School Board Special Call Meeting: 9-29-25

001Call this meeting to order. Will you please take the role? >> Buffalo >> here. >> Ginge >> present. >> Pson >> present. >> Thomas >> here. >> Caligger >> here. >> All right. Tonight we are here to discuss uh really now two plans that were presented to the board. One from the steering committee's meeting last week and one put together by uh the current colonel Ken Pollson. Uh I'd like for us to first review the the plan out of the steering committee last week. Um, are we able to pull that up? >> What's the title of that? >> SC3. >> This SC3 options >> options PDF. >> Oh, it's very hard to read. >> Match what I have. Why am I thinking it's going to pull up on this one? >> Look up. >> Same

002one. >> Oh, because I have a copy. What I have a copy of is not there. >> Thank you. >> Yes. >> Thank you. Doing good, Freley. How about yourself? >> They say I can't call it. If I did, I spoil it. >> Madam Chair. >> Yes, ma'am. >> He is not available this evening. >> I'm not speaking out of No, he as far as I understand, he was not available. All right. So this plan begins in 2025 with those district-wide redistricting plan and we would use 2025 to begin school transition plans. So in 2026, this plan calls for repurposing the current Rosemont AOIS facility for the Gent program and relocating AOIS to Ruffner on the fourth floor. uh would close the GED facility, repurpose Lynenwood Elementary School for professional development center and reloc. >>

003Yes. >> I'm so sorry. Um with the administration, this is this is from the from the consultants. Correct. I would prefer hearing it from the administration. >> Oh, absolutely. >> Have him go step by step so the entire community can hear from the administration. >> Okay. I think that's fair. >> Excuse me, Mr. Freley who was participated in the meeting. Yeah, if you could step forward, explain this new recommendation to the community. >> Well, I've created a little cheat sheet. >> Thank you so much. >> I think you're right. Thank you. >> All good. No problem. >> Good evening, everybody. So we did um call the committee together again. That was last week. It was led by Mr. Sts and uh he had a chance to go through the community feedback from the previous board

004meeting and we felt strongly that we would need to get the committee back together to take one more swing at an option. So I'll go through it real quick. Um so obviously rebuilding Mari as you all know all that paperwork is signed and we break ground on that project here real soon in 2025 um we'll start a complete redistricting plan elementary uh schools all of them uh 26 so we're going to we're proposing to repurpose Rosemont AOS facility for the Gent program close the Gent facility repurpose is Lindwood for a professional development center. So all of the staff at Rosemont, the administrative staff at Rosemont would then go to Lynenwood. Um closed Harlton, close Willoughby ECC, repurpose Ocean Air to be an ECC for that side of town and then close Graanby Elementary School. For

005the following year, we would close PB Young because that aligns with the project that's going on over there. Um, close Norview Elementary, repurpose St. Helena, close Berkeley ECC, repurpose Chesterfield Elementary School to receive CEP, and then close the CEP facility. The following year in 2028, 2029, we would get one of our design uh architectural firms hopefully to start working on plans for Jay Cox and Suburban. Some of y'all might know that in the past we've used the same architectural plan to build more than one school. It saves a whole lot of money. Um like Ocean View and Larchmont are the same exact plan. If you looked at both schools, you wouldn't be able to tell the difference. They changed the brick facade out front. So it does appear different but it's the same plan. So

006the reason one of the reasons we're repairing them like that it'll save between six and 8 million in architectural engine both schools uh the following year then we would begin rebuilding JCOS and Suburban Park. Both of those are considered high student population areas. year after that we would repurpose Lake Taylor High School to be a comprehensive CTE. Uh we would recommend to close Madison because we believe we can make that a comprehensive addition to the Lake Taylor High School and then close NTC facility. The reason we got a little bit more aggressive in the closures as far as the first within the first three years, this being year one and then the next two successive years is we felt like um by redistricting and then closing four elementary schools the first year and then four

007more the second year. all the redistricting and all the moves would we would be done because the last two closures are seven years down the way and neither one of the last two closures are related or redistricting. So it would just get it all done as quickly as we could from an operational standpoint. We could do this. >> Um I do have a quick question where you talk about closing PB Young in 2027. The note the relocation plan says students in west boundary to Taylor and east to is that because of the redistric >> what we were just trying to do is give people an understanding that there are open seats and these are places where they could go just so people knew that this was a possibility but the actual placement of students will

008be in the hands of our expert the company we have under contract that does that work but they will put the students as close to the educational center as they in and we've given them other charges that they need to go by. >> Okay. It's just it's just it looks like an incomplete sentence, so I just >> I apologize. >> David types pretty fast. >> Um Dr. Paul, could you speak to what would happen to the AOIS program should it be moved? >> Sure. A couple comments on that. really um the purpose of this plan was to show even other possibilities that are out there. So, it's not uh firm relocation or anything else on this plan. It is, but it's it's just an option that's out there for everybody. And if AOIS would move,

009just like with Gent, the whole program would move. All the teachers would move it. It would just be a program shift into a different building. >> Keep it as administration. >> It would keep it administration. There would just be a separate school within Ruffner. Ruffner has roughly 600 open seats. >> Numbers again. >> Yeah, 614. >> Yeah, they have 613 seats open right now. from the 4th. From from September 4th, you have an updated >> I just did it. >> Oh, okay. >> Like when you say just did it like you just >> were those posted on board docs, though. >> If he emails me it to me, I can do it. >> I can I can email it to you. >> Can you email him and then he can also distribute those to the

010board? >> All right. Can I get a copy of that? Oh god. Got to give it to me first. I didn't >> bring my phone. Sorry. Oh, >> you'll just have to you'll just have to answer questions that we have then. >> I can ask. >> Did you get that before? >> It was It was 618. It was 618 as of um fourth. Yeah, I had the I had >> What was it? >> What was >> I believe it was 618. >> What you had on here? >> Ruffner's capacity is 1192. They currently have 579 students. Correct. >> 435 of those are middle school. 144 are elementary. They have 613 open seats >> as of today, this morning. >> Can I ask something? Um, it say relocate students in west boundary to teller and east

011to where? >> That's what I asked to do today. >> Yes, >> those are just general back, you know, locations where kids might >> Well, what are we thinking about though? East to what? Just throw some school. What are we thinking about? What school we thinking about? >> Which line are you referring to, ma'am? >> PB Young 2027 closure. Relocate students to west boundary to Tox. >> Uhuh. It's PB Young. No, it says PB closed PB Young says reclo relocate students in west boundary to Taylor and east to Jay. >> Oh, it's just it's just >> Oh, it's not up here. Okay. >> It's just cut off on our >> It's not up here. >> It's on the copy that's on board docs. It's up there. I'm sorry. On the on that copy >> and

012those are just general references where they might fit. But again, you know, we're charging this company that and when I say charging, giving them orders on what our parameters are for them to do the redistricting. >> It'll be more than just the physical location. >> Madam Chair. >> Yes, May. Yes, sir. >> Uh, Mr. Freigh, I'm sorry. Yeah, my board member was already there, but go ahead, Mr. >> Are you sure? Okay. Um, so are you talking about Schultz? Is that the company we're talking about that's going to be doing this? Mr. >> Cal Walbert, >> Mr. Stewarts works for that company. >> Got it. Okay. Um, and I think I recall on the um on the conversation with the education committee because um both myself and Mr. Pollson were assigned as designates from the

013board that he stated that maybe tentively he would have a redistricting plan back to the board by February of 2026. Is that correct? He said um yes, if he could get the 10 closures, he could get it. >> Excellent. Thank you, sir. >> Yes, ma'am. I'm sorry. I would like um a better understanding with this option um particularly how what rubric was used to determine which schools would be closed in 2026 27 you know and so on. If you could share a little bit about the order of things um and why these schools are in the order that they are. Well, we identified the 10 schools that had the highest highest FCIs working in the sequencing from there. One of the reasons, as I've I've alluded to about PB Young being in the second year

014of closing is because it aligns with the NRA, but the other ones um are are pretty much just we, you know, the order we chose for them to to be in the consolidation. >> Okay. >> Well, and I'm glad >> nothing overly specific. Well, I'm glad you brought that up because, you know, I was trying to figure out, you know, what may have been looking at all of the information that has been provided to us thus far and just looking at FCI by itself, which this is much more complicated than that obviously, but um you know, Graanby, Norview Elementary, PB Young, Jay Cox, some of these especially like Gent closing Gent and you So, I'm trying to figure out what the rationale is for having that in year one. Um, why that keeps I guess

015coming up to be year a year one uh solution so to speak and if we could kind of have an understanding around that um that I think would help. And the other thing since we're having a board discussion on it and I think to Miss Thomas's point which to me is personally frustrating is the relocation part and I don't know why we keep talking about relocation. It's good to give an idea, but I think people latch on to my child is moving to this locationally having been been you know we've done different planning school consolidation work before those may change based on the redistricting boundary work and you articulated that but when we put it on paper it becomes real and it becomes something that families attach to. So, I caution us in anything that

016we end up bringing forward for a vote that we don't have that information on there because it's really confusing to have to explain to people that could change two or three times within the next, you know, seven, eight years. You know, it could it could change. Um, and that boundary work is if you see what the current boundaries look like, they could change pretty drastically. So, I caution us to have relocation um items, but when we do have relocations, I also think we need to have guiding principles around what those are. And we've talked about that in the past about deconentrating poverty and about providing enhanced learning opportunities for everyone. Because when you look at school closure research, the research shows that if you're not moving to a higher performing school, you are going to

017see dips in academic performance. And with everything going on at the state level with with framework changes, I think we and just what's right for students academically being at the center of this discussion. Um we need about that when we before we decide if >> I could expand on your initial uh question. So this is a document that shows the FCIS of schools highest to lowest and I highlighted it. Orange are the schools that we're recommending to close. Green is the rebuild, and yellow is the ones we're recommending to repurpose. So, of the top 12 schools with the highest FCIs, we're recommending to change 10 of those. >> So, it was part of our initial conversations with the committee. >> Yep. >> Was that a document that >> I can I can post that, but

018it's not on board docs right now. This is a document. This is from the facilities master condition study that we had the architects and engineers do about six months ago. >> So that's with after all the windows, doors. >> This is everything >> everything. So like the updated um Okay. >> If we could have access to that, that would be too >> then. So then back to the second part of my question about why Gent is in year one on that because that is not a school that is at the top um top 10 first conditions. >> Well ma'am when we start this construction project at Mari there's going to be 60 trucks minimum a day transversing that area. 60. They're going to be filled with sand, crush and run, demolition, steel, bricks. There's going

019to be a whole lot going on for about two years. It's a 300 plus thousand square foot building. And uh we feel like it it would be smart that if we are going to close that building, we should close. That's one of the conditions we're very concerned with. I I am personally concerned with that and so is uh so is M. >> So how are the Mory how do we why is the safety of the gun students more important than the safety of the Mory students? Is it just >> Well, we already have a plan. I mean, we're going to post it shortly, but we've met and we've got a a large fence that's going to go up around the area of the school where the students can access. We're changing the whole access to

020the physical property. We're going to knock the island out on the well and the trucks are going to come in west of the tennis courts and go back to the back. We can't let them go up debris. There's no way they can access the build area from 20th Street because it's two-way parking traffic. And if they were to do that, it would have upset the businesses on that street. So that we're good neighbors and we're being very safe. We're we're redesigning all of that, which means they'll come in on the well to enter into the school to stay away from them. >> We've already met. We met there last week and everybody's agreed. The rightway people were there. City of Norfolk, our build team, our team, we all agreed on that. >> So there is

021some space between Luualid and the physical Mory building, but that doesn't really there. They're going to have to cut through the island, ma'am, and create an access roadway that comes in and J and J in to the back part of of Mory. >> So it's safer. >> There's more separation at Mory than there would be at Gent. Well, I mean, >> just because >> deeply concerned with both sides of the street, but high school kids are going to be right there in that mix and we building fencing so they can't get into the construction site. So, going to be a lot of traffic all day long. Well, I guess I'm trying to understand the safety concern at Gent a little bit better so that if this is an urgent need to move them that we

022fully all understand what that safety concern is even with the redesign, you know, when we were being asked to design the cooperative I mean and then the cooperative agreement where we talked a lot about the rebuild build um the safety even even the safety of the gent students during the rebuild wasn't a prominent feature of the discussion and so now I feel like it is a much more prominent feature of the discussion that are we saying that we cannot keep our students at Gent safe during the my rebuild >> let me let me jump in here for a second missine and madam chair no this whether whether the gent school is moved or uh the students will be safe. We'll have fencing up. We we talked about a media plan where weeks ahead we'll we'll

023be making the community aware of every step of the way of what's going on. I think Mr. Freillley's concern is the traffic um part, you know, with the trucks coming in and out. So, it's it's it it's the traffic concern more than student general student safety concern. And and we know, you know, Gant has a large pickup and drop off line as well. And then adding to it all the constant traffic with the rebuild is where the concern comes in. >> Fredley says safety. So I'm going on what he said. That was one of his main issues. And and I get it. I see what he's saying. I get that part. >> But when you see students Yeah, y'all. They're not looking left and right. They're looking at their cell phones. And anytime I go

024on a campus, doesn't matter where the kids are, they're just looking at their phones. >> Not supposed to have it. But yeah, >> I'm talking about outside. Oh, inside. >> Talking about outside. >> Oh, Miss Buffalo. >> Oh, so when you say that the fencing will cut across the median, am I to assume that Llewellen? >> No, it won't cut across Llewellen. It'll start on this side of Luwellyn on the Mari side and it'll it'll Do you know where the practice football field is? It'll start by the administrative parking, come all the way down that area, cut back behind where the pool is, >> and then go all the way around to where the old parking um driver's ed tower is, and then it'll go down >> all the way down the parking lot. There

025will be a gate there so the students can access a small portion of that for student parking but the majority of the parking lot um back there will be part of the drop site where they are storing sand gravel and all their other >> better visual now because when you said the median I'm like oh so they're going to offing detour. Okay. So, it's just, >> you know, the island that that runs between Llewellyn, they'll have to cut through the island and create an access point for the large trucks. And they're going to have trucks with long steel beams on them. Um >> I I kind of have it a picture because of similar uh situation when they build the new >> off. Um >> Well, this building's almost twice the size. >> Yeah. So,

026>> big building. questions. >> Well, so so since that is uh a recommendation for year one, what other thought processes are in existence for where the Gent program could be? I just finished a study about the capacity of Rosemont. Um, so when Dr. Paul brought forward the when we were talking about option five, Dr. Paul said he really wanted to keep it building for a PD center. We started putting things together and we could move the administrative staff at Rosemont into Linewood and I we could flip the building back to its original design and that would host 1,147 students because it used to be a 789 a junior high school. So the 360 students from Gent, excuse me, from Rosemont and the 490 kids from Gent could all fit at Rosemont. They could all be

027in the one building. >> In other words, instead of moving AOS to Ruffner's fourth floor, we leave AOS young right where they are and have the Gent program join them. That's that's the clarity that I was trying to >> Yeah. And they'll all fit. I mean, we'd have to, you know, make some minor adjustments to plumbing, i.e., you know, access for kids to wash their hands. We lower the sinks and stuff for the younger kids, but the back of the building was retrofitted years ago to be an administrative wing. We could turn all that back into classroom space uh for a relatively nominal fee. That's something that the administration feels done well in the time period have to do this in year one. >> We could flip the building back in one summer. Yeah, >>

028daunting. >> Abby, we could do it. >> It's not as daunting as you think. We could do >> we could we could get a a a demolition contractor in there and then our guys can do the finish work. I know. I've been I've been here long enough to know and see what what we've done in some of our buildings, which is also why um >> questionuring and sorry during Mr. Freillley's walkth through the all the work that was done to create the office spaces were temporary walls just in the divide class. So it's not we're not talking center block or anything else where it's it was all put up temporarily and that that was something we recently discovered because again as you know option five was recent and I had to look at Lindenwood in

029the receiving end and we had to do the capacity study at Rosemont. >> Okay. And >> that also leave room for growth for any of those programs or >> well those combined would be 860 and the building holds 1147. So there is some growth and one of the things that operationally that we have to look at is that building is like a pin in the center of Norfolk. So as I've told you all we have six all city programs. If we could put three of them in one building, all those buses would be picking up kids from all three programs all at once, delivering them to the same location. We could probably cut 10 buses and redirect them to support other things that they need to be supported. So, it would help us operationally. >>

030Okay. So, and I'm I'm sorry because I'm looking at the Rosemont at 540. Can you repeat again the capacity of Rosemont as your um >> it has 51 classrooms available times 22.5 is 1,147 >> I believe um I memorized that from the other day. So, um, currently at, um, like I said, currently there's, um, and program currently has 490 and the Young Scholars program currently has 360. There's room for about 300 more kids. Wouldn't suggest we do that the first year probably best. >> Young Scholars is a small portion of that. Young is about is less than 50 is a larger portion. >> I just want to add a historical piece to this as well. Um, so Young Scholars in particular, this would be in my 10 years the third time that if we were

031to if the board were to consider moving it would be yet again another move for a program that has been working very hard to get its bearings and um they've had consistent staffing. I mean the teachers are so incredibly dedicated at at In Young Scholars. They have been through a lot with every single move because they're so committed that you know I think that we really can't keep pingponging programs around this district whether it's AOIS young scholars gent it's just got to be more deliberate in our thought process around it. So thought going into how do we keep still digesting that idea but it's it's like how do we how do we build that into a better program >> and um there are across the nation there are also programs like this that house they're

032like Corey County South Carolina they have their high school programs are all in one building. Um, so again, operationally it makes sense. It it it makes sense to put them there, but there are like four different specialy programs within one building. So it's not this is not unheard of to do something like that to put multiple specially areas in one building. >> Are there any drawbacks that you can think of? Well, I I think the the the main drawback is, you know, it you're you're recreating a kind of a culture of the school, right? You you know, you have young scholars in AIS right now that's been at Rosemont and you have Gent that's been there for much more than a decade. putting those together, you have to think about you're combining them even though

033we're we're keeping them as separate programs. You know, you put them into one building, but it does give it gives more space and facility use. Plot of land at Rosemont is even bigger than what Gent has right now. that. So everything that the programs currently offer, you would continue offering pathways for Gent students. >> Correct. Absolutely. >> Colonel, >> what's the distance from Gent to Rosemont? >> Like seven miles. Just I asked distance not not >> it's not seven miles but it's not a fair seven miles because when I have to drive from Gent to that part of the city it probably takes me seven miles but it probably takes me 15 to 20 >> that during the the school times. Yeah, I used to drive it. >> In mind that most of the people

034are all over the city. It's like with the Gent program, that's an all city program. There's kids in South Norfol and kids in Willoughby that go to Gent. It's very spread out. All the programs are very spread out because they they all So it it's hard to say. I mean, the furthest would be, you know, South Norfolk or Willoughby, but for the most part, they're all spread out and they can get there in a reasonable amount of time. >> Also afford the opportunity to put together have enough students to do middle school teams. >> Right now, the the AOS program doesn't have their own middle school sports teams, but with the >> will they get paired up with another middle school? >> Get paired. I'm just saying would it give them the ability to have

035their own sports team out of that one? >> There's a couple other positives if I could ask if you don't mind. It removes Monroe from the plan which eliminates our need to relocate the expansive prek program there at Monroe and that serves the whole southwest area of the city. Um the two new school builds we're we're promoting Jay Cox and Serber and Park are five years removed from the Mari build which fits the city's ability to fund better. Um we can possibly do public hearings that are combined two years in a row instead of having to do them every year for five years. I I think that would be something people will appreciate. and closing Gent, Willoughby, BC, ECC, CEP, and Rosemont ARS. They're not assigned to doicile placements. They can be done very quickly

036and easily without the redistricting concerns. And uh closing Tarlton, Graanby, Norview, Lindwood, and PB Young requires very little work aside from moving assets that we can continue to utilize. or I can go later. >> Where are you going to store all these assets? If you're >> looking your your your size of the classes and you have extra decks, desks and other things that can replace the old ones, >> we'll move them to the schools that receive the students. >> Okay. So they have they I was envisioning that we would have there's classrooms with enough for their capacity. Let's say they're 20 students. They would have 20 desks. You're saying they just have enough for how many kids are present today. can't speak for every school, but I can tell you that any viable asset that

037we can continue to use >> have opportunities to arrange their classrooms. How are the principles, >> for example, the Rosemont property has administrative administrative offices where you're going to put classrooms. So, we'll need those. We'll need most of Gent's uh assets >> and moving assets is not complicated. Our operational teams are very efficient. >> Freley, Dr. Pole, can you speak to the fact that staffing will follow their students? >> Have to defer to Dr. P. No, absolutely. As as we've said all along, teachers of course we we'll need the teachers to follow the students. Um uh administratively to keep both programs viable. We'd move the administrative program specialists. Everybody else would move >> I wouldn't piggy but how can we move all faculty and staff into another school? I mean how can we do that?

038a PR. You cannot take one principal from one school when you already have a principal at another school. So, how are we going to do that? >> We'd be running two programs within the school. So, we would it would be like a separated separated school. So, we would have the two administrations for the for that program. >> So, you guarantee every staff member would go into a new school >> as Yeah. There would be no no riffs in this a AOIS identified as a separate program. They have their own VDOE identified number. So, they're two separate programs >> and we're just housing them in the same building. And again, the staff re those uh teachers will follow their students. I will say, Miss Thomas, the when we're looking at the possibility of of combining elementary

039schools that aren't programs, then that would be where we'd have to look at principal different moves or assistant principal moves to >> during this process. Fair enough. If >> if we had a problem with with the number of principles and there was saying you can do it in some situations, how many are retiring in the next four or five years that you know about that the these could individuals could be considered for what is there that upward or that sideboard? >> Yeah. So we we will have some attrition within administration that will take care of a lot of the moves. There absolutely will be. It's it's a natural attrition, you know, >> and conceivably would you share resources between the programs because at right now uh more advanced Gent students will go to my for

040certain high school classes. My understanding is that young scholars offers advanced more advanced classes to the young scholars. So would you utilize that pathway potentially? >> We would do all we could to create the best program. >> We're able to utilize that. Absolutely we would. >> That would be a question because I know um many of the Gant middle schoolers will go over to Mari to get their algebra one and so forth. But if that is available that >> those are that's a typical class taught, >> right? going in geometry or >> geometry >> they wouldn't lose the access to higher >> courses >> and that's a benefit yeah >> the other benefit is um AOIS does not have an admin they have one one principal and no assistant principal so whenever the principal's out

041someone else has to step in but in this case there'd still be an administrator in the building >> so I guess so for me I feel the conversation that I'm hearing is back to um buildings assets and then but I really when we're talking about programs get back to the program itself and what it's doing for students because that's where I don't feel that we have we being we um have a good handle on I mean it's an opportunity so I think we should take it as an opportunity to look at the programs what the goals of the programs. Are we meeting the goals of the programs? What can we do to enhance it? Is this the right move? I don't want I'm not comfortable making a decision to say um yes, let's you know,

042three programs in one place. The logistical uh the logistics of it makes sense. Let's do it because there are three very different programs. So even when you're talking about sharing resources, just knowing um you know uh the young scholars program uses the autonomous learner model then you have AOIS which has a different focus then you have the Gent program it's just we we have to be cognizant of of the different and then who they're serving is also different >> right but I I was more thinking and my comment was really more about the the high school classes that are taught in middle school that there would be were were you know not the early years but you know those algebra ones those science classes. >> Yeah. And I think that was a great question not

043a threat here >> right. No, no, no. And I I think that that's what made me kind of go back and think because even with the young scholars being in the same um building with AOIS, that's one of the things that I feel like they've now, you know, gotten into a better groove of how they do share resources. And I think that has been a huge benefit. But that process of getting there takes time, right? I mean because I remember in the beginning and I say this with my parent hat on, you know, there were challenges with the scheduling and, you know, having teachers in place to to teach those high school credit courses. And so it was a very delicate, you know, balance and it took time. And that's what we want to be

044sure that we have built into this decision-making process is the time to do that. music. >> There's like >> your background is in drama. I'm just kidding. >> When I when I walked the building recently, all the teachers that were in the program are still in their program. They're all they were all highly certified to teach all the EOC. So, I don't think we're taking any steps backwards. >> This is that is in case we want to use the smartboard. Just close it. Just >> he's coming to take care of it. >> Coming to get it. He's coming to get it. It's usually when something bad >> um >> we're usually the first to go. So >> um >> she seems >> so well lost my train of thought but um yeah so thinking about

045programmatically you know especially with specialty programs that time having that time built in to do it well and to be sure that that move is the right move outside of the logistical benefits that it may provide. Um, the other thing with this option that has me very concerned is the aggressiveness of the closures. Again, you know, I hear what you I hear what you're saying about the staffing and but I think again academic environment that we send our students to have to be sure that we have strong environments for every student. And again, that also I would like to see the districtricting and boundary work and strong transition plans put in place before um before we we do that like that aggressively. Um so that's just >> other than the aggressive nature of the plan

046and I do wonder if the plan is too aggressive. Um, what other concerns do other board members have or opportunities that you see in this current version of a plan? >> I'd like to ask a question, Miss Bassine. You I if I heard you right, you talked about oppressiveness >> about what >> oppressiveness because of this being very aggressive. Did I misunderstand you? I guess I did. Um I was just talking about the aggressiveness like uh the aggressive aggressive >> aggressive I thank you. >> Yeah. Thank you for clarifying. Yeah. >> It it is aggressive of course. >> Yes. >> That we have we as a board which we own all the bad decisions from the past. >> Correct. Um we we have to and we're we're coming close I think to a solution for

047some of the problems. Uh but we we have to make up for the lost time. We we don't have a lot of time to meet the goals of the future that that are expected of us from from the school, the parents, uh the citizens. Everybody has an interest in what we're doing and I appreciate everybody, you know, coming tonight, everybody that's watching that this is going to be a a process that it's going to take a moment. Um, we talked before and there was a we were talking about the voting. I didn't or were you going to explain that to them? Um well it does have vote required listed on the agenda. However, if we are seriously considering this plan or even Mr. Colonel Paulson's plan that he will present next, I would caution us

048to not vote tonight simply because it needs to get out into the community and we need to get community feedback on whatever it is that we are seriously committing. and it is not fair to the community to take a vote on something that we have just worked through this evening. That is my that was my thought process. But I wanted to make sure that we we looked at each plan and talked through the pros and cons of each plan or we we made a decision. But I still think the right decision is not Um, any other questions, comments, opportunities, threats that anybody see with this plan? I do want to give uh Colonel a chance to present >> one from Mr. Freley. Um if what's the latest we should vote so you can um do

049I the the let's just call it the ones Norview Terald and Willoughby when could you start that when's the latest decision we point we have to come up so you can do that in 26 27 Are you talking about moving st >> No, I'm talking about the the consolidate closure and consolidation part of it. >> Getting the buildings ready. >> Let me just re-qualify. When we close a building, >> staff and the kids move, only thing that moves is what is going to be an asset we can continue to use. We close buildings a lot of the times we abandon a whole lot of stuff in place because it's just not feasible to use life is done. So the only complication here is moving assets we're going to we want to keep in our portfolio

050operationally >> but educationally there is probably different take on that. >> Yeah. So I think you know that the concern comes we wait too long and and we've mentioned it a few times is that transition time because we want to make sure that the students have a chance to be invited and acclimated to their new schools and together. Um it it's not just the nuts and bolts of it. So I I don't have a definitive deadline. It's it but but know that that takes time. Um and and the sooner we can get to a decision the better clearly. Um, so especially any schools that have any kind of a transition next year, we have the most time to to work on those transition plans. I will let you know, I have been meeting with principles

051of the schools, any school that's on the list here. So, they're aware and and we're we're working through that, but the planning for that starts once we have that list of >> Oh, you did. Okay. Oh, okay. >> I'll defer to No, I'm good. Go ahead. >> Um, can you can you ex explain a little more about um the suburban park rebuild and the >> It's a population density area. Um probably and I'll probably be reallocated to Large M possibly Monroe just because it's physically makes sense >> and then the kids in the northern boundary of Gramby will go to Suburban Park and maybe some in the northwest boundary might go to camp out >> and this is just conjecture because again we've charged Walpert with a number of specific things they have to do

052to redistrict. But it is that is considered a fairly dense population spot. >> But if we find if we find that with the redistricting rebound with the boundary work that a rebuild, a renovation perhaps, but a rebuild is not necessary. Um, is that something that we can come back to and >> we projected it for five years down the road? >> Right. That's why I'm >> five years down the road, we take a hard look at it again and if that's the case, then we adjust. So our process for today is that going to be like we're going to hear about these plans and then kind of work together and come up with some our own ideas of how to >> mesh what we like and don't like of these. Okay. >> That is my

053hope. >> Okay. So then I'll reserve the >> why I keep asking if people concerns or comments or >> you have a lot other concerns but I'm going to wait to >> Dr. Martin. So, um, in five years, so right now, Suburban Park Elementary is, um, its FCI is at 641. So, in five years, it's going to need, >> we just replaced all the air conditioning units in it, which dropped it down to that that percentage. >> That would be about the time when Graanby's closing, >> right? But we we would maintain the building if it's going to be rebuilt. We wouldn't put huge dollar amount projects into it. we would maintain it. Um, but if for whatever reason we're not going to rebuild it, then we can always ask the city to rebuild something

054else and make a different decision on Suburban Park down the road. >> I that property is a really beautiful. >> It is um potential for a wonderful school. It >> does. We we agree with you. That's why we project to keep it in this. Yes, ma'am. Other thoughts? >> If I could clarify, with the late evaluation of Rosemont, we now want that to replace moving the kids to Ruffner. That was what Mr. Stern asked me to communicate. Again, it it's something we just identified through a real nice capacity study recently. So to take So just to clarify to take the move to Ruffner off the table. >> That's what David thought this most recent option would supplant that one. >> Yes, ma'am. >> I just have one comment. >> Oh, absolutely. I'm going all the

055way down >> to um 2032 closing Madison at East and I know we're going to talk through this. Um again, I know we have put some dollars in Madison. Uh the board voted last year to move uh those students over there along with open campus. And so I guess cuz this appeared on the list and so can you share why this is an option? >> I would defer to Dr. P. was part of his big plan for CTE. Sort of >> the the this this appeared on the list, you know, when we're looking at at 10 school closures that was in the city council's resolution. um you know that that that is another way that we could move and make a transfer um that didn't affect um moving a a traditional sitebased school with a

056zoned student body out of their school because Madison and open campus both have city-wide implications u or or attendance rather. Um so that that was the reasoning for that to get to that tenth school. um when we kept Monroe on the list because another another area of keeping Monroe on the list is team did all the the walkthroughs the numbers we're looking at 22.5 on average and some of our classrooms are 19 18 purposefully and we want to make sure we can keep that so we needed those seats at Monroe as well so that that was the purpose for that move is because it would be the least >> disrup Madison is really just to get to 10 schools So, and that's what I was getting ready to say. Are we just saying we're moving

057these programs so we can have 10 schools? But it is it >> but when we if we repurpose Lynenwood, it won't be like completely closing the school, but we'll be repurposing it and it won't will no longer be a >> traditional >> a traditional school. So, um I know I know the goal is to get to 10, but if if for now we have to get to nine, >> then that's perfect. >> Then that's going to have to be perfectly fine. >> Can I ask are the students that's currently enrolled in at Madison allowed to be on our regular campus? >> They're not allowed to be at their home school currently on their campuses. However, if we were to do something like this within seven years, we could redefine policy if we had to. >>

058So, right, as of today, they cannot >> they they cannot correct because if the students at Madison, they they are there for a disciplinary reason. >> Oh, so they shouldn't even really be considered on the option at this time. >> It the only the only way it would be moved is if we were able to do a separate a separate annex to the building at Lake Taylor. wouldn't be for them to be included at Lake Taylor in the CTE center just on that campus is all >> but we could simply remove that from this plan if that was the will of the board. >> Absolutely we could. This again administratively we tried to put every single option on the table that you have as a board you know every single thing and as a board

059absolutely it's your this is your decision. >> I need another secondary school one. >> Oh I just have the secondary schools. There should be one for elementary and one for secondary. >> Elementary >> here. >> Is there an elementary one? I don't >> have >> I have the elementary. I just don't have the secondary. >> There's another one coming around. >> Okay. >> High school and middle school. >> Nothing right now. >> I just have a comment. >> Oh, I I'm sorry. I thought you were still waiting for your sheet. I apologize, Dr. Martin. Um, so one of the things that I want to make sure that we do as well along and not wait until all the closures, but we really have to do something about the undercapacity at Ruffner. It's a beautiful um

060yeah, there's a lot of capacity that be used there. I just don't want to see that go by the wayside. I know that a lot of parents fought against it. Um, but we have to figure something out. >> We have to get the school together first. That's the main issue. That's the issue I have. Getting that school to a way that we can right now. That's just not a good idea. >> Now, it is one of our most underutilized, >> very un >> the scene I recognize. >> Yes. Well, I wanted to get back to the Easton Madison um Madison at Eastn Open Campus at Eastn just like I was saying with the other programs. It's like, you know, I I appreciate that we're beginning what will hopefully be a stronger look at our our

061alternative education offerings and what we're offering. And so that I would like for that to dictate the where like what building it goes in, what it looks like because, you know, we should have state-of-the-art alternative education. It's not just a place where we're sending kids have strong transitional uh planning. They should have strong supports, social emotional supports, um all of the things they need for their well-being. Um, and then open campus being at really thinking through what a what a non-traditional academic program could look like for credit recovery and being more innovative in how we think about it and again using that as to guide like where that program should be. So I'm not comfortable right now and the only reason I was okay with it it being because it's so far down the list.

062I was telling Dr. I have concerns about I want to do a real alternative ed study. We haven't done one since 2016. Um, and really looking at our credit recovery programs and GED, like all of those things that would help with dropouts with with dropout prevention and and providing other non-traditional opportunities for our students that I would like that to drive the where like where that is housed versus trying to that right now. Um, but you know, if we come up with nine and a re and we've repurposed Lynenwood, we are not spending the money that we would have spent to keep Lynenwood open. And I think it's better to come up with a plan that reflects what our students need than to arbitrarily have 10 schools. >> I thousand% agree with that. I I

063want our stu what our students need academically from an opportunity opportunity and academic standpoint that to be the driving force behind closing schools. And also looking ahead, we could have population growth. Other districts that are also in the same boat, they're seeing that their enrollments going up and they have no buildings to then, you know, purpose reuse for um as schools. So, I think we got to think about that, too. >> Well, we do have Ruffner. What's that? We do have Ruffner with all their seats. >> But if I could interject, even with this closure plan, we'll still be below 85% capacity across the division. So, there there is room to grow. >> Other questions? and Dr. Cotala was kind enough to scan those documents and send them to Miss Tanner while I was up

064here. So, all of those are on board docs. You you'll be able to see >> Colonel, would you like to present your >> Yes. Thank you very much. First of all, I want to thank those that have helped me on this uh journey there. lately there I've gotten a lot of input. I've reached out to people and and they've come back and given me ideas and I've been working with with them and thank you. They asked to be anonymous so I won't some of them are here and some are not. Um we um the vice chair suggested recently or a couple meetings ago that we develop our own plan and I think that's a great idea. We need to do what Norfolk does, not what we do in Chicago or any other place. But then

065one of my the my teammates uh suggested why not have two bites at the apple instead of one and the right now we've been stalling if you will I may not be the right word to use but we haven't progressed forward because we're looking to put everything in one plan do two plans or three and that's what I'd like to see that we consider that I on my u list I I picked uh what I thought were the most u vulnerable schools that needed to be >> Can I school excuse me buildings buildings >> I don't mean to interrupt you but can you tell us which document it is so that we can pull it up >> um >> I had put it up >> no I mean pull it up >> would be >>

066you know it was posted >> the framework or plan first >> um >> the plan >> not the framework. >> Okay. Thank you. I just wanted to put that up there for the audience. >> And so what we develop we did we tonight or whenever we vote we select 20 uh 26 and 27 and we're in the meantime working on 27 and 28. But at least we've made progress forward because we're not waiting for the rest of of all the other schools the to figure out what we're going to do with them or the other buildings. Excuse me. I keep saying schools. I mean buildings. So what I I've divided them into what I thought we had a consensus. So that's what's in yellow for 26 27. um what I thought the most contentious were

067and those are in 27 and 28. So we can work on them but we um take and table these and but we're we're showing progress by making a decision now on however many schools we're we're comfortable with. Uh and then when we're in the dealing with the contentious, we would look at um I I was suggesting two special call meetings with public input that should be scheduled at times convenient for the stakeholders. The third special call meeting should be for the uh steering committee and I wrote in there school council but that's wrong. it's it should be steering committee to review and provide feedback to the board and the fourth um special call meeting would be scheduled for board deliberations and a decision. Then we go into long-term which is the 28 I'm sorry 29

068and 30. This is for the next round of elementary, middle and high schools that we are going to have to face three years from now. We should start looking at five years, seven years, eight years. Then we have the long-term, I'm sorry, funded rebuilds. We have to make sure we have the money before we put them on the plan. We right now I believe we've been promised two rebuilds uh from the city. I think they've said they would fund two rebuilds. Three. >> Three. >> Okay. Three. >> Okay. And put those on on the TW the 30 to 32 uh part of this. and then Lake Taylor and all the that which is further down the road 32 to 34. We look at those and in in that order but we start now with a

069small bite and then another bite and then we can spread our workload out to those things that are coming up. Right now we're trying to do everything at once. So, uh, particularly, uh, these schools, most of them, as I said, uh, they're they're ones I thought were the lowhanging fruit, I think, was what it was mentioned earlier. And so, that's why I put those on there. And that was my intent to change the way the process that we're doing get not change but cons have the board consider changing the process so we can be more efficient and not uh waiting to make a decision on everything. >> Questions >> instead of Yes. Yes. One body at a time. So are you are you suggesting that we vote on 2627 and put off the remaining till

070those years till those years? No, no, that's why I said for 2728 we have within the next I didn't say this. Uh they should be the buildings that we're going to consider for 27 and 28 are tabled for 30 days while we do public input >> for this. Yes. >> Okay. >> And move on those um during that time period that they're tabled. And that was the the two special calls. The third special call for the steering committee and the fourth I can provide you this. >> I can send the >> Oh, I think I think I have it. >> Oh, okay. >> It just it just I I was following what you were saying and trying to align with what it says here. >> And then u the fourth call is is uh 30

071days from now or whatever the board decides. But I think the sooner that we look at the the next two uh school year 2728 it should come sorry to say quickly but that's not the right word. uh we need to do it in a timely manner because we do have other things that we need to do and the longer we put it off or try to find out a lot more things I I'm not sure that we're going to get a return on investment if we we wait too late in the future. >> Um I have a question. Why is PB Young not closed until considering 20? >> But I got that off of um I think it was one of these sheets. I just I just picked I tried to pick what was on

072already being considered in somebody else's um >> Okay. Okay. >> What do you want to call it? Their schedule. And I I put them in there except for the first uh the first go around for 26 27. I just put the as I said with the lowhanging fruit that I thought that we had. I'm sorry. Miss Cassine has her hand. >> So I'd like to understand like I asked Mr. Freley of the other um option. Can you um can you elaborate on how these schools were chosen? And then I see and I appreciated you know the notes that you have under consolidation additional fields. It looks like you got a lot of information here about the athletic comp complex for Graanby High School, Mory High School, lots about fields and stuff. So if you could

073like explain how that ties into what you have proposed here for year 26, 27 and then so on. if you could help them that >> these are uh things that we are looking at long range like Mory High School and the issue of what we're going to a a field a uh with with a stadium and and these I tried not to address those because they're distractors. This this is simply a process. Um, and why did I uh see um with the just thoughts that I had from other input that I got from some some of the the people that were helping me. They they advised me to think about uh the money that we have coming. What what um I'm not sure I'm answering your question. I think I don't I quite understand. >>

074Yeah. And I I appreciate I appreciate that's why because I appreciate the information that you've included here which is why I'm trying to like understand the thought process because understanding because I I do like the notion of doing things in bites which is where I originally was uh when we talked before it was like start with something do the re have the time built in for redistricting coming up with strong transition plans and then kind of going from there. But I'm seeing that your small bites is a little bit different than what my small bites was. >> And I'm And to be honest, your small bites are good, but they come together just sort of like that. Yeah. Right. >> You know, and the order and the order is a a little different. Um, and

075there's a couple of things like I told you, Colonel, that I I don't agree with the plan for Gent in this particular plan. and a couple of things, >> right? >> But but again, that's all up for discussion. I'm not saying I'm not >> see some of these can be moved and that's why I didn't put Gent in in the >> put it in 27. Yeah, that's that's why I was trying to understand your thought process because I appreciated that it was wasn't in the first year, but the schools that are in the first year, I wanted to understand because you have very detailed, you know, some additional information asks of the city, >> things like that that that seem that to me seem to think that just, you know, having received it this morning

076that those are things that you think are important, which is why those particular schools schools were at the top of the list, >> right? They're the they are important. These are the the the city ask has nothing to do with the schools at all. >> Okay. >> It's things that we should do now like reach out to what we are going to have a meeting with the city on the 7th or where but that's the time to ask about a new annual agreement with them. some this is tying >> it u the funding agreement I think it's >> oh the funding formula >> the funding formula >> okay >> and and I think we I think it's something that we work together with them I mean >> can you elaborate on what you mean by

077up with a a different funding formula >> no I don't mean coming up we we I think right now as I understand it it's It's a gentleman's agreement, if you will. >> Oh, it's in policy. It's in polic. It's in policy. It's written in policy. I've sh I've shared it with the board a couple times, but it's it is in policy. >> I I I didn't know that part of it. Okay. So, I was just thinking something to formalizing that since we have it, but we can cut that up. >> Yeah. Yeah, it's already been formalized. So, I appreciate that. I was just trying to understand if the notes had something to do with how you prioritize them. >> Um, >> still it matches the aggressiveness of the other option the steering committee came up

078with. And in the part about the identify buildings and direct centers for professional development, I'm kind of opposed to Lynenwood being used uh for we retain it for professional development, but we'll get to that when we uh talk about it here. but looking for places that don't cost us money uh that for the professional development when it's done and that's one of the reasons I understand they want to have our own building they being the the administration uh that we could find other resources to do it that the city has some with with their rec centers um that could be used but I I think taking on the task of having uh Lynenwood would uh as a professional development center. I'm I'm not really that's not my favorite thing for for that. I think I'm

079kind of opposed to it. So, I'm trying to find a solution somewhere. The I think the benefit of us having our own building is that we can design it for what the needs are for the professional devel you know different types of professional development whereas we can't just go into a rec center and start changing things. So you know >> in years of space it was I'm sorry excuse me >> they're not going to have the same kind of classroom space that we have. think that the movement of Gent into AOIS is probably going to be a much more popular decision or step forward than moving AOIS into Ruffner. Um, and if we do take that move, we have to move that those administrators out of that building that where the temporary structures have been

080where we've housed administrators that we don't have elsewhere to house. How many administrators are at Rosemont that are not part of the Rosemont program? >> Yeah, I'd have to do a count, but it's it's about there's about 30 30 folks that work at Rosemont >> that don't work for the Rosemont. >> So, you have like our music and fine arts. Uh there's some special education folks out there. Gifted is there. Um you have languages >> and they all have to be relocated. >> Oh, go ahead. I'm sorry. >> I think I said why needed but just to be clear like I was I was talking about Lynenwood. >> I I agree with you. >> I support that as well. >> I support keeping Lynenwood online. Um I like it as a professional development center. I

081think our teachers administrators deserve have an influx in population. We can revert um a professional development center back into elementary to meet the capacities instead of having to build from the ground up. So I definitely agree. >> In addition to that, I also want to keep that I I still as we look at all of our programming which is going to be part of this um >> and we got it. >> I'm keep bringing it in. I'm like not letting that go. Is that it has the real potential to be an educational uh I mean environmental educational program there. It's, you know, it's a great space for that. And so I I we need to be we need about that what's best for our students. Um but >> if you think about it in a

082way um with um just funding reductions that are going across the board across a couple of nonprofits like the Virginia um the um the Virginia Extension that may be something we could actually partner with them to have in-house at Lynenwood to actually educate Yeah. to educate our students there and they're on site and that could also maybe be a gen a revenue generator for us because for them pay at least in the space. >> So I think that's a viable option. >> Yeah, I see a lot of potential. >> Yeah, it's a lot of potential in keeping Lynwood there. >> Getting back to the colonel's plan, is there something that that you feel that you need? I I don't want to cut you off on >> No, I understand. Um the the idea of population

083explosion is I don't think it's out there. We've I've heard it a couple of times tonight. We're we're planning for something that's not in everybody the studies are still indicating population is declining as we go forward and yet we're saying well a couple of the board members saying well we need to keep a little extra pace space just in case. Well, there is no just in case because we're right now the population is going to continue to uh decline and unless there's another brown out like they had in New York City what 20 years ago and the population exploded. We're we're not going to have anything like that. We're we're just going to continue to go down. But uh you know that's again something we should consider. But I I the probability is it's a

084nice idea but the probability just doesn't exist. U the other thing is the we'll talk about it. This the the the CIP part of that is something that we have to we should talk about the the reversionary funds and designate them for CIP projects on earmarked. That's it. That's you know That's a budget pro. >> Yeah, that's common. So that's what we usually do. That's all we can do with it. >> Well, it's been common practice, but that doesn't necessarily mean like we should be able to determine what is best for our students, whether it's capital improvement or instructional support that is needed. But I know it's their one-time fund. So I understand that limitation but >> I hope it >> a whole other you know conversation I think but >> I hope we take

085small bites as we go forward. >> Thank you. So, I am I'm still So, I'm still looking at this plan because I do want to >> do you want to we'll just meet or you want to do I think we're >> I thought >> it's related to your It's related to your plan. >> Okay. >> Yeah. So, I'm just trying to understand. So, so I'm still moving through it. Is that Are we >> That's fine. Yeah. Is that okay? Okay. So then 2728 you have closure gent and lynenwood although okay we talked about lynenwood so that's where you have the gent closure and you're proposing consolidate again bringing back James Monroe in this or you have other ideas here can you elaborate on what those >> No that's to consolidate the >> right so >>

086well >> it says is Gent Middle School students consolidate to ADL 50 seats, Ruffner and AOIS. So you have a you you ha you have breaking up the Gent program into different schools in this. >> Yes. >> Okay. I just want to un be sure I understand what the recommendation is and then Madison uh or CEP going. So is this recommendation for CEP to go to Easton >> at Madison cons? Because it says CEP consolidates to Madison. >> Things have changed a little bit since I did this. So >> Okay. >> But yeah, initially CEP would consolidate with Madison and alternative C campus >> open campus. Yeah. >> That would go in the building with Madison >> ASAP. Isn't that our our most in need students? Why would we put them in a building with

087students? >> Yes. And it's a regional program that we have. >> Yeah. >> Uh okay. And you say move Madison to open C to Norfick Tech. >> Well, that's what I'm trying to understand. It looks like you're you're saying here you're suggesting or recommending that CEP that we close the current CEP building which is the old Richard Bowling and consolidate CEP into Madison alternative or with Madison pro with the Madison program and the open campus site. Is that >> he has the next bullet it says he has Madison moving Madison open campus moving to NTC. >> Okay. So, well, that's what I that's what I'm trying to take the other one to to the NTC. >> So, you're saying put CEP Madison and Open Campus together and moving that whole thing to the NTC building

088>> to the NTC building. >> Okay. >> Close the NTC. >> Well, >> not in this plan. >> In this plan. So, he's >> I >> this plan you're keeping NTC open >> at at that point. Yes. because I only go I don't I don't go past 30 30 20 30 >> right right I'm just trying to understand which like how you're thinking about >> and I say this because cept and we were you know I kind of brought it up with Dr. whole um trying to understand what the future needs are going to be of the CET program. Um like I also serve on the CET board and one of the conversations that did that has come up although this is like down the down the road but again we don't want to keep

089making decisions at different points down the road but would could would we have a need for a prek program for instance because that was something that was talked about I don't know if nor it would be in Norphick because it is a regional program but I was just that's why I'm trying understand what your recommendation is because I there also may be resources that CEP uses that may be shared with other programs potentially that you know maybe we do need to consider. So it's just I'm just trying to understand the thought process behind putting them together that you have. it. I'm trying to get move get get this the closures that we need and combining some some assets like I put Cap with Madison and and all those and then you go to NTC but

090uh then trying to remember now this there's >> this This takes away this takes away the need for Lake Taylor to become a a comprehensive CTE school. Is that what you're saying? >> And I I don't know what will happen to to Lake Taylor. And that's one that's why I cut this off at 2030 is when we do the resoning. What are we going to find out about our need for high schools? >> Okay. Well, so I'm I'm glad. So, this is I see that um I saw that somewhere in your notes about having to think about whether we really need five high schools. >> Yes. >> So, >> but that won't be that will come after we have the resoning. will get some information and an indication of do we need a fifth high

091school which will change what we we've been doing. >> We Dr. P and I see you have this note here after the first year MPS begins and finalizes study on need for five high schools and redistricting. that something that we're going to through the redistricting work have a have some more clarity around. >> That is not the high school part is not in the we're looking at elementarymentaries right now for redistricting. You know right now last time Mr. Stz presented to us currently we still have a need for five high schools. Um excuse me part of the thought about moving more into Lake Taylor in the CTE center still have more high school populations at our high schools, but that was not a on our radar right now to redistrict high schools. >> I thought

092we I thought part of the redistricting was also to we were doing a whole a comprehensive redistricting. >> Well, well, we we can certainly look at all levels to redistrict all levels to see where where we are with that >> that we can ask Mr. Sts to take care of that, too. I thought we were going to the this compre the redistricting would be for the whole district, not just portions of it. So we we could find even a middle school or a need for a middle school, but >> Exactly. And that's that's kind of like just looking at the numbers. I think that would be useful to know that for the long-term planning potential rebuilds that process. So I would hate for us to do like an redistricting elementary and not look at it

093more broadly. >> So I know Mr. Sts is looking K12. >> Okay. um board decision-wise that you know when we have that plan that's >> I know we were looking specifically elementaryaries because those are the the >> that are being affected right now. >> Yeah. Most recently affected but >> especially when you look at the FCIS of some of our middle schools too that are going to be next on the list. make it clear to the general public. This is only we're looking at elementary as of right now. >> I mean, that's the that's the board's decision. We're going to look I mean, Mr. Stz is going to look at at the whole city >> for redistricting, right, >> but the closures are only largely impacting >> Right. Elementary. >> Elementary. Right. >> Just don't

094want to stress any more constituents out. >> Right. Right. This initial Yeah. Yeah. I think that we should be focusing on elementary. I think if we add in middle and high school reszoning right now, I think that >> I I I think >> I think we need to look at the redistricting >> said that we we should >> do the competition >> just look at the elementary schools now >> for closure >> because he he was saying I if if I remember correctly that we're close on on the high school middle schools he thought we were really good for now but three years from now who knows I mean Yeah, I pulled up the 2021 ED planning report that he gave us and just looking at there were several middle schools, high schools that were

095on the 3 to five year projection if you remember like so I went back and was looking at that to prepare for this and um so that made me think that >> even our numbers I mean we have one high school just shy of 2,000 and one high school just shy of 800 students right now. >> Yeah, I agree. I think when we redistrict, we could probably could proportion those out to the high schools instead of um even have fathom looking at eliminating one high school right now, >> right? I mean, which is interesting because we're also rebuilding a high school in the midst of this conversation which is, you know, strange >> but necessary. >> That's dead on arrival. >> So, I did have a >> Oh, go ahead. >> Madam Chair, um Dr.

096Dr. Paul, maybe you can answer this. I do see here um um Mr. Pollson, thank you so much for um bringing up this option here. Um I see where it says under 2028 23, it has city requests military to participate in funding. Has the federal government ever participated in giving money towards school construction? And >> uh I would have to research. I think with Camp Allen there was there was >> Okay, cool. Yeah, help with that. >> I was thinking even Okay. Okay. presidents. >> There was a DoD. Yeah, >> they were part of the five and five. Five schools, five years. >> They were part of it, right? >> Are there other question? Oh, Colonel. Uh, speaking of the military, what happened to the response to the Navy station's letter about three schools being

097uh potentially closed or or uh it came from the commander Navy station. [Music] >> I'm sorry. >> Was there You mean was there? >> He was talking about Terlton, SS Point. Um, and I forgot that there was three, maybe four. >> What about it? That's what I'm trying to get. What was the >> Well, he was concerned about the quickness of the decision. >> Yeah. >> One one word he used the that decision to close Tarlton and uh he had concerns. I'll I'll I'll send it to you all because it it came to us in >> Well, it was >> and I appreciate you bringing that up because it was just about it was about us being cognizant of the transitions that military families experience and for us, you know, to to in our in

098our school closure and consolidation plan to just kind of keep in mind >> that, you know, that we have other things to consider particular to the military families. So, >> and it but he also brought up um the need for transportation for children now to go to their uh when we work at Willoughby and and in Ocean View area that getting their students, some of the students to the facility that they have right there at Fourth View, uh that the military has in in their housing area. They have a like a daycare center I believe it's or or some some afterchool programs and he was wanting to to us to negotiate with them on how to do that to make sure the kids got there. That was in the last paragraph. I I'll send it

099to >> Please do and I'll research that >> cuz we had those issue too. I mean >> some you know a lot of our parents over here don't have car transportation and we not talking about school hours you talking about after school programs. >> Well they would be taking to school during the daytime so they can get their education. >> It was just the transportation part of it. >> But I'm just saying we have transportation issues too. We looking at that. >> Well, right and and because of the closeness of their center and where Willoughies is now they can walk it. It's you just have to be careful of all the construction there right now. But you could walk up there from one to the other. If they move to Little Creek now, how are

100they going to get to that? Because if they get them, they only go back to to their home or the housing area. Now, somebody's got to get them from the housing area to that after care. >> Yeah. >> Well, you know, uh, Corner Pollson, that argument could be the same for St. Helena parents. That's right. >> Um, >> you know, if it was for me, I could wand and give everyone what they what they need, what they want, I would do that. But that's the same argument St. Helena parents are having. >> So, I mean, >> I'm I'm not I'm just wondering what the status was and and that that's what I wanted to find out. And I will get that. I have a copy. You >> got to do research on that. You got

101to do research over here, too. >> Oh, absolutely. Okay. All right. Does anyone have any further questions about Colonel Pollson's uh option? >> Thank you for listening. >> At least some people are >> I would We've been at it for an hour and 40 minutes and there has been a request for a recess. So I'm going to call for a 15minute recess right starting now ending at >> 18 minutes. Oh, I thought she said 18 >> ending at five of So, it's a little more than 15 minutes. [Music] the meeting back to order. >> Okay. Uh first I'd like to thank the colonel for break for bringing forth another option for the committee for the school board to consider. Um, I'd also like to um t talk about the option brought forth by the steering

102committee and I'm going to refer to it as the 929 option because if we keep giving it a number, we have no idea what we're number is. So, I'm going to call it the 929 option. So, um >> Yes, sir. >> Um so, everybody knows I sent you the nav station letter uh while we were on >> Oh, thank you very much. everybody on the board and uh Dr. Paul, Mr. Freley and Miss Tanner. So, everybody should have that letter so you can see what what the NAV station's uh concerns are. >> Okay. Thank you very much. >> Or I forgot it. >> Hopefully it didn't just get lost in our email because we have a lot of >> I remember seeing in express his concerns. That's all. >> Okay. Um so uh so to

103bring us back to talk quickly or to talk a little bit about the 929 option, you know, we t this steering committee to bring forward options that uh we thought would be in the best interest of our students and and our school system. And I think that uh we really need to discuss that option fuller. Um I'd like to do a straw poll on where our heads are. Um if there's I want to know if there's interest in discussing the 929 option f further or interest in discussing the colonel's option further so that we can make some headway tonight. the straw poll. Mine are either of the options something you'd like to discuss further. >> There are aspects of both that >> Hey, that's a perfectly fine answer as well. >> I Yeah, but not

104one fully over the other or >> Okay, that's that's perfectly fine. >> Dr. Martin, you have any thoughts at this point? >> My thought was what was FCI and some of what we discussed earlier today um that we might be able to narrow it down more. But I'm I think I'm I'm favoring the um the committee's suggestions. kind of leaning towards 929, but I do like uh with uh Colonel Pson. >> Yes. >> So, um get some something done today. >> Not favoring either one, but I do like what um Colonel Paul about the small bites. um to get started. But um not favoring either one of these. >> We actually still have that. >> I I I am in favor of it. I still I believe that we do have to make progress and

105and and it's a change for for us and for everybody uh to do our process differently. We need to examine our processes at at every level. And and I'm glad that vice chair brought up the the idea of doing our own plan and somebody that was on helping me said why not do it this way. Yeah. Um, thank you so much, Madam Chair. Um, I'm open to the plan that's been suggested by the committee as well as um I do um agree um in the in the taking small bites um as well by Colonel Pollson. So, I think there's merits in both and I'm I'm open and willing to discuss both till we can come to some amical resolution to give some type of satisfaction. My concern about the small bites is are we giving

106the city enough information for them to plan ahead. I just don't want to, you know, this stop stall stops or start stall start stall thing to keep happening. Um and and I mean we do have other topics that we need to talk about with our schools as well. So um I mean I know this is important. I I get it. It's not lost on me. But um but we do have a lot of things that we have to discuss. we do. >> Um I there are I I I like the idea of the small bites, but I also think that we have to make decisions. I there are a few things with the colonel's plan that I I I that are sort of non-negotiable for me like the breaking up of of the Gent program.

107Um redistricting the James Monroe students out of James Monroe. um potentially putting PB Young at Ruffner down the line. Um so my suggestion is that maybe we start with the plan from the steering committee and see where we can uh we can get consensus and work forward from there. Because, you know, if if all we could do tonight is agree, and we we I I still suggest we don't take a vote until we have a public hearing. Um, if all we can do tonight is agree on what happens in 2026 and 2027 or just 2026, I think that would be a huge step forward for for the school board and for getting this process started. So, as I take us through um the 20 2026 or 2526, are we all in in agreement that a

108district-wide redistricting plan needs to happen? >> Yes. >> So, there's no controversy there, >> but the timing >> will be done after we >> I have to make some decision. We were talking about doing it before we did we had designated the schools. Sorry, the buildings. >> No, I think we have to designate the buildings in order to do the to do the resoning. >> I was only trying to clarify that this would be done after we designate the buildings. >> Yes. Because they need to know which buildings to reszone. But at one point there was a conversation about doing the resoning ahead of time and I just wanted to make sure we're going to do it when it's >> most feasible. Give us the best. >> Yeah. Because it it doesn't do us any

109good to reszone without knowing what schools are closing >> without making a list of schools that are up for closure. >> Yes. >> But it does do a disservice to say where students are being relocated to without. So that is the piece if you're listen you know >> that's that's the piece that has been misinterpreted misconstrued um is that is that it wasn't about doing the redistricting boundary work before coming up with which schools it was about where they would go. Um so right that's that's the part that I still firm hope feel strongly about should not be >> should not be set in stone >> should not be even put out there until that work >> we put every possible school within a three mile radius as a possible school that they go to

110>> right because some of our boundaries our current boundaries which haven't been looked at in like two decades you know you'll >> there's there's a rhyme and reason behind it that we're hoping to dismantle here. So, um I would I would hope that we wouldn't get into into that and so I still continue with that right process in mind >> and and that could be that could be where we move some of the 2026 closures to 2027 so that the red the resoning has been done and then we have a full academic year in order to prepare the students for their moves. >> That's that's kind of where earlier on with um the option that I had brought forward which received very different reaction than the one that was tonight. Um uh sorry I just

111had to thought it was interesting. Um but anyway was that we start with schools that were are smaller impact the fewest students so that we can do the redistricting boundary work um and come up with strong transition plans that benefit the students. And so that's right still my position is that we do that and I' I'd really love to hear from Dr. poll if he thought that that if there was any reason to um you know that that particular one had two schools on it if there is any reason why we couldn't do that in year one and then well I I was going to suggest that we look at all these closures for year one and maybe as a as a as a as a school board we choose two um for 2627 so

112that we can do them well in 26 and 27 and potentially move some of the other closures to 2728 which is which is what I was also just stating. >> Yeah. So let's let's work through if we can see if we can get some consensus not on the dates right now but on the I on the on the on the closures. Okay. So, we'll take the dates into consideration, but let's see if we can get agreement. Um, and I'm going to go with the I'm going to go with the stickiest one first. Um, closing the Gent facility next year and moving the students to Rosemont. >> Oh, >> yeah. Oh, >> I mean, will we What will we do next? I I'm just I'm just I'm just trying to see if we can >> if

113we can if we can make any if we can find any consensus if we can find >> um >> any and you you said no quickly but why would did you say no quickly? >> I'm saying no for year one because a again for everything that I said earlier about considering the program considering the feedback considering the integ you know the integrity of the programs that takes time. This is these are about moving academic. >> But you're not opposed to moving them. You're opposed to moving them next year. >> I am and closing Gent. I am not in support of that next year. >> Okay. But in 27, is that something you could be in support of? >> It's something I could be in support of, but what my expectation would be from the administration

114is for them to come back and really detail to us what that would look like. Um, so the strong like what a transition plan would look like. uh what the input and the feedback is from the stakeholders, you know, all of that that we haven't already received. I think that piece is really important. So, right now, I'm not um you know, Dr. poll says that our students can continue safely at the Gent location uh right now I think to do it well and even for the Gent program to be able to celebrate their school and the closure you know I think those are all things that have to be considered. So >> for 26 no >> what are your thoughts >> about closing Gent and eventually moving them to Rosemont? >> Um I mean I'm

115in favor of the Rosemont proposal. I am unclear because if we're going to start construction, I think that the safety concerns are real and that if we could successfully move the the program over um for the opening the 2627 school year, well, again, I'm I'm disappointed with what I've just, you know, I've been saying over and over again is that I really wanted schools to have a nice cushion before they had to transition out to be able to celebrate their school. And I just think that that's cutting it pretty short for Gent to be able to do that. They'd really have to, >> you know, I I don't I don't like that part. Um because again, I think this is definitely an emotional um process for everyone involved. Um, but I do like the recommendation

116to move the all the specialy programs. >> Yeah. And and and let's let's focus on getting common ground on the recommendations and the semantics. We can we can continue to discuss. Um, Miss Moore >> um kind of agree with Tanya and uh Dr. Martin. literally getting ready to >> see. >> Yeah. >> So, um not opposing to moving it >> to Rosemont, but um it's kind of looking more. >> Okay, fair enough. >> Okay. I'm opposed to moving Rosemont because um >> we wouldn't move Rosemont. We would leave Rosemont where they are and move the Gant program into the building. >> So this is the building that you're gonna have what two three programs? >> Yes, because it can hold 1100 students. >> I'm not for that. >> You want to you want to uh

117give >> each program is different and I I think you should keep it separate. That's just my opinion. >> Um I'm opposed to moving the gap facility to Rosemont. Also, I think it's the that is 15, 20 minutes, 7 miles, whatever. Still a strain that that we we're just suddenly doing this. >> Well, what if we did it in >> I'm not sure where it should go. >> Well, and and that's that's part of the problem. And so, that's why I think it's it's one of those contentious items. we move it down and put it for uh 27, but we we have to at some point figure out where it needs to go. Right now, it's it's amongst us. It's it's not a favorable action. I don't think that that we that will be supported

118by everybody. Mr. Ins hasn't talked and you haven't had your your say, but I'm I'm opposed to doing it. It it needs to be done. That much I can say. I wish I had a sol a good solution for my idea. I got an email from somebody um about my gent solution on on my program. >> Whoops. >> Oops. >> So, Madame Chair, um I'm so sorry, Colonel. You >> No. Yeah, I'm done. I'm sorry. You >> All right. Um, madam chair, I am not opposed to um moving the gent program with that um but there has to be a sustainable pro um plan in place um to make sure that these families can get everything they need a smooth transition um make sure that we're maintaining safety while the program is still there until

119we do able to move it. Um I think that we can handle three programs in a bigger building. It has a capacity of 1100 1147 is what do Mr. Freley stated. Will we be able to have additional seats added into >> Gent? They said there were 300 extra seats, >> right? So, will we will we open that up citywide? >> Well, it is a citywide. It is citywide. >> I know it's a citywide program. They already have a certain amount of seats at Gant. So, when it goes to the new program, it's going to be additional seats >> conceivably, but that would have to be worked out between Young Scholars and AOIS as well to see where those seats potentially would be divided up. >> Okay. Okay. >> Got to study. Okay. Okay. Yes. I'm

120not opposed to um it going to a bigger facility and um that being a better space for them. >> I I'm in fa favor of moving Gent to Rosemont in 20 considering in 27. Um I think 26 would be too short of a time to ensure pro the programs are all the programs are getting what they need. But I do feel that a basically a year and a half would be would be enough time for those for those programs to get worked out. And I see a lot of operational benefits in terms of busing because then you're picking you're able to pick up students from three specialty programs in one neighborhood at one time and take them to a single building which is considering our bus driver shortage and the issues that we have with

121busing as it is would would be huge for the division. Um, I also see the potential for the Gent students to get some of those high school classes that they've had to go to my for by teaming up with some of the assets of the young scholars program which already offers the advanced the advanced high school classes. So, I am in favor of moving it, but I would like to consider moving it in the 20 in the 2728 school year. >> We talking more about Gent. You're not even talking about Rose Mount. I mean, we're talking about Gent, but what about the families? >> Well, I don't think >> somebody's like coming to their home. I think they need to be addressed divorce their opinions also. >> Oh, I think you're right. But yeah, >>

122I I think you're right. I'm just talking about the benefits to Gent at this point. But you know, Rosemont will will go to a much bigger school. But again, there are certain criteria that you have to meet to get into the young scholars and the AIS program. And some of that criteria is is true for the Gent program in terms of absenteeism and and behavioral referrals. So, >> Young Scholars is a gifted program, >> but Young Scholars is a gifted program >> for gifted students. And so by repurposing Rosemont, we have 300 seats that could go to e all three of those programs could be divided up. It could be reutilized. You had a question. >> Could I ask well I I asked for this and um early on and could we establish or make

123a commitment that we will have school planning and management teams for every affected school. So, >> so coming, so right now we're coming up with solutions on the needs that we think are relevant to those populations, those school communities. And we're not bringing the voice of those that are affected. And I think that's that's what what I've seen this district do well in the past um is having those in place that have families, teachers, you know, administrators participating in coming up with a solution together so that that buyin is there and rather than a committee or even us saying let's move them here. Can we get them to like say okay guys this is what our situation is like you know have one at Gent have one at Rosemont like how can we bring these

124programs together in a meaningful way for our students and families and um that commitment is what I'd like for us to encourage for every single one >> we could make it one of our non-negotiables for this plan >> it was on the asurances but but even as we talk about if we are saying that we we are all I think what I heard is agreeing to not close Gent in 2026. But if we are still leaving it for closure in 2027, I would only support that if I know that a you know SPMT is in place and that they are coming up. They are part of the solution to where it goes, how it goes, what the programming looks like and so that that buyin is there from them. And so I would want that

125commitment administration on that. Yeah. >> Okay. So we have some consensus about what we could do again. How about closing ECC and moving it to Ocean Air? >> So I I would be supportive. you're talking about for the 20. >> I'm putting it at I'm just I'm just saying in general like do we have support for doing that? >> Yes or no? And then then let's talk about the timing. >> Right. So I have support for moving Willoughby uh ECC to Oceanair. However, I want to be sure that Ocean Air also is, you know, I, you know, from my understanding, it used to have a prek, but that it is um >> it's retrofitted, but also that it's a healthy environment for our young students. Um, the grounds are healthy. You know, everything about it

126is ready. like if we're going to do that for next year that we have the time right now and be courageous enough to say if we don't have the time right now to really do it well like you know think consider that in the process. So um but otherwise I am in support of of that. >> I'm in support. I would also like them for them to move into a shiny pretty spanky facility >> intentional sized >> teeny tiny toilets. >> Yeah. >> And I agree. And can this is for 2026. >> Well, I was just trying to get agreement about the move and then we can talk about 2026. But if you [Music] >> what they said >> I agree also that I think it's it can be done and and I think he

127said that they they do the retrofitting for the ECC's in summer. So it would seem like a good time to do it in 2026 is >> strange. >> Objections from me. >> All right. Does the 2020 Does anyone have any objections to >> Wait, can we celebrate that real quick? >> Right. Wait, we came to a consensus on closing a building. So, we should celebrate that now. Can we come to consensus that 2026 is the right time to close that building? >> Say it again. I'm sorry. we come to consensus that 2026 is the right time to close that building. >> If it's being said that ocean air will be prime and ready for our our young students healthy environment all of that >> Mr. Freley, I'm looking for a thumbs up on Ocean Air

128for next year. The >> will prec Thank you, Mr. Further. one. >> Um, okay. So, we have two other closures. We have three other closures which are still going to be dependent on reszoning. So, let's just talk about the closures themselves and not the timing first because if the resoning comes in in February, is that enough time to really allow the students to get comfortable with the schools that they might be moving to? >> The timeline down, but that's Ocean Air zoning is going to come into play. the early schools, it's going to be tight, but if we limit the number of schools on the on the first year, that gives us a an opportunity to plan it out and do it right and then be able to model that for future years. >> Okay.

129>> Um, so let's see. Are we in agreement about repurposing Lynenwood for for a professional development center regardless of the year? I know the colonel is opposed to that. How does the rest of the board feel >> of maintaining Lindwood in our portfolio for professional development, educational programming, whatever we we we deem as necessary for for our students. So I agree. >> Disagree disagree. I I asked for uh information on the savings, cost savings. I have not seen that. I don't know what we're going to accomplish by doing this for as far as an investment. We're going to have to make an investment in it and I don't see the data yet for that. So, I'm opposed. >> I support keeping Linda Wood on our portfolio. closing Tarlton. I'm not going on that. I'm just

130trying to see if we can get agreement on the closures and then we'll talk about the timelines closing Tarlton Elementary School. Any thoughts about closing Tarlton? I'm not talking about the timeline. >> I agree. >> Yes, that's sinking. I I I know you have the same caveat, but is there anything else that you have thoughts on about closing Tarlton? >> No, I just, you know, his historically as we've been doing this work, it was at one point a rebuild like to potentially do that and I know we talked about it and the feasibility of that is just not not there. So, I do support given its condition and the land that it's on and all of that. I I think it's it's uh it's got to happen. I do ask they have a great the

131community has put great investment in their community garden, the school garden that we work with them and the master gardeners to you know how do we move that effectively so that wherever they do land that it's that's taken into consideration. >> Um the colonel I'm um I'm for closing uh Tarlton, but we have to ensure that there is room for the buses. the we don't have at uh Little Creek now. I'm not sure what you call it, but the bus with the drop the drop off area is very small because of the that's now going to require I don't know how many buses it's going to require to bring the the students from Tarlton there, but they it's going to increase what happens at at Little Creek. So we if that it's doable and it

132can be done. Yeah, I'm I'm in favor, but I just want to make sure that that part is well thought out. >> I'm sorry, sir. What? >> Oh, I was He's good to go on it. >> Oh, good to go. >> There's two buildings there, >> right? >> They both have a front door, so depending on what grade level they're in, they're in. kids off. >> But all these new additional buses will arrive at the same time or Yeah. But there that Yeah. That that circle back there is is very small. >> But it's two entrances like he's saying. >> It's not just one. >> Yeah. As long as it's taken care of. That's >> Mr. range. You agreed to closing Tarlton. >> Yeah. I mean, um, infrastructurally it's it's sinking. I find it kind

133of odd because the rec center is right next to it and it's not sinking. Um, that's interesting, but >> but it's a $17 million fix if I'm not just just to fix the sinking issue, not to address the rest of the issues with the building. >> And our children don't deserve to be in that type of condition. So, I would be in favor of closing Tarlton. >> Okay. Um, closing Graanby. >> Yes. >> Favor of closing Graanby. >> Or Buffalo. Miss Thomas. >> Yes. >> Colonel Pollson. I'm sorry. And Mr. Ing Thomas, >> I say yes. >> Oh. Oh, I'm sorry. I didn't hear you. Thank you. Um, I'm I'm in favor. >> I'm in favor of closing green. All right. So, let's talk about now that we have we have agreed to the closures

134listed in 2026. >> Are but then when you say it like that, so I'm not >> No, no. We have agreed to the closures listed in 2026. What I was saying is >> is there an argument >> if there is there does someone have an argument >> for a school that should or should not be closed? You got to let me finish my thought. >> Should or should not be closed in 2026? Is there something on this list that makes sense to close the schools in 2026? That makes sense to close a particular school in 2026 or do we feel that these schools need to wait to 2027 or beyond? >> Oh, wait. So >> what I'm saying of between Tarlton, Brandy, Lynenwood, does anybody have any thoughts or ideas on whether or not closing

135one of these schools in 2026 is a good idea, a bad idea? Do we want to move them out? I thought we was I thought we was betting on 2027. I just thought that was the year. >> That's what I'm saying. >> No, you're not. You're saying 2026. >> I'm saying she's asking who of of the schools we just discussed should would be closed up for closing in 2026 or should we >> move them to 202? >> We already said 2027. >> I'm confused because I feel like we're in school year 26 right now. So, we should just say 27. That's next school year. We're not closing any. >> Yeah. We're not going to close any schools mid year, >> right? >> So, I Okay. So, what I'm saying is >> Yeah. [Laughter] >> Okay.

136So, what I'm just saying is I I I'm getting in general that we should not close any of these schools to 2027. >> Wait, >> 26. >> 20 27 28. >> Wait, wait, wait. Okay, now I've confused myself. Let me take a step back. >> So, so the 2627 school year is when the steering committee's plan has them closing the 2627 academic year. Right. What I am saying is are there any arguments for or against closing them in 2026 2027 as opposed to moving it to 2728? >> I said 2728 since you put it that way because if you saying 27 what are you going to move in the middle of the school year? >> No no I'm just saying no that's what I'm saying. So you will have to wait the 2728 school year.

137Well, that's what I'm saying. >> Well, no, because next next school year is 2627. >> That's what I was about to say. I guess it would help if it was FY physical year 2027, which is next school year. >> Okay. >> Which is school year 27, >> right? >> So, so would you refer to 2026 27 as school year FY27? >> Right. >> Correct. >> All right. So, >> we're in FY26 right now. >> Okay. So, Let's just re just like we had to rename the option to 929, we have to rename how we talk about our gears. Yes. >> Well, um >> my concern though is that we're not able to give them the proper sendoff, the proper transition time. >> Yes. And and that's that's why I'm asking >> it does it make

138sense to close any of these schools in 27? >> 26. >> Yeah. Okay. >> Can we do it by school? Can we do it by because we've been talking about it this whole year. >> This is we are in 2526, >> right? >> I was saying does it make any sense to close any of these schools in 2627 or wait until 2728? >> That's what I said. That's exactly what I said. >> Yeah. So 2627 you're asking should we be closing any schools? >> Yes. >> No. >> Any of these schools? >> No. >> Cuz that's a short time. That's exactly what we're talking about. So it should be school year 2728, the beginning of that school year. >> So no schools closed next year >> except for Willoughby. >> That's not really two years.

139>> Yeah, except for >> That's not two years. >> Except for Willoughby. >> Yeah. >> So that So we're saying that we are comfortable closing Willoughby for the 26 27th school year and moving those students right to Ocean Air. >> So we would move them next year then. That's what you're saying. >> The 26 27 the little >> Once we once we decide that >> but they still have to go into another school. You have to get them ready too. The school they going into, >> right? But it's only a two-year school. Either you go there for prek 3, prek 4. So >> not will but the school they're going into, >> right? You have to prepare. >> It'll be ready by next school year. >> It will be. They're saying it will be ready.

140And really, if I may, no matter what, that building, the changes would have to take place during the summer because until we close it, ocean, we're not going to keep unless we moved Ocean Air students out 26 27 and then waited a year to move Willoughby in. We'd have to do the changes over the summer no matter what. >> Our track record is not that good when we want to do things. So, we have to do we have a guarantee that's going to be done. >> Yeah. The transitioning Oceaner to be ready for preK. Yes. smaller >> next school year. We talking about less than a year cuz we already in what? October on Wednesday. So less than a year >> a Las Vegas um bet right there. All right. >> That's as guaranteed. All

141right. >> All right. heard it. >> So, we'll close Willoughby and move them in the 2026 2027 school year. >> However, we're saying the other closures listed for 2627 we'd like to move to 2728. >> I say I'm not speaking for the whole board, but I say yes. What you just said? >> I say yes as well. Although I'm not in I'm saying yes, but the >> I'm only talking about Lynenwood, Graanby, and Terlton. >> Yeah. >> All three of them the same school year. 26 I mean 27 >> 27 28. Well, you said that's feasible. Then we do that that school year. >> Right now they have it as 26 27. But we're saying >> 27 28 >> once the redistricting boundary work comes in because we're talking now like hundreds of students between

142those three. >> So instead of city council getting two schools next year, they would get one school next year and three schools the the year after. >> We still have to go through all of these others. So >> I know there may be one on here that could be >> up. Right. >> Exactly. Well, but tentatively we're saying Graanby, Terlton, and Lynenwood 26 2728, right? >> That right. Next year is 26 to 27. >> Okay. >> I'm confused. >> Okay. >> Sorry. >> Okay. So, what we have >> board? Yeah. Right on that. >> Rich, can you cut the white back? >> And look, and and a professor from TCC. There you go, ladies and gentlemen. >> Do you want to you want to write? >> Absolutely not. I'm good. That's why I thought we

143would get the TCC. Um, professor, >> my handwriting is not >> You need to be chair though. You can't be up here writing. >> Like to do this. >> I'll do it. >> All right. Thank you. >> AKA to the rescue. All right. >> So, put 2627 >> full year. And and then we would the only thing we would potentially do right now is is move the Willoughby close Willoughby ECC and move to move that to Ocean Air for 2627. >> Close Willoughby. Okay. >> Do not do not second guess the person who volunteered to be up there. >> She was volunttoled. >> You're out of order. >> Tiffany's a collaborator. >> We just just put the school names and would just understand it as close. >> Okay. And then we're saying for the 2027

144to 2028 school year this help is this helping Colonel. >> You're not even looking. >> I'm not a teacher. I'm trying to erase my >> You have to choose the erase. You have to back >> your hand. >> Look at all these experts. Thank God for teachers. >> That year we would close Carolton and Graanby Granby. And then we tentatively would repurpose Lynenwood. Put Lynenwood and then just put >> aster next to it >> or put an asterisk next to it. >> That teacher handwrit. >> Now let's look at the schools listed for 2728. But we are not necessarily assigning dates to these schools closures. Okay. So 20 uh close PB Young there in agreement that PB >> Well, let's let's PB Young is a special case because >> the neighborhood >> because the neighborhood

145will be torn up in 2728. >> We want to get the children out. >> That's what they propose. >> Yeah. So to that end, that's where that's that's the proposal of when demolition would begin there. And I guess my concern is waiting till that demolition is happening or even after that is happening I think would be really traumatic uh for the school community um and disruptive just a whole host of things I think lessons that we've learned uh with Taiw Park and Richard Bowling and yeah it's um >> so would you be in favor you're saying you're in favor of closing closing PB Young in 2728 >> potentially, but I would like for the superintendent to work with the city manager to kind of get a more definitive idea of what the demolition plans are

146so that we're taking all of that into consideration. Um because we don't want that to be happening in the midst of all of that. >> I I think it's not the city manager but NRHA, right? city would charge. He would know. Yeah. >> So, so should Okay. So, I'm going to put this proposal up. Should we list PB Young in 2728 with an asterisk? The plan would be to close it in 2027 28 because of the work that is being done. >> It's right now it's not clear. So, once we get >> not clear, but the asterisk is dependent upon the city's response. Yeah. Yeah. So I think three school personally I think three school closures in a year possibly four is probably enough for 2728. Well, that was my I wanted to ask this

147earlier like how how much how many schools could we feasibly per year >> and do well. Yeah. Do well obviously like the >> well so I think that comes into if we if we start off smaller next year than trying to such a big bite next year I we could do four in a year with the reasonzoning. It's it's a it's a it's a big lift but you know we would have a year and a half of planning time with those schools. You know we have more time to plan it out. I think three is enough in one year. >> Three is probably enough, but PB PB Young needs to stay as an asterisk because we do not want to send those students in the middle of a teacher >> and and Lynenwood is technically

148not I mean >> it's a repurpose, >> right? Right. >> Okay. What happened to Norview? I thought that's >> it's on it's it's in the next set of We haven't gotten there yet. >> I thought that should have been up there somewhere, too. >> But that's the thing. We can move the stuff around, >> right? We we we're not um So, the next set has closed Norview. You can put 2829, but let's just make sure we're okay with closing these schools. So, closing Norview. um close Berkeley. Hold on. Can we talk about closing Norview? >> Sure. >> So, the one thing about um since we were talking about whether it should be moved up or not, um it, you know, I was looking at the FCIS, but when I look at the utilization and the

149high utilization there that >> busting at the seams >> where we where we those kids. >> Yeah. busting at the >> but I'm also thinking of our communication and I'm thinking about preparing them and and having solid um transition plans because it is a a larger school community. So that's why you know but I I'm comfortable in that year of doing that. Yeah. >> I'd like to close Norview next year personally. I went in there and I got instantly sick from the mold. That's why I said that needs to go on 20 27 28 >> but we have to prepare the where they're going. >> Yes, we have to prepare where they're going and and that's a consideration too. But in terms of >> but far as them being sick, they'll be going to the

150hospital. >> So 27 28 Northview should be right there. That school >> like she's telling you now that school is >> if that is the case Dr. Paul, I Yeah. What? >> Dr. Paul was going to interject on something just for >> Oh, yeah. Oh, >> yeah. I' I'd be cautious about using the the words mold and mildew. We we do test. You know, the the the truth though about Norview is there's that elementary school uses the most portables >> of any of our elementary schools. So, it is it is it's well over capacity for the building. So, can could we do the heavy lift for 2728 and move a school off the 2728 list? >> I I think you had stated before, you know, Lynenwood is um >> Yeah, it's being repurposed. >> It's

151being repurposed. So, we have some flexibility on where we move that um depending on what we end up doing with with Rosemont, right? Because if we we have to do Lynenwood and Rosemont at the same time if we're moving everything into Rosemont because we have to move folks out of >> out of Rosemont into Lynenwood. >> Um so that has to be synchronous but we could certainly move Norview over. >> Can we just move Tarlton to 28 and move Norview to 27? >> I I think that that one is also one that Yeah. I I'm just asking. I'm asking. >> No, but I think his point is like the Lind Lynen Wood could, >> you know, >> Lindwood could fall off. >> Yeah, that's what >> But we have to decide. We have to decide

152what we're going to do with with We do have to come back and decide what we're going to do with Gent because that's going to shift a lot of things. >> Well, you wasn't finished talking about Norview. If we putting on the table, let's put on the table. >> Yeah. Well, first of all, I want to acknowledge the colonel because he he's >> for Norview. I think it needs to go to >> and Graanby also. 2627. >> Well, Graanby is up there for 2728. >> I I said 26. >> Oh, 26. We was only doing one school. >> That's next year. >> I'm saying do three schools >> next year. >> Yes. >> Less than one year. >> Yes. Okay. >> Wait, you want to close Graanby Elementary next year? They're saying >> I I

153Graby and Norview are primed for having to be replaced soon, >> right? But you're understanding that Graby went from 2031 to now >> 28 like that's >> well and he's saying 26 27 is what he's recommending. >> So you want Willoughby, Norview, and Graham and Graanby to close all >> Let's just let's just ask this question. Does anyone else want Grandb and you said Lynenwood no >> in Norview closed in 2627. Does anybody else want another school closed in 2627? Let's just ask that question. There is the potential of another school being closed in 2627. >> You you might >> Yeah, >> I would say no of you. And if there, you know, concerns about the health of the building, obviously that moves things and I would switch Graanby Elementary and Norview, >> but Graanby

154doesn't have a health issue. >> That's what we're looking at right now. >> But the thing is is with Norview also where where they are. I mean, but that does give us time that really needs to be under the resoning plan. >> Yeah. and and it will be actually because it is 2728 that we're talking about, right? But he's saying which is why I'm not >> even if we did 2627 for Norview, the reasoning plan we'll have in February. So we we we'd have places where where the students would be going, it would be a shorter transition period for them. Um, but it I mean administratively I'm saying that could be done if that's the will of the board to do it that quickly. >> Okay. >> So, you know, and we could we could

155handle Willoughby and repurposing Ocean Air. Norview is is reszoning and it's the committee work to move that around. There's no need to fix any other schools because we're not creating another ECC. So, there, you know, that there's no work to be done in other schools. >> I'd be bumping it up. >> And the same goes for Graanby. It's the same. What about transportation? >> They're not doing anything to any other school is currently >> Dr. Martin has her hand up and she >> So, um, in closing Graanby, the um, we're going to send some students north and some students south, right? >> That's that's what's been said so far. So if we close Graanby B with will this like so 2728 do those other schools currently have the capacity to absorb those students as the

156plan goes? >> Yes they do. >> Okay >> up there. That's what I hear too. Tiffany, >> I'm here. >> I'm not We're over here. We're not >> I'm not in support of moving that in 26 27. >> That's way too soon. And those are >> those are big schools. >> And those are big schools. >> Big school. >> I really want us to get off on like on the right foot >> and and have a template that works well. And if we just do too much >> the first year, I just I think that it's all gonna fall apart. >> Yeah, >> I'm in agreement with that. >> In agreement with what doc what Dr. Martin just said. I mean, and I've been consistent with that that doing >> too many and the large

157schools unless you are telling me that and they are unhousable and we need to move them like tomorrow then we should be doing that tomorrow. you know >> 60 >> how can we call them unhousable if we're having students in there >> well that's she's saying I'm just saying that's what I >> something needs to happen soon >> I know but I'm arguing that point is that which is I'm assuming that they are suitable environments for our students to learn in right now that I want to do this well and in the best interest of our students and So this is um I don't >> how is not moving them in their not in their best interest if we leave them there till 9 the last year I'm sorry 27 28 28 29 >> longer

158how is that good for >> again Graanby was slated to close in 31 so we just moved them up a few years >> yeah so this isn't making >> well that was on a >> again there's all kinds of of options that we've been >> reviewing and looking at. We're really down to do we want to do three in a year and the three there are three prime candidates right there. There's actually more but >> right and and no I don't knowing what the school research shows around school closures we have to do this well and I'm and and the impacts that closing school has on student performance student well-being all has to be considered and with Norview and Graanby Elementary being larger school communities than Willoughby for instance I am not in support of

159doing that next year I'm in support of doing it well unless it is shared that which I'm almost asking like when I say it's unhousable I'm saying >> so bad we wouldn't be having right so so to me that does not make it urgent to do it next year >> it is bad Jason do you want to talk about Norview Elementary School >> I've been in Norview elementary too I just >> I mean I've been in Norv elementary school um I've had the opportunity to tour all the schools have been slated for closure. Um I mean and our our children are um and um staff are working in some very horrid conditions. Um and and I think that's something that we do have to address while also addressing the student success. Um and understanding that

160we don't want to be too aggressive um that we uproot the and interrupt the lives so fast with a lot of our students and families. But I do agree Norview is one that should be a priority. Um, yeah. >> So, switch and we're not arguing that point. It's just what what year if we're we're talking doing it next. >> But then how about we could we switch Graanby and Norv? So, take Norv and put that one >> 27 28. >> Yeah. No reason we can't >> just and maybe make a repurposing column here and take Lynenwood off of there just so that it's not confused with closing. Yeah, >> thank you Vanna. >> That's eraser. Huh. >> I will I will say um when Sarah I and um I think it was Mr. Freley when

161we went to Norview and and toured and afterwards um I end up just having a massive headache after leaving. >> So imagine being in the school for six, seven hours, >> five days a week. >> The class I will say the classrooms were better than the hallways at that school. There's filters and humidifiers and things going on. So, we're going to put Norview in 2728. >> Yeah. >> That okay with the majority of the board. >> So, you're saying we're only doing one school next year >> right now unless something unless something No. >> Yeah. Yeah. You put it in the right place. >> Put it in the right place. >> Delete. >> Second option. >> Got to be smarter than the smart board. >> Good. >> All right. >> Not so smart though. >>

162I put grand over on that one. >> Yes. It's under 2829. Correct y'all? >> Moves it up two years. >> Yeah. From there, >> remove it from the 2728 list. >> We get to really feel how those teachers are in those classrooms. >> All the technique. >> You already have. Have you? Oh. Oh. Oh. Okay. the perfectionism in her. All right. >> All right. I still advocate for another school at least one in 26 27 and the again we have three prime candidates Tarlton Norview and Graanby Graanby just slipped a year why didn't it advance a year >> okay >> could go up I'm with you, Tiffany. Now, could that go up there? >> I was thinking if one of them could, it could be that because there's less than 300 students there, which is

163what I was, but at the same time, there's there's all of those nuances that we have to be prepared. >> Okay. So, what So, I'm going to bring up something that Miss Thomas is not super in favor, not in favor of. I know. Don't do it then. >> It's the next one on the list. I got to do it. >> U close Berkeley and move to St. Helena. >> So, >> but can we resolve this? >> Well, what I'm saying is what I'm saying is in 2026 27 close the Berkeley ECC and that would be and move to St. Helena. Move St. Helena uh based on their redistricting. St. Elena has 220 something students I think >> 240 >> off by 20 >> it's a smaller school >> and ECCS 146 >> I'm I'm just

164if we if we're really trying to get another school up there this would be the the this would be less affected by the red resoning >> well I have an idea Yeah. Oh, go ahead. >> Um, let me say this about St. Helina going to Southside STEM. Um, kids going to Southside STEM um will require some in my opinion for those kids to be successful because we know that the the um initial plan for Southside STEM is not um what Southside campus uh Southside STEM is at at this present moment. So, I've had a conversation with Dr. poll if that was the case that there needs to be some real uh supports put in place if St. Helena kids go to Southside STEM. And those are one of the reassurance that I want to see

165in writing and um and really reimagine what Southside STEM can be and should be for the kids on the south side. >> Yes. So that so look >> look we have to do what is going to be best for our students and if that means the first year we close one and the second year we close three on average we close two a year. So um we have to do what's in the best interest of our students. Hand up than the colonel. >> Yes. So about Berkeley ECC, this is one that I've been kind of racking my brain around and it is what I originally that will be to start off so that we could do all the boundary work, redistricting, transition plans, all of that to start off with. Um I did recently ask

166and I don't know if you were able to get that information about the doicile. So, so there's a couple of things that concern me and there's some ideas too that I want to share that which is where I think a little bit of time on this might be beneficial. But um so Berkeley ECC right now, you know, I wanted to put the focus on the ECC's if we had to put a focus somewhere on the first years because they're smaller smaller populations, but moving them into St. Helina and moving St. Helina students into Southside STEM Academy is where I have um uh reservations around because I want to see St. Helina be maintained as an elementary school. And I say that because working backwards because Southside STEM Academy was at one point having been in

167the seat now, but this was even way before I was in this seat, we advocated for a Southside STEM and swim academy where it was it had more choice seats and it had a strong STEM uh educational component to it. And I believe that, and I'm saying this having been on it, is that we've we did not succeed in fulfilling that um that promise to the community and and uh to the district. So, one of the things that I want us to do because we have the opportunity to do it now is to look at the programming at the school and really think how can we create more choice options, strengthen the program there before we move any students into there. Like I said, the closure research clearly shows if you're moving students, you should

168be moving them to a higher performing school. And until that is where we are, like I I am not in favor of moving that. And not only for the students that are moving, but the students that are there um because we need to have strong academic environment for them. And I think we're on the path. But but again, looking back programmatically at what we are offering at Sawside STEM Academy and making sure and improving the integrity of the program is something that I want us to look at. The other thing, the other idea that I had was um if we close Berkeley ECC, the reason why I am supportive of closing Berkeley ECC is for a couple reasons. the facility condition index of course, but then I also went back and was looking at the

169HR reports and they have had a a high teacher vacancy rate there for now for se for a good few years and that's really concerning to me and this year it is at 23% as as of the 910 um uh report and and to me if we I know it is a citywide mixed income one of our you know mixed income preks but one of the pieces of information I asked from Dr. Paul is can we see are we truly you know is this pro is this are we really meeting that goal of it being citywide um and mixed income and where the students what the doicile like what where the students are coming from that actually attend Berkeley ECC and my thought is that if we really have students primarily from um St. Helina

170the the district and Southside STEM >> all that. Yeah, that's the kids. >> Why why not uh consider reszoning them for those schools or to their home schools if they are just a few in other other areas and take the time to work on Southside STEM Academy um with St. Helina explore some potential options like um potentially like we talk about which I want to get to you know the suburban park rebuild. I would like to see us invest in communities that have been disinvested in historically and so there could be an opportunity for St. Helena to be uh renovated, expanded to be a elementary school where we could they have the community center next to it. Um and the whole c Yeah. the whole campus and how can we work with the city to

171use the the entire campus to have prek and have um you know afterchool programming all of that you know all on one campus so that's an idea that I would like for us to take time to explore and I have spoken with Dr. about that. Um, so >> I would support closing. So those are the reasons why I would support closing Berkeley ECC, but I am not if if there was space to put them in Yeah. St. Helina for now and then um figure out the rest down the down the road. I would be in support of that. But those are the kind of assurances that I I would need. >> Let's take St. and Helina out of the discussion right now. Let's No, I'm saying like let's not try to put a pin in

172it. Let's put a pin in it. >> Can I >> Sure. >> Uh so can we can we put Berkeley on there with an asterisk and then we can do that research. If we if we put it down down the line, we can do the research of can we add them to St. Helena to keep St. Helina or utilize the spaces around St. Helina um knowing that that you know that the the building would be you know closed eventually >> potentially. Yeah. Right. >> Be too soon. >> Yeah. I think at this point you can separate ECC from St. Helena because it's not enough room in St. Helena for them to go there. We know that already. >> No, we were talking about the building space around it. >> Well, that's that would take some

173time though. Oh, that would take that's why I'm saying like we put that piece >> that's why I'm like separated. >> Yeah. >> So, yeah, >> because that would then give us the direction of saying, you know, this is the year where we're looking and this is what we have to do accomplish to be able to make that step happen. >> Okay. >> Where are we? >> Can we put it at 20? for closing ECC in 2930. >> We close >> potentially close Berkeley in 20 I'm just throwing this out there. >> I got you. You're put isn't >> Yeah. >> Could we close cept and repurpose Chesterfield in 2829? >> All right. back to I don't want to I want to go back to Norview. That's why I was raised my hand a little

174bit ago. I wanted to few minutes ago everybody had a headache going there. Everybody thought it was bad and now it's in 27 28. It's not. It needs to go up to 26 27 if if we're you know in how could it be bad for us and good for the kids. It can't be. >> If it's bad for us, it's bad for them. >> That's right. And staff, everybody that goes in that bill. >> Wait, wait, don't get that knuckle out just yet. >> I want to hear from Dr. Martin. And >> I'm not Oh, >> what? >> I'm not opposed to putting it in 27. But I agree with Dr. Martin. I think she's may say it's just it's too soon. >> I want to know where we're going to put the kids. >>

175Yeah, >> we won't know that till February. That's the problem. >> That's going to be very >> That's one of the bigger schools. >> Such a big school. I thought we had an idea where the kids was going. Well, we have Tanner's Creek and Sherwood Forest. >> Isn't that an idea? >> That's the idea. But we just >> So why are we saying we don't know? >> Because because the boundary work may show something different or may show provide show an opportunity might come out of that. >> Well, we have an idea. So it's not that we don't. for now it was which two >> if if it wasn't going to go to Sherwood then why was it put on on our sheet to say we're going to go to that's where we're going to

176if we closed uh Norview we're going to send them to Sherwood and I I can't I think there was another place but now we're saying we don't know if they're >> well the part part of the issue is in the redist the reasonzoning is done there may be some students who went to Norview that go to a completely different school and then We've put out there that they are going to only one of these two schools, but a small sliver ends up at another school and then you've created chaos because people will not know what is going on. They will they will they will have they will have thought something was happening and something else is happening and it puts people in a bad spot. So trying to to to close the zone schools in

17726 27 is difficult. Yes. >> Mr. Norview Elementary. population walkers. >> They are walkers. >> Walkers. >> Are those across? >> And I believe elementary is mostly walkers, too. That's what I'm thinking. Well, I'm I'm gonna just I'm gonna I'm gonna stop you there. My kids uh went to Taylor and the kids that live in that we lived in Gent and we had to cross Hampton Boulevard. So, they were bust. But once they hit Blair, those kids in West Gent were no long they became walkers. So you have to be a little careful with where you kind of put the elementary because there could be pl instances where they're bust because of their location for elementary but not necessarily bust for middle >> is it 1.5 >> for northview to challenge creek >> north public

178schools. >> Oh I'm sorry is it 1.5 miles? >> Yeah one mile. Yeah. >> Okay. So that that's my only that's my only concern with that an analogy. Um, >> ma'am. >> Yes, M. Colonel, >> if if we were putting out information that that could be changed, then we should say that we don't know where they're going to go, but we have to do it. Either we Norview is the worst and and I thought we were going to close it and it should close right away. If we have to make exceptions or we have to do something to give them an assurance that they won't be moved after the resoning's done, then we give them that assurance that we put them and like you said, there's a little sliver. Make the sliver go away. Make

179it work for the people when we move them this time. They're not that when the reasonzoning comes, unless it's substantial, we just honor what we've done. >> Mr. Fairley, when was this done? >> Very recent, right? >> So, these are the indicators. >> So, you just put this up here for the schools that no elementary school be going to, correct? But that's but >> that was a wonderful idea when y'all came up with this. Correct. But now it's not an idea. This is just came up the last couple of days. >> Well, how many students are at Norview? >> Yeah. >> Showing 383. >> Oh, so Tanner's Creek and Sherwood Forest could very easily absorb those population. >> Absolutely. So, I I agree they could they could absorb it. Um my concern is if we're

180looking also at a districtwide resoning process and we have a school on the other end of town that might have space, there might be holistic shifts across the division if we truly look at resoning. >> So, why did we just come up with this? This this was where we knew we would have seats for them is where where the the our consultancy firm put that on here in in in the committee because we knew we have seats for them. But there if if we're truly going to look at a holistic if the board's request is to look at reszoning across the entire city then you know we can say sure Norview would likely go mostly to Sherwood Forest and and Tanner Creek. However, there might be a population to the to the west that may

181end up going to a different place because, you know, we some some of uh uh Taylor that using every single classroom this year might have to shift to Monroe or to Larchmont or to somewhere else to to alleviate some space there. So, with all these shifts, that's all we're saying is it might be very minute like like the colonel said, it might be a sliver of it, but we might have that sliver at the end. But but at the same time, if the board requests for for next year, we could do it. It just means a transition plan because even with the shift with Willoughby, we you know, we know the three schools where will where where Ocean Air is likely going to end up, but the the zoning hasn't been finalized on that. So

182even with with Ocean Air, we have to wait until February to be able to know where those students are going with the change in Willoughby. So that's already happening on the board. So putting Norview there is it it's feasible administratively we could make that happen and do a solid transition plan with it um to happen. >> One of my one of my concerns is also that we're not I I want students to be let's see this is what I want to avoid. I'll just say I I try to do everything positively, but I can't right um um that we are transfer transitioning students into a new school that they might only be in for a year >> and then transitioning, you know, into another like >> minimize that as much as possible. Yeah. >> And

183that's that's very difficult because no matter when we do it, you're going to have a rising fifth grader going to a new school unless we phase out schools, which is just it's it's financially irresponsible to do that. We So no matter what, no matter when you do it, that's that's just unfortunately it's the nature of this beast that we're trying to tackle right now is is you're going to have that. The on the other end though, how however I will say once we have the resoning in place for schools, if we have a student who's coming into kindergarten to a school that's slated to close in another year, on the asurances, we've said that they can go to the school where we know they're going to go so that they don't have that kind of

184a shift. But on the upper end, it's it's impossible to do. If I could share, we have the technology as soon as the grid code book is adjusted by Walpert. We have the the technology that families can punch their address into one of our applications and it will automatically tell them where they go to elementary, middle, and high. If they finish the redistricting in February, then we could I would defer to Mike because Mike's the techie guru, but I'm pretty sure we could have all that posted before April so that people would know exactly where they're going if we release all 10 closures so that it can be done that way. So, nobody's not going to know where they're going. We're going to have the technology to do that and they're going to know as

185soon as we post it. Mike, how long would it take? >> Right. I would say right around that time. >> Thank you, >> April. I was just saying that that's about the time the time frame that April time frame because once we have that information in then Tommy Eth just has to plug it in and then we can be able to lay out specifically when that would occur. So, and is there consensus to close norview in 2627? Yes or no? >> Say yes. >> Yes. >> Conditions to say yes. >> Miss Bine and Dr. Martin, just hit the little down button now. Hit the down button next to it. Fine. Just just I don't know. We haven't heard from Dr. Martin and Missively about closing Norv next year. Forward. Do you stand? That's That's what

186I'm thinking. So, I'm I'm in favor. Ignore you. But while all of these schools in the first year um then >> if yeah if we have one large school one small school I have >> administrative we can >> if you if we do that then those are the only two schools that year. >> Decision >> if that if I was an emergent >> I personally was fine doing one school the first year so we made sure we did it right but two I think is the max but that is yeah >> those that we're talking about three and four definitely not support >> now can we move to 2728 thing with engaging the school communities >> on that shift too is >> not yet Tiffany. Um, so we need to talk about we need to

187talk about >> 29. >> No, wait a second. We need to talk about >> I'm sorry. >> We need to be determined. >> Oh, okay. >> Um, right now it was listed as 2728, but I would argue 2829 to reper repurpose Chesterfield for CEP and closing CEP. >> How long would it take for them to repurpose it? Dr. involved >> there wouldn't I mean there wouldn't be much work that need to be done at you know school to school >> from yeah >> over a summer >> so could we put cept in 2829 or even >> either one works >> well we already have three in that year >> right >> oh okay >> yeah so I mean we would have my re 2829 say Chesterfield CESAP. >> Okay. >> Because then that gives back

188the old Richard Bowling >> and it'll probably help the city with um some housing because that's an area the city wants to um use for housing for the Broad Creek project. >> So, can I ask a question? So, as far as CEP goes, you know, one of my original concerns was um you know, that we're not again putting our most vulnerable students in school environments that well school buildings I mean that have their issues. So, so making sure the health of the building is suitable and what conversations I guess I'm asking what conversations are being had with CEP about ensuring that the physical capacity, the accommodations that all of the things that are necessary to meet the needs of CEP students are available at Chesterfield >> between now and then we'll have them all, you

189know, once we have a building location. They already know we're looking because they >> Yeah, they do. >> I mean, their understanding was they were only going to be in their placement for a year and this is year six of that placement. So, yeah. >> Right. Yeah. And I know there was some advocacy like to really consider um you know, location >> for CEP as well. So, um >> I just want to be sure that that's that's all going to be in place. Okay. >> All right. And so right now they have a pause in 2829 to design Jay Cox and Suburban Park rebuilds. >> But we also have Chesterfield and CEP that year, right? Yeah. >> But you could still you could still start the design process in 2829 for those schools. >> The

190J Cox >> or JC. >> Yeah. That's a wonderful idea too because that school Yes. Yes. So we could we can leave those redesigns in 2829. There's no reason we can't repurpose Chesterfield. >> Madam Chair. >> Yes, ma'am. >> So this is also in the time frame um as we do the redistricting work if suburban park like if if we might consider St. Helina investing uh there versus suburban park based on what the needs what we've what we've learned from the research that we do. I'd like to you know I mean we're not committing specifically to suburban park >> like Mr. Freley said earlier you know it's we before the time frame we could absolutely make a shift in that. So you could even put Jay Cox in school B down there. You know, rebuild

191for right now, >> but we know we want to rebuild Jay Cox. Jox is a definite. >> So rebuild would be Jay Cox and TBD. >> Well, too. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Oh, 20 28 29. Uhhuh. Tiffany. >> Yeah. >> Jay Cox. Go ahead. JCO is a definite and Suburban Parks a maybe. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> And then technically we have a third school um that was on a CIP that hopefully could help with the CTE program at Lake Taylor >> and that would be in 32. I just want to update it. >> It would be a while. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Just elementary is elementary, but >> Okay. >> So, in 2029, 2030, we talking about maybe renovating >> St. Helena. >> that could that could be the suburban park instead. And can

192you put school too like cuz that Yeah, cuz Suburban Park is up there. That could be St. Alina. >> So So what you saying? So what you saying? >> What you >> So that's what we were saying like >> in 2829 >> by then we'll have the information that we need that that suburban park could be St. Helena. >> Put school too. >> Yeah. >> We said we said instead of >> just put an asterisk next to suburban >> or just put an asterisk there. It's Suburban Park or another school like St. Helena. >> Oh, okay. So, we're gonna put that up there. Tiffany, we're putting it up there, right? >> It matches the star with Berkeley. >> But I don't see the name up there, though. Can you put say just put >> Yeah,

193I agree with I agree with what u Miss Thomas is saying just so that we don't lose sight of >> looking into that. Yeah. Um, so we have the rebuilds in 20 in 2032 to 2034. We had repurposing Lake Tiller High School to a comprehensive CTE program. >> 32. It's a ways down the road. 32 33 >> goes all the way up to 34. >> Yeah. >> You said front porch. iced tea. I heard that. >> What happened to 31? >> Yeah. What happened to 3132? >> That's when we're rebuilding. It's going to take it is going to take years. >> That's your gap. Okay. >> Yeah. A couple years in there to rebuild >> comprehensive. >> Write that on there that it's a gap. So if someone takes a picture, >> right? Exactly. Jason,

194y'all missing a year. >> Just put rebuild. >> Just put Yeah. Just put >> put that the years and put it. It's a gap. Rebuild so people understand. >> Gap year. So it's just more clear. >> Well, we're just gonna have to redesign this anyway. So >> 32, Tiffany, >> but just put you could just point an arrow. >> Oh, it's 30 31 Tiffany, I think. Yeah, I messed you up. It's 3031. >> 30 31. You got 31. >> 30 to 32 actually. >> Oh, the two years. Yeah, it's going to take it's going to take two years. >> So, just change your one to a two. >> Change your one to a two. It's all use fist. >> Yeah, there we go. >> Third to >> Miss Buffalo. >> One person give her direction,

195not the entire board. I think that's not helpful. >> 2030 to 2032 is when we will have those rebuilds. So if you just want to point an arrow, >> sorry >> from Suburban Park and Jay Cox. >> It's Yeah, >> right there. >> Just just do an air >> and then put the CTE >> now. Now 32 33. >> Yeah, there you go. >> 32 to 34 is repurposing LT. >> Oh, okay. I thought CT that's under 3032 as well. >> Those those dates so far out. It's really depending on the city and funding. Got you. >> Which is why they're so far out. >> Okay. >> And we should since there's been some disagreement about closing Madison at Easton. I would recommend that we don't put it on this list at this point. >>

196Correct. >> But could we put NTC closing NTC? So that's our ninth ninth building >> close NTC in 2034. >> Yeah. Once we have that beautiful comprehensive CTE center built >> agreement about. All right. So we have to go back and talk about again moving into Rosemont. >> Tiffany, I don't want to bother you. Well, we missing a date. What's 2034? Shouldn't 2034 be somewhere up there? That's uh CTE comprehensive high school and close NTC's 2032 to 2034. >> Yeah. >> Just put it as being far out. >> Put it earlier then out. Is that what you're thinking? Yeah. >> So I'd like to propose moving the gent school into AOIS in 2027 2028. I would that would give enough time to look at the programming concerns and issues making sure that all the students

197needs are going to be met but it gives it allows us to close another school >> but we already have three schools. >> Yeah. But I'm also thinking about the fact that they aren't going to be in the middle of a construction zone and we weren't comfortable doing it in 2627. So I'm proposing that we do it in 2728 and then they're only in a construction zone for a year and a half rather than multiple years. Like I said earlier, I would be in support of that so long as and I heard the commitment that SPMT is put in place to really come up with the solution that we involved again and AOIS young scholars to to work together. >> Just just real quick, even during the break, one of our committee members came up

198and said, you know, they don't have an elementary library. So the the case in point when we did Compass Academy we built an elementary library. So we'd build an elementary li you know things like that would be in place so that programmatically it's in place for the students and we're ready to go. >> So against the 2728 >> that's what I'm proposing. >> You're proposing what everybody thinking. So long as those assurances are there, I can uh >> written and >> I'm okay. >> I can go for it. >> Martin, Colonel, >> I I like the Gen idea, but the four closings, why don't we move Graanby to 26 27? >> We already have two schools up there. That's two, but you got four there, >> but that's less than a year. >> And that's

199for all the redistricting work and >> all the redistricting work should be done. So closing >> and PB Young is still >> on the table a little bit because of when the the work is going to be started in that neighborhood >> on the table >> and then we need to decide what to do with Lyndenwood. I would like I think the majority of the board would would like to repurpose it, but what year would we repurpose it in? >> I think that would be contingent on what what you were saying earlier about it being contingent on >> have to do it in 2728. >> We we'd have to do it with Kent. >> It has to be done at the same time as Gent. >> Yeah. So just up up there repurpose 20728. is

200what I would next to repurpose. >> I still don't see data coming for doing this for repurposing. >> Well, the only way we can move the students into Gent and close Gent move students to AOIS is that if we move out that administrative staff and I think it was 30 administrative staff >> it's it's approximately >> approximately somewhere between 20 and 45. Let's just say, right? And so we have to move them somewhere and repurposing Lynenwood to move them is best idea >> for 45 people. >> Well, we're going to use that building. We're going to we're going to use that building for for professional development and other things. And we also kept an elementary school in our portfolio in case we needed another elementary school. The data the data is not there. I I

201I haven't seen the data that supports keeping Lynenwood. >> All right. So, >> I mean, >> how does the rest of the board feel, >> Dr. Paul? >> Yes, ma'am. >> Do you have anyone working on how much we spend the request that >> I do? I I asked the C CFO for the information. I haven't gotten it back yet. I know a couple years ago we did the did that study and it was I think it was around it was just shy of $100,000 a year that we spend out of the building for for spaces. >> Well, Ken, when did you ask for that, Mr. Pollson? Colonel Pollson, when did you ask for how much? >> Couple meetings ago. >> It was It was >> Yeah, he asked for that. >> It was on

202the 10th. Yeah. >> And you said >> I thought we would have had that by now. You said to operate the building it was about $150,000 a year just in overhead in January >> cost and just in well the the average cost for power and water was and this was posted in the last set of board docs was around 99,000 a year. I was going to ask you how is it because I I also asked um similar to that question but for every single one of the school buildings >> what the operating costs are because I mean just because Yeah. But just just because you assume savings once you account for the transition for all that what what the savings actually look like are going to vary school by school because some schools are you

203know so you know >> I wanted to get that full picture and I hope that we can at some point that's what the time also built in is what is really the true doing a cost savings analysis of what we're really >> truly saving um is what I'd like the data that I would like to And if we were to repurpose Lynenwood for our teachers, would um also like after hours, could it also be available to the general public as a way for the school to generate revenue like community meeting spaces? So we haven't done that previously but you know that there is a building use form and then the you know the they would have to you know take on like usually when we when we rent a space after hours or during the

204weekends and they are responsible for paying for security paying for custodial services everything else. So I mean it could be put on our building use form that we do already and that's absolutely a possibility for our >> our sites. I can tell you with, you know, with divisions around us that have professional development centers, they're they're used all day long and they're they're used um uh over over the summer. Um and they're they're appreciated by the staff to have them because then there's a central place for meetings that everybody just knows where they're going to go. right now even um for any like when we do like teacher forum for instance we're fortunate that we have a space at Norview Middle School where we can host it but if someone else wants to host a

205meeting then it that's the only space we've got. >> Gotcha. Okay. >> And it's if Norview Middle's using the building that time then we don't even have that space. >> So how much would it cost to repurpose the building to get it right for um hold your professional development? So the to to use it as professional development, it there there wouldn't be much because we have the open space already in the classrooms. >> But when you want to change inside the um structure, >> so the the for some of the office space possibly putting up some some partitions or walls like we did at Rosemont years ago. Um and I don't have a cost estimate for that, Miss Thomas. I I do apologize for that. um for what it would cost, you know, the the

206the only other option would be then I guess, you know, if we didn't repurpose it to professional development, we'd have to find locations for um the administrators that are housed in the building and then Lynenwood would just be I I I suppose given back to the city. That's a negative ghost rider. >> I'm I'm in I'm in favor of of repurposing Lynenwood in the 20s 2720 for 2027 2028. >> And it you know Lynenwood also is an ideal place for us to take our um AP environmental students. It's an ideal t place to take um even students from the STEM academy, you know, to learn about environmental. it this this is a piece of property that can be educationally sound as well. >> Um you know >> is it currently being used? >> Yeah, >>

207I mean it it's being used >> I know it's a school for the environmental aspect >> at the school there at Lindwood at the school there. They have some gardens they put up some I think there's some land they built as well. >> So do we know if we don't do anything the city wants it back? We know that for a fact. They'll if we don't if we don't keep if we don't repurpose the building then we we I think we're required to give it back to the city >> or we just hold it and we we we can board it up >> but we up >> I mean that's what I'm saying that there if we're not going to use it >> which one we talking about >> it could be used for something

208it could be used >> it could be used as a professional development center >> you had me come up out the slumber but Lindywood is staying in our portfolio >> that that's what I'm saying we would use it for something else for NPS purpose. >> Well, it seems like the professional development would be used almost every single day of the school year. >> Miss Bina, I mean, that that comment is, you know, somewhat correct, though. So, when we do our >> We do need to find >> I mean, when we when we do our when we do schoolboard like this schoolboard meeting, I mean, we're we're tight in this room. Having more space when we do a true budget hearing, having more space and having a place where we can have cameras and speakers and

209stuff set up that that it's it's something we can go into easily and do it. See more parking though at Linton Wood. >> And we do we've discussed that about at least a crush and run lot something, you know, in the back where the the annex was torn down a few years back. >> Yeah, I wasn't kidding, but >> No, no. >> Yes, sir. >> Why Why are we not using the uh the Chesake uh Bay Foundation, CBF has a environmental building at 42nd Street. I think it's on 42nd >> one >> off of college. one of colleagues. >> The Ryan So the Ryan that's a environment. They have >> all the marsh land and I'm sorry what? >> It's the Elizabeth River project. >> Okay. ERP which whichever. Okay. CBF ERP. It's still there.

210It's there. That that facility is there. Why don't we use that? I mean, we're talking about environmental uh things. they they have more uh they do that as as um part of their education system and why can't we use that instead of having to maintain something else for for this uh for this one one purp well another purpose if we keep the building it's a good idea but I'm still opposed because I don't see a return on the investment yet >> um one of the reasons that it wouldn't it wouldn't be naturally accessible to the students. You have to have a reservation to go there, you know, to um have a tour or, you know, I know they're doing some things on the water, but it's it's just >> yeah, there's a lot of barriers

211for the students to be able to be there. >> Um and this is something that the students were involved in creating with the Chesapeake Bay Foundation and with other um gardening organizations. So um it's more accessible for them and also if we own that property or you know keep it >> um then we can add to it as well. >> Yeah. >> And you have to upkeep it. >> We have right but >> there's there's maintenance there's costs that we have not discussed that that are going that will impact it and and I'd like to see that. I want I I'd like to see when we invest this that we get something out of it beside yes there's the educa educational part of it but that's not the whole purpose of the building. There's got

212to be something else that says that this investment by keeping it and it's going to cost um we we quote for a school $100,000 what it's $100,000 for the electricity. So you can cut a a third. 30,000 uh for electricity and water and stuff, but still the building, the doors, the security systems, the lights, the electricity, the air conditioning. Those are long term. I don't know when the last one when it was done. >> Right now, we're spending hundred thou we're spending approximately $100,000 a year to rent space. So, it's it's almost a wash when you look at yearly cost. >> I know. And I believe you asked about evidence on that too about the PD being spent. How do we know? We haven't seen it. >> But this was a couple years ago. It

213was >> No, I'm saying now. >> I'll I'll have the information for you tomorrow on that because I asked for it a couple weeks ago. My apologies if you're not having it. I asked for it the day after it was asked for here. >> How about Wednesday at the meeting since we have another meeting. >> That's true. Yeah. you don't need to really get it that quick, but it should be accessible so we can see what the these other aspects of it. Okay, thank you. >> I think so. This this seems to be the only point of potential con I'm losing my words of contention. Um, but I'd like to know from the rest of the board if they think they we should repurpose Lynenwood or we should we should table that until we get

214some members. >> I I I'm firm on for right now. I feel like we should repurpose it. And for all of these, I mean, I I would like to see us do a cost savings analysis for the entire, you know, uh, school closure consolidation because right now we have projected numbers, but I want to see real data around these, uh, school closures. Um, so and with that, if the recommendation comes out of that that Lyndon would the return on investment is not there, then I would be open to coming back to that and reconsidering it, especially if we don't have perhaps clearer plans on how we're going to use it. Um, then, you know, I would consider that, but for right now, I am in support of repurposing it. >> Dr. Martin, >> are we

215talking about just Lynenwood or this whole plan here? >> Talking about just Lynenwood right now. >> Just Lynenwood. I I agree with what Miss Bine said. >> I I agree with repurposing um for the meeting space. Like I said, a division our size, if you look around to our neighbors, I'm sure they have um spaces um that they meet in big big groups, principal meetings and such. So, I'm I'm in favor for keeping it on our um on our books for repurpose because like I said, a division our size should have a place that we can conduct meetings um and we don't have to go I don't know a a hotel dining hall, you know. So, I'm in favor of repurposing Lind Lindwood for that purpose. >> I'm in favor of um keeping Linda Word

216in our portfolio, repurposing it um as well. Thomas. >> Um, >> no. >> Of repurposing it. Um, that would be five yeses to repurpose it. So, um, >> but I also still we need >> I think we also still need the money, but we are not voting tonight. >> We need the information. Absolutely. But we are not voting tonight. Um, we need to put this plan out into the community. I would suggest that we vote on the 15th. Um, after getting some feedback. >> So, where are you putting Linderwood at for now? >> Well, it would be 2728 because it it would it would it would have to be at the same time as Gent School. >> I just think that's too soon. I mean, >> a way to save this Well, it's conceivable. What

217>> you say? >> He has a flash drive. >> Oh, okay. I was like, "Oh, okay. There it is. All right." Because I was like, "Wait a minute." >> Going to show them how to do it. >> Oh, yeah. You got a better angle. >> Show Miss Buffalo how to do this. >> Oh, yes. >> I just >> But it's also possible that the PB Young project gets pushed off a year and PB Young goes into 28 29. But why does Gint determine so much in this plan? Everything relies on Gint. Gent. Gent. Gent. >> Doesn't rely on. >> Yes, it does. Gent was not up there at first. We was talking about Linda Wood. We put that off for a moment. Soon as you put Gint back up there. Okay. Linderwood got to come

218back. >> And that's the issue. I have an issue with that. I don't think that's the way. Wherever Gint is, she just said Lindlewood has to be. >> Oh, well, yes. >> Well, that's because they were tied together, >> right? >> Repurposing Lynenwood is tied to moving those 30 20 to 40 administrators out of the Rosemont building. >> Well, then we just go another year or two. That's just my opinion. >> That's that's just Yeah. and all contingent on what the school committee comes up with and forget I mean like if the move to Rosemont is actually a feasible option >> if we're looking for space for the administrators from Rosemont is there other places they could go >> yes >> instead of just going to Lynenwood about reference. >> We we can certainly research

219the open spaces that we have for them. Again, I just I want to stress that that means that we would we would not have a purpose for Lynenwood in our portfolio. That that's again that has to be for me. It has to be decided by what what I'm going to decide based on what we're going to get from it. What what cost savings, what and the purposes are are nice, but and I understand that, but I think it's a lot more space than I and I I don't I don't know how big your meetings are. I don't and and how big the building is, but the data will tell me what I'm looking for. >> Have you been to the building yet? Linded. What? Yes. >> Three times. >> Do you know the size of

220it? You've been there. >> All right. So, we we have overall consensus except on the sticky issue of Lynenwood. And it sounds like two people want to put it remove it from the portfolio and five people want to keep it in the portfolio portfolio. So for now it remains as a repurpose. Um I think we need to make this plan pretty and explain our thought process behind the plan um and post it for people to be able to give feedback. No, let me um clear you correct you on that. I don't want to remove it from the um portfolio. One thing I want to push the time and can we use it for something else if we repurpose not PD? Can we come up with something use it for the children >> something use for

221the students or something? Can we come up with a program? I think the program would be the grounds of Lynenwood would be able to be used for environmental programming while the inside of the building would be able to use for professional development >> which benefits the children >> but yeah we're talk about I see it having multiple uses including for the students you know and that's what that is primarily why I want to keep it in >> well then but we just saying professional development okay I'm thinking beyond that let's say something Yeah. Well, Dr. Paul, I think you mentioned it >> about the AP environmental science and and you know, we right now our um our title one students go out to camp young for science and we could open that up to non-title

222one schools because it's close by at at Lynenwood to go out there for environmental science in in science programs and early elementary school. Abs there grounds we can do so much. There's so many garden spaces on there, so much wetlands out there that ties right to our curriculum and we already have curriculum written for it. So the the plans would still be to use it um for for that aspect as well and benefit from having a professional development center at the same time. >> Let's reword it. Let's, you know, word it a little different than that. >> Repurpose for the students. >> I like that. >> Well, uses. The other the other thing I want to point out is the the benefit to the neighborhood. >> So the green space, the garden. Yep. >> I

223think all of that is really important to neighborhood vitality and health. And so that's the other benefit to to keep. Okay. So have something that we can feel confident about that. I do. Did it go? >> Except for there exceptions. Yes. >> But not every We're not all going to get >> I know. I understand. >> We have to come to as much of a consensus as we can. We We You know, you don't like keeping Lynenwood in the portfolio, but I really don't want to close Norview in 2627, but I've compromised um with with you on this. So, we have to think about the spirit of compromising here. I'mma lighten up the room. Why don't we just take all these programs and go throw them over there in Macarthur Mall? It's a whole lot

224of space over there. >> Hello. >> Not enough windows. >> Right. Out of windows. >> So, what is Can we Can we talk about So, next steps. So, so >> next steps are putting this into a format that people can actually understand. um posting that going out, you know, if there's um I I think that we should take a vote on the 15th at the business meeting. Um I think we'll have then we'll be able to get public comment, but with public will have almost two weeks to let us know what their thoughts are. We're not making everybody happy, but we're trying to do what's in the best interest of our students, and that's what we have to remember at the end of the day. So this is what our plan is looking like >>

225and we will present this to the city council on this evening. >> So we don't need anyone coming in changing anything giving suggestions and you know anything else is looking like this. >> What the purpose of this meeting was for us to >> okay cameras audience >> have you seen anything present this to city council on the 7th even though we won't take an official vote until the 15th. >> Get my head out. I just want to say thank you everyone for going through this process. I think you know there's some give and take and I think we finally got some traction >> something we came up with. So thank you everybody. Thank you the board. Thank you. >> Okay. >> I took a picture I can share with everyone. >> Okay. >> And yeah

226I'd like to echo on that. Thank you. It's been a long meeting. Uh I think we we've accomplished something and that's what we've come to a decision sort of but because the the future will always change that's for sure but we have a starting point and everybody can now have feel comfortable everybody being the stakeholders everybody who's participated which there's lots of people who have participated and um we all don't get what we want, but we have a consensus and and we can move forward. And I think it's been a while since we've done that. So now we're doing it and thank you all for participating. >> Not going to make everybody happy. I guarantee you that. Okay. >> All right. Madam Chair, with that being said, I don't think >> that being said, this

227meeting is adjourned.