. Is there any discussion? There is none. All in favor raise your hand. John opposed. Same sign. Motion carries. Okay. Item G, new business. Uh we'll go to G1 superintendent search discussion. Uh interim deputy superintendent Drew Tone. >> Yeah. So it's that time that we start uh the process of the superintendent search. Last um this this past summer we talked about uh bringing the topic back up early in
006the fall. Um we are starting to see school districts around the state post uh their superintendent openings. Um and kind of like we did last time to get on the front end of it. Uh now is the time that we probably need to get moving and and decide what we want to do. Um we have a few different options. Uh number one, we can reissue a new RFP. Uh completely start over with finding a new search firm, going through the search firm process. Uh with the RFP process, uh similar to what we did last time, um there's obviously costs and time associated with that. Um, we can utilize the warranty with Ray and Associates uh that were guaranteed from the last search with uh Dr. McCartney stepping down uh prior to one year. Uh or
007we can do nothing. Um the cost if we go through the RFP search, I did reach out to some firms, it's pretty similar to what we saw last time. It'll be anything ranging from uh the bottom end of about5 to $7,000 in the top end. being as expensive as we want to go, but probably somewhere in that 35 30 to $35,000 range. Uh if we go with um Ray Associates, obviously there's no cost to us outside of the the typical cost that we would associate uh with bringing in candidates for travel. And then if we do nothing, there's obviously no immediate cost, but that really delays and and postpones the the process. And um I'm not sure that would be a great option. Uh I don't have a recommendation. Um it's whatever serves you guys
008best as to what you want to do with the process. All that we need tonight is some direction on what to do. Um if we do the RFP process, uh I would get with Jennifer Cunningham and we would develop an RFP and get that out to to folks if that's your guys's wish. If we went with Rand Associates, we literally don't have to do anything. We would just invoke the warranty. Um, if we went that direction and then obviously doing nothing, we don't have to do anything. But that's going to put us a little bit behind the eight-ball as far as where other districts are at at this time. >> What uh wasn't about this time last year that we started? >> It was. Yeah. >> Kind of the operating. This is a a very
009similar timeline to what what we had last year. Um the kind of depending on what you guys choose to do is why we're bringing it to you at this point. If we have to go through the whole RFP process, uh that's really going to if you guys remember, we kind of even though we started early last time, we got to the end of it. We were still late when we got to the end of it if you guys if you guys remember back. So, um, we kind of did learn a little bit of a lesson last time in how long we spread out the process. >> How much did we pay Rain Associates? Do you remember? >> Yeah, it it ended up being about seven. >> Yeah. 17. Say it again. >> No, it was
010>> I can look that up real quick. >> Yeah, Jessica will find it. I think the base was was uh 15,000 plus travel and and expenses and advertising. >> Yeah, I think that's >> we don't want to go there. >> We if we go with Rain Associates, do we have some control over maybe which one of the associates that we have working with us? >> Yeah. So, I talked to Rain Associates and they're they're willing to u they're willing to adjust to us. Uh, I talked to them about specific associates maybe not being >> on our team. >> Yeah. maybe not being involved and and Molly did say she would be more involved would be more involved in this process if we wanted her to be and we can um kind of pick and choose
011the other individuals that we would um in my discussion with Rain Associates I will say um and if that's the direction you guys end up end up going they are going to be very um flexible to your guys's demands is what I would say they're they feel that about what happened last time with um with having to step down that quickly and uh they do feel like they want to make it right with our district. >> Well, my my feeling on it is is we paid them already. They offered a warranty and they're willing to honor that warranty. There's no additional expense to us other than the normal expense from bringing candidates in. I I just think we hold their feet to the fire to honor the warranty that they gave us because we've already
012paid for their service. So that's my opinion. I mean, I don't know anybody else thinks, but >> I feel the same way because I think one of the reasons we selected them was because of the warranty that they gave. And I agree and I I know, you know, someone could be critical of that for the fact that what happened, but I don't think that that probably anybody would have seen that doing your background check that the lawsuit was going to be filed three or four days before the u expiration statute >> statute limitations. Thank you. Uh yeah. >> Yeah. >> I mean they gave us a warranty. It's going to cost us minimal. >> It'll be minimal. It'll just be the travel of the of the uh candidates themselves. Uh Ry has mentioned that norm
013like in our warranty, we would normally pay for advertising. They want to go ahead and take care of advertising uh and and take care of those costs for us if we end up going that direction. And then also, you know, I kind of that that makes me feel a little better that this company's willing to honor it and they're willing to try to make it right. That to me that means something, you know, >> and if we go that way, I'd sure like get it moving, you know. >> I did have a question that we got asked a while back. Does this process offer a new warranty if we or do we have an answer for that? I don't have I didn't think about asking that question. I I'll find out. Uh I'm I'll find
014out. I'm not going to answer for them, but >> I would be in favor of utilizing brain associates as well. It seems like the best used of the district's money as well. >> You ready for a motion? >> Yeah. Is there any other discussion? Mr. President, I'll make a motion that we go with option two, Ray and Associates using the existing warrant and uh proceed that way in our superintendent search. >> One more question. The legal council, they've reviewed the warranty and that's all. >> Second that. >> Okay, moved and seconded. Uh any further discussion? >> John, do you have anything to add? >> Yeah, I would just add Randy that I agree with kind of the board there. I think that uh Ray and Associates, I think Molly, you know, she wants to make
015it right with us as a as a board and as a district. And I think they'll do a great job this time around and and I think we should do that. I think it's fiscally responsible and I think we'll get a good search. >> Okay. Okay. Another discussion. Uh all in favor raise your hand. Opposed same. John >> I. >> Okay. Motion carries. So, following up on that, uh, now that you made that decision, if if we went a direction and needed to do an RFP, I would give you that timeline. Um, going with Ray and Associates, they would like to get going on this because of the timeliness of it. They, um, they don't want what happened last year to happen again this year. Um, so one thing that she did ask is that
016we find a time uh probably early, not next early the following week to get with them and set up a Zoom and and talk about the search and um make sure that we're all on the same page as far as our expectations for them who we'd like to be involved with the search, their new updated timeline for the search. Make sure everybody's everybody's good with that. So, um, we'll put When's the next board meeting, Joshua? >> October 13. >> 13. Sorry. >> So, we'll we'll put a special board meeting together just to have that discussion >> the week before. >> Yeah. With them. And it'll probably we'll probably do it over Zoom. So, everybody I don't have to interrupt everybody's unless you guys want to come in. We can probably do it over Zoom because
017we're just talking timelines and nuts and bolts of the search. Okay. Total payment for them was 1957. >> Close lot closer. >> A lot closer to 19 is better than 70. >> He looked at me. I was like, "Yeah, you're right." And then I couldn't find them because it's under Cesco executive search and I couldn't find it under Ray. So that's 195. >> All right. Thank you. >> Okay, we'll move on to item G2, grade reconfiguration discussion. Uh, inter superintendent Josh Gman. >> Uh, Mr. President, I'm going to recuse from this discussion. Okay. >> So, I know we've we've had a we've I've had a couple board members uh reach out to me and and express some interest in kind of moving forward and looking at grade reconfiguration. So, I just wanted to bring that
018up tonight, let you guys kind of discuss it. Um, if if you choose to to move forward with that, we would just need action given us direction to come to you with kind of a plan. Um, I think we need to get direction from you all first and then once we have once we have that, then we can kind of bring a plan for you to approve down the road. But, um, just get direction moving forward. So, I just wanted to open that up for conversation with you all and see kind of what your thoughts were and give us an idea of how you want us to move forward. If you want us to move forward, >> we have K4 at all schools except for three >> and that would be Aubert, Jenny Barker, and
019Fly Mail. And that's K6. Correct. >> All three of those. >> Correct. >> So, Mr. Norby is not here tonight, but how does that affect his job and what he's doing with the curriculum when he's got three of them at K6, everybody else at K4, and then the two fifth and sixth grade? So like some of our current curriculums, it is a challenge um because when we adopted like our our current ELA curriculum and we're we're in the process of obviously adopting a new ELA curriculum, but when we adopted that ELA curriculum 7 years ago, uh that was when we had had that initial decision and we we we assumed that we were going to move forward with the the K568 model and so we bought K5 one curriculum, 68 a different curriculum. So when
020you go to the two intermediate centers, fifth grade's using one curriculum and sixth grade using a totally different curriculum. >> Um and and it's the same thing at those schools. So K4 is doing one curriculum or excuse me, K5 is doing one curriculum and sixth grade's kind of out on their own. And so you know, you look at PLM and JD Marker, the the LA curriculum is completely different than everybody else in the building. And then at at AP, we've got two sixth grade teachers. And so there's two people that are using that curriculum and everybody else is using a different curriculum. So it does create some challenges. Um I think you and I have had conversations with it about this a lot. I think from a personnel standpoint um it would make life a
021lot easier if we were all uniform. I mean even even if even if you all decided we don't want to do anything with grade reconfiguration, having all of our buildings be the same would really make life a lot easier on on a lot of fronts. Um, as far as as far as grades is, programming would be easier and things like that. >> Do we know do you know how many electives that the kids at Plymouth, AB, and Jenny Barker do not have at those schools compared to the intermediate centers? >> Music is the big name. >> Yeah, band and orchestra would be your big one. Choir. Um, uh, yeah, I think they do, uh, they do Tech Lab, too, don't they? Still at the intermediate centers. And so, that would be the the other one
022I think that that the intermediate centers offer that they're not able to take at the at the other buildings. >> So, they're missing out completely on those opportunities. >> Yeah. So, Ben band and orchestra. So, in the past, it was a fifth and sixth grade. We try to do it for fifth and sixth graders and we've done all kinds of different things and it's it's been a struggle for us. Um and so we met with the music folks um two years ago, right? And we kind of talked about that and so we made the decision that we're not going to do band and orchestra until sixth grade. And instead of offering it every other day, so they would fifth grade would have one day, sixth grade would have the next day. Instead of doing that,
023it's it's all um it's every day for sixth grade. Um but it was a challenge to bust the kids in and they were missing a lot of their content, you know, from from the other three schools. And so um the decision was made a couple years ago that if those kiddos in sixth grade wanted to take band or orchestra that they would have to transfer to either Stones or Sits to take those take those music programs. And I think we've had a couple do that, but I think the majority of the kiddos have just decided that if they're going to do that, they'll stay where they're at and then pick up an orchestra starting in seventh grade. So if we were to take fifth and sixth grade out Jenny Bark or I know we've had
024to we've been full there. So you've had to actually turn students away. Correct. >> Yeah. >> What about Plymouth? What would we do with fifth and sixth grade? Would there be anything boundary wise that we would do different? >> If if we move them to the intermediate centers, right? >> No, I think we could absorb those kiddos pretty easily. >> Okay. >> And APR too. We've had that discussion. I mean, we're And that's not to say we would lose the teachers. We would we would just probably have to >> Well, let's say we say we want to definitely get the sixth graders in with the seventh and eighth graders and move the fifth graders back down. First step would be like figuring out how to make that happen >> at the middle schools. >> Yeah.
025>> Correct. Yeah. >> We have lots of room. We've got to figure out the middle school capacity issue and then um >> and then figure out how to how to put all those pieces together. Yeah, >> I know this is the last last time we went through this, we had a lot of that was the overwhelming majority of people saying we want to get this figured out and get this resolved. And I think it's beneficial on like you've already mentioned multiple fronts and I think it's a no-brainer that we go forward with this and getting this going. So that's my two cents. Well, and I remember when we had these talks last year, it was completely obvious to me that the community supported the great reconfiguration, the the K5 68 912 model. That was that
026was obvious. The problem came when we decided how to get there, >> you know, that's when we started hitting all the bumps in the road. So, I do think it's needs to be done. I support the the great reconfiguration. It's just Yeah, it comes with challenges. Yeah, >> I think I think the the need and the desire is there and we've proven it's better for students. It's it's one less transition. It that's all it's just how do we get there? So I my recommendation is is that we move forward with whether you form we form a committee. >> Yeah. And >> I mean what I think we do now I mean I think the studies that we've done have have proven that that's what the community wants and how we want to go. So now
027what I think we we would we would do is first off figure out the facility issue. What does that look like? And then how do we get there, you know, um as far as what does that look like movement wise and stuff cuz Drew is going to have to be involved in that quite a bit from a from the personnel standpoint because there's going to be movement obviously with with staff. I mean that question got brought up yesterday. Yeah, yesterday >> we had the board faculty meeting at Charleston and >> you know I think they're and and I understand that this conversation has come up multiple times um since 2018. This conversation's come up and they you know I think they're worried about what does that mean for us? Where are we going to be?
028Where are we going to land? I mean I think we need to to involve you know the principles in that conversation and have a have a lot of conversations and get staff involved. you know, um, the music conversation. Summer Miller to me. Um, I sent a letter out to the staff, let them know that we were going to bring this up in the board meeting because I wanted to be upfront, let the staff know that that I didn't want anybody felt like they were getting blindsided. And Summer Miller reached out to me and said that she's been on this since 2018 and she'd like to be a part of that. So, I think, you know, that's going to impact the music program. That's going to impact a lot of our a lot of those kind
029of programs. And so, what does that look like? I think we need to get get feedback from folks for sure. >> Yeah. And definitely community involvement is a is a must. >> And some families involved that. >> Well, and I agree like none of the contention last year was over the reconfiguration. It was the implementation. And if we are slowing this process down a little bit, we're being more methodical. We're being open and transparent about what we're doing. I think we'll have a better response. So, I would say whatever you guys need to do to start moving forward, I would be in favor of >> I and I also think, you know, one of the things we've talked about too is I I think we've got to figure out what we're doing with the reconfiguration
030and once we get that piece figured out, then we talk about the boundaries because what I don't want to do is we have to do something about our boundaries. I'm not I'm not saying we don't. And and while I know it's not great to kick that down can down the road another year or two until we've got to figure out where these what we're going to do because it doesn't make sense to reboundary everybody and move all of our families and then once we move the sixth graders up to the middle school if that's the decision that we decide to take we're going to move everybody again. You know that's that's not good for kids. We need to we need to be a little bit methodical in that in that decision too. >> Yeah because
031what >> I think you do one before you do the other. Randy brought up, you know, it's one less transition. What we don't want to move is move right >> students into one school and the next year move them to another school just because boundary >> not because they move transition to another school but just it's a boundary related >> issue. Y >> I agree. Timewise if we were to do this K4 and then the 56 do we have any idea? >> You mean K5 and 68? >> I'm sorry. Yeah. No, no, no. right now if we were to the fifth and well back up we have any idea what kind of time we're looking at in if if we move forward with this >> so more than likely we're probably going to have to
032add a little bit onto KH right and so my best guess would be fall of 2028 would be the earliest that I see this happening >> we got to start now we got to get the ball rolling now and that's the earliest I see that happening I talked to I've literally talked to board members that were on the board in the 90s and they said they were having these exact same discussions. They wanted to do it then when they built, you know, when the intermediate centers were built. I just we just need to do it. Yeah. >> So, I guess what do you Let me ask John. John, do you have anything you want to say? Uh yeah, I would agree with Robin um with her comment that we got to start at KH. So
033I mean if it was me, I think the process would be we have to figure out how to make KH um work for sixth, seventh, and eighth grade and what that's going to look like and what that's going to cost the district. I think that's the starting spot, but I think all you board members know where I'm at and probably the community that um we have to start investing in our our schools. We have a lot of old buildings and if we don't get started in investing in those buildings um now we're going to end up with a lot of buildings that are going to need a lot of maintenance at one time. So we we have to be forward thinking and and get started with the process. >> Good. I think we're at a
034I believe I can't speak for everybody else, but as far as what we know building maintenance is, I think we're in a really good spot with being very familiar with that facilities directors that we've we've had and the walkthroughs and everything. So, I mean, >> yeah, I think that would should hinder our decision because we I mean >> I think Brandon and Fau before they did an excellent job in their long range facilities plans and I have identified problems and the big stuff and so I I agree. I feel comfortable that that they've done a good job with that. The next the next big step for us is if if that's what you guys are deciding is just we've got to get a design and put dollars to a design on KH. >> You know,
035we've talked before about >> taking it to 900ish. >> Yeah. >> And so that that realistically would be we would have to get we would more than likely in October if we can get it put together that quick. I don't know if we can pull it off that quick, but we would try to get it to um a plan for for um a design fee um to get that kind of going and and have that in front of you to vote for in October and then kind of go from there. What is the capacity in horse good versus KH? So horse good we've had as many as 7 >> 780 >> 80 790 it's very uncomfortable at 780 790 when we were having these discussions last year one of the big conversations was the growth
036of the community and the growth to the north and to the east um you know there's there's talk about that new bypass possibly going in which would continue that growth toward the north and the east and so as we talked last year was it was finding a way to make KH the bigger of the two middle schools and knowing I we talked a little bit about it with one of our faculty meetings yesterday. Knowing that uh and and you guys have talked about it, end of life on horse good on parts of horse good is is in the next decade. And so knowing we get this done because we also have a big bill coming up with horse good that was built in 1957 that has plumbing issues, has electrical issues, has all kinds of
037issues. um we're coming to end of life on that and so making sure that we get this done, we get it sized right, we know the growth is that direction, that's the school is that direction and then and you know 10 years from now we come back and and take a look at horse good and figure out what do we need to do with horse good at that point. >> But as far as numbers if you were to what would you say the capacity is for KH? >> KH is >> well currently Yeah. I mean, if you had >> if we were maxed out >> Yeah. maxed out >> 470. >> Yeah. I was say 475. >> And about 800 it works good. >> Yeah. 780. Yeah. >> I'd hate to see 800 in there,
038>> right? >> Yeah. >> I mean, you could do it, but it would be >> and and we got a lot of conversations last time about, well, back when it was the old high school, we had and at the time it would have been, 1900 kids in there. 1,800 kids. People forget we had 11 trailers and JDA and >> don't forget those trailers. >> There's a lot more to garden. >> Yeah. So, and when you think of 11 trailers, that's 22 classrooms, you know. So, eight trailers. I think it may have been eight trailers. 11 trailers districtwide, but maybe it was eight there. That's 16 classrooms, those trailers. So, >> and the whole math department was in JDA. I mean, there was >> there was a lot of JDA, too. So, >> so it's a
039lot of times people forget that >> it's a different dynamic. >> It's not that it's not the old >> Yeah. >> So, >> yeah, when you start looking at the fact that building the main part of that building was built, >> it's almost as old as me. >> 1957, it's old. >> Yeah, it's old. And we've got, you know, the front facade of the of horse good is covering up the old front facade of horse good. And we're always having issues with that. And it's I mean, it it just is it's been a good building. it served its purpose, but it it is in 8 to 10 years from now, we're we're going to need to have some and and that's why this decision is so important with what we do at KH um is
040because in 8 to 10 years from now, right, >> we're and it's not going to be, you know, we may invest, you know, 166 million into KH. That investment is going to be much more significant when we do something at worst good that will probably take a bond. and Jess has done a great job financially. Um, we've been building up for this time. You know, we we've been talking about the expansion of cage for a long time and and we've been building up for this time. So, it's it's not something that um that she hasn't taken lightly and saved up for and prepared for. Yeah. Adding on a cage won't require a bond issue. Shouldn't. No, that's I would I would not recommend that. Do you guys need just a consensus to move forward or?
041>> Yeah, just a motion to move forward to bring a plan forward to you guys >> to move forward with design, I guess, where KH would be the biggest piece >> and and the the next step again is just that plan of KH. What is KH going to look like if if we move forward with grade reconfiguration? The first step is figuring out what KH is going to cost. how much is that going to cost for us to be able to get it up to 800, 900 students? And so we come with that if that that price very well could be out of our range and we stick where we are and we we keep you know intermediate centers. But if it comes back and you guys are comfortable and >> there is converting the
042intermediate centers to an elementary, there's going to be a little bit of a cost there. I don't think it's going to be significant, but you're going to want to bring in more playground equipment. you're going to want to bring in, you know, fence off the playgrounds a little bit more. There's going to be some things to bring it down to to fit little littleer people than than what we have there now. And so, I don't see that being a huge cost, but there will be I mean, y'all voted on the upgrade for the the addition for the the playground equipment at at Sharon. So, I mean, you know what that cost is going to be. There'll be a little bit of a cost there too, but um comparatively speaking it'll be minimal, but there'll be
043some there. >> Right now is KH does the just the dome and their gym that gets all their needs. They're not taking kids to Florence schools, are they? No. So just the two are getting >> Yeah. Yeah. >> And high school uses the dome. Yeah, it it gets used. I I will say for for what it is, it it does get a lot of use. Um like after school, we have middle school cheer, high school cheer, volleyball going in it right now. Um which has been nice. PE has been going over there and using it as well. So it is serving its purpose. I I think for the 100,000 we invested in it for it's serving its purpose well. And um I doubt a new gym can be included in the price tag that we
044can afford right away. That's probably a phase two of of KH. So that that dome will continue to serve a focus for the next few years until we we have the funds available to do >> right >> because we're going to have to hire more PE teachers. So you're going to need that gem space for sure. >> What was the warranty on the dome? >> Sorry. with maintenance. It's pretty good. >> All right, I'll make you want the motion to move forward to proceed. I would be willing to make that motion move forward proceed with the addition on cage to get us to that point of understanding on uh reconfiguration. Is that clear enough or do you need more of that? >> Yeah. No, I think that's good. You get it, Jennifer. >> I'll second
045that. Okay, it's been moved and seconded to move forward with the planning base for grave reconfiguration. >> Is there any other discussion? >> John, do you have anything else to add? >> Uh, nope. >> All in favor raise your hand. Opposed? Same side. >> Motion carries. >> John. >> Oh, John. I'm sorry. >> I was an I. Yeah, >> thank you. >> Okay, we'll move on to item H. The next board meeting, next board meeting of the educational board of education will take place on Monday, October 13th at 6 PM here in the boardroom at the educational support center. Item I, executive session. Mr. >> President, I move we go into executive session for 15 15 minutes to discuss an individual employees performance pursuant to non-elected personnel exception under coma beginning at 5:40 and the
046open meeting will resume in the board meeting room at 5:55. I second. >> Move and second. Is there any discussion? All in favor, raise your hand. Oppose. Same. >> Motion carries. Need a picture