001Seamus Abshere: Thank you. Seamus Abshere: So I I would like to open the July 7, th 2025 special meeting of the South Burlington School Board. Seamus Abshere: Today we we would like to start with an executive session, but then we will go back into open session. Seamus Abshere: and so I would entertain a motion to find that premature public knowledge would place the board at a disadvantage, and therefore we need executive session under one Vsa. 3, 13, one b. And 2, so that relates to real estate and labor negotiations. Do I have a motion. Jennifer Lawrence: Oh, motion! This is Jen. Seamus Abshere: Hey, Jen, okay, do. I have a second. Dan Boyer: Second. Seamus Abshere: Any discussion, all those in favor say, aye. Jennifer Lawrence: I. Dan Boyer: I. Seamus Abshere: Okay, great then
002I would. I would entertain a motion to enter into executive session. Jennifer Lawrence: All motion. This is Jen again. Seamus Abshere: Do I have a second. Dan Boyer: 10 seconds. Seamus Abshere: Okay. Do I have any discussion? Seamus Abshere: Okay, all those in favor say, aye. Jennifer Lawrence: Bye. Dan Boyer: Right. Jennifer Lawrence: And Seamus, you're gonna send the link for that for the. Seamus Abshere: Other session. Yes? Seamus Abshere: Well, I think I only heard Dan and Jen Emily. Emilee Hoffman: Bye, bye. Seamus Abshere: I? Okay, I alright. Well, then, we will now go into executive session, and we will return at 3 Pm. For the special meeting. So board members and superintendent, I will send you a link right now. Jennifer Lawrence: Okay. Thank you. Bye. Emilee Hoffman: Thank you. Seamus Abshere: Being
003in the South Row. Seamus Abshere: Oh, alright! So I would like to call the Seamus Abshere: July 7, th 2025 special South Burlington School Board meeting back to order. Seamus Abshere: So the 1st item on the agenda after our executive session is announcements and amendments to the agenda. Do we have any announcements or amendments to the agenda. Seamus Abshere: Hope you're muted, Jen. Jennifer Lawrence: Sorry I toggled off. I think the one thing that I recalled seeing yesterday I don't know if it's been updated is that we need to mention the School Board vacancy Jennifer Lawrence: is that happening this today? Or is that happening on. Seamus Abshere: On Wednesday. Jennifer Lawrence: Okay. Very good. Seamus Abshere: On Wednesday. Jennifer Lawrence: Okay. Seamus Abshere: Any other announcements or amendments. Seamus Abshere: All right, we'll move
004on to comments from the public. Seamus Abshere: I don't. Is there anybody in the room or on Zoom, who might. SBSD Helpdesk: Oh, do you want from here? If you wanted to comment, Yeah. SBSD Helpdesk: Hi, hi, David. SBSD Helpdesk: this is Daisy Brayton, and I just wanted to make a comment on. The action that you are going to be taking SBSD Helpdesk: or the discussion item, excuse me. 6. A policy 2.9. That 1st reading. I do want to point out that the Board may want to consider that this motion will be in direct contradiction to the board management. Section 3.2 accountability of the superintendent, and then also the superintendent's contract, and I'm happy to provide that in written statement. Seamus Abshere: Thank you, Daisy. Seamus Abshere: Any other comments in the room? Seamus Abshere:
005Alright. Then we will move to our next item, which is action. Item, Seamus Abshere: for policy. G, 8. Selection of library materials. 3, rd reading. Seamus Abshere: So this is a document that's in the folder for this meeting. We've reddit twice. Seamus Abshere: And is there any further discussion on the selection of library materials? Policy? Seamus Abshere: Okay? Well, then, I would entertain a motion to adopt policy. G. 8 selection of library materials. Seamus Abshere: as provided in the current set of documents for this meeting. Seamus Abshere: I think you, Tim, you're muted. If you were saying something. Seamus Abshere: Oh. Tim Warren: Again. Sorry my apologies. I was muted you'd think I'd know better, having been on meetings half my life, and zoom and teams. I move that we accept the policy as read.
006G. 8. Selection of library materials. Seamus Abshere: Do I have a second. Jennifer Lawrence: I'll second. Seamus Abshere: Okay, any discussion? Seamus Abshere: Alright. And I think that we should probably do a roll call vote just because Seamus Abshere: we're remote and I don't necessarily Seamus Abshere: have a perfect view onto everybody's screen. So Seamus Abshere: let's so, Jen, how do you vote? Jennifer Lawrence: Aye. Seamus Abshere: Emily. Emilee Hoffman: Aye. Seamus Abshere: Dan. Dan Boyer: I. Seamus Abshere: Tim. Tim Warren: I. Seamus Abshere: And I'm also an eye. So the motion passes. Seamus Abshere: Now we'll move on to policy. 4.9 public participation policy, 3, rd reading as, and the current text as proposed, is in the Seamus Abshere: is in the folder for the today's meeting. The one difference from the last time
007was that in the. In the second reading we got advice that it would actually be impermissible to limit who could address the board. And so there was a section in the middle of the policy that said, you know anyone people who can address the board and it listed enumerated list. And so we've removed that and replaced it with simply, anyone may address the board. Jennifer Lawrence: I liked how you linked it in the agenda seamus. I'm just pointing that out. Thank you for doing that. Seamus Abshere: Yep, Seamus Abshere: So yes, go ahead, superintendent. Violet Nichols: Thank you! Chair! I am. SBSD Helpdesk: Alright! Can you all hear me now? Seamus Abshere: Yes, we can hear you. SBSD Helpdesk: so I would advise that this be a modified to be a 1st reading. We've had
008discussion on the topic. However, open meeting law requires 2 readings prior to action being taken. I would also advise that this is not a policy under government governance. I think this belongs under the policies and procedures section SBSD Helpdesk: on the website. And that would be under item C board procedures. There currently aren't any. But this is not something that I think is either a 3rd reading or appropriately labeled as a policy. Seamus Abshere: Yes, I so on the point about where to place this. I had received advice from you, superintendent, that it should go in policies under governance Seamus Abshere: under 4.9 Seamus Abshere: but I agree it might potentially be better in the pop, the guides, and in the other section. SBSD Helpdesk: Yeah, I had advised that I I think that it
009it belongs under policies and procedures under Item C board procedures. SBSD Helpdesk: And then again, I would advise the Board avoid an open meeting, law, violation, and relabel this a 1st reading. I also would express the concerns that I'm in an open board meeting room here, and we've had a lot of feedback from constituents. You know, wanting for participation. SBSD Helpdesk: expectations to be made clear, and I think, having a 3rd reading without warning. The 1st or second SBSD Helpdesk: is not only an open meeting law violation, but it's kind of pulling the wool over the community's eyes when you know, this is a time where we don't typically do a lot of business. I would advise the Board to have this be a 1st official reading to really get community feedback on this again.
010There's there's no one in the room, and and very few folks online. Seamus Abshere: I just need a minute. So you're changing your advice that this should not go under policies under governance. SBSD Helpdesk: My advice that I emailed you, and that we discussed is that this is under policies and procedures under item C, which is board procedures. SBSD Helpdesk: That is my recommendation, and that it have 3 readings during a time where our community is engaged right now. Given that school is on recess. We don't have SBSD Helpdesk: you know, stakeholders to engage or provide feedback on this. Seamus Abshere: So I think what I want to propose that we do here Seamus Abshere: is open up the policy. Seamus Abshere: Change it to what you are saying so that it's under board policies.
011SBSD Helpdesk: Procedures. Seamus Abshere: Yeah, the policies and procedures. Seamus Abshere: So let me just pull it up here. Seamus Abshere: I will share my screen. Seamus Abshere: Awkward. Seamus Abshere: So 4.9. Okay, so Seamus Abshere: we are going to put this under policies and procedures. Seamus Abshere: Which I believe is on Jennifer Lawrence: Yeah, there's currently nothing in that. Seamus Abshere: District. Seamus Abshere: procedure. See? Board procedures. Seamus Abshere: features? Seamus Abshere: Okay. And so we've we've talked about this for almost an hour in public session. When it wasn't during the summer, so I would entertain a motion Seamus Abshere: to accept policies and procedure C. Seamus Abshere: For public participation at board meetings as currently written. Tim Warren: I? Well, I I'm sorry I I do have to kind of echo a violet
012is saying around this. I'm looking at the past agendas, and I do remember that Laura read this, but I think this was back on Tim Warren: June 16, th when she did a reading of it, but this was just labeled under discussion items and wasn't. Wasn't. I don't see anything in our agendas where we labeled as 1st Reading, Second Reading. Seamus Abshere: Yeah, I understand that that was an error in the way that they were warned. The there is recordings of us discussing this for 22 min Seamus Abshere: on May 21, st I believe, and then a further 38 min on Joel on June Seamus Abshere: 21, st or something like that. I can. I can look up the actual dates, but we've we've spent almost an hour discussing this. Tim Warren: What? Seamus Abshere: Right now.
013We're 3 groups an hour. Tim Warren: I would just counter that. I think we spend a lot of time discussing a lot of things. But from a an official record perspective. We don't have it. We don't have a 1st reading warned, or a second reading, warned. SBSD Helpdesk: Which would warrant and legitimate open meeting, law, violation. Seamus Abshere: I would, of course. You know, if somebody believes that open meeting law has been violated, they should, in my opinion, you know I don't. I don't speak for the board here. They should certainly file that open meeting law violation. However, I believe that we have, in good faith discussed this twice. And we are now at our 3rd reading. I'd be happy to read it out again, Seamus Abshere: and Seamus Abshere: but I but I'd like
014to hear from the rest of the board about how they'd like to move forward with this. Jennifer Lawrence: I mean Seamus. I agree that I feel like this has been discussed, and and you know, perhaps the nomenclature on it was off. But this has been discussed several times, is my opinion. And if even if we were to say, Okay, well, this is the 1st warning, and then could we warn it again on the 7, th or I'm sorry on the 9, th and then would we adopt it after that? I mean, if if there's a concern there, you know, if we're trying to Jennifer Lawrence: meet in the middle somewhere. But. Seamus Abshere: So if we discussed it on the 9, th that would be the. Jennifer Lawrence: Second. Seamus Abshere: 4th time that we've
015talked about it. Jennifer Lawrence: Right. Jennifer Lawrence: and then and then, if I'm hearing the superintendent and Tim correctly, if we were to do that, then that would constitute the second reading, and then we would still have to have one more time where it's discussed, and that would be the 5th time. Jennifer Lawrence: And you know again, in the spirit of trying to just get something out there. I mean, I'm you know. Jennifer Lawrence: No, I would be okay with it. But you know I'm I'm not control police to say that this is. I think it has been good faith that this has been out there. Jennifer Lawrence: and that's my opinion. Seamus Abshere: So I'll go back. Does it, Emily or Dan? Do you have any thoughts on this. Emilee Hoffman: I don't have
016a strong opinion one way or the other. I'm happy to read it as many more times as necessary for us to be within the rules that we're supposed to be in, and have people be able to comment on it. Emilee Hoffman: Yeah, I I think I don't see a problem with reading it a couple more times and having more opportunity for the public to comment on it. But if other people are ready to move forward, that's Emilee Hoffman: sounds like we're split in that area. Dan Boyer: Our choice is this is gonna be either the 1st or the 3rd reading, you know, is, I kinda I guess Dan Boyer: I'm thinking, like Jen, why don't we Dan Boyer: make this the second? And then the 3rd reading could be on Wednesday. Tim Warren: Well, well,
017I I don't I. So again, I'm I'm gonna say this because I just we don't have in the official record Tim Warren: that we have warned. We have identified this for a 1st reading. I mean, there's been a lot of discussion, I agree. We've discussed it. It's been read before, but that hasn't been officially warned to the public as a 1st reading. Even today, if we read it again, it's really just. It's. Tim Warren: you know, we have not warned the public of a 1st official reading of this document, this policy and that. That's where I think I have to agree with the superintendent. I think we are opening ourselves up for a violation and a blatant one, and I don't see the need to rush this just because we've discussed it a couple of
018times already. Tim Warren: I would prefer the board. Tim Warren: you know. Follow what has been precedent as far as how we warn these officially, because if if we go. With this approach we could conceivably say that anything we discuss a lot a few times here and there. We could simply say, Okay, well, we can consider that a 1st reading, and move forward with a motion on a vote. And that's where I see us having a slippery slope here. Jennifer Lawrence: So, so just so I understand, Tim. So what this would look like is if we were to put this because the agendas out, it says 3rd reading action. So instead, you'd have policy. Well, now, we're changing it because the name of where it's gonna be is 4.9. But it would be, would today
019be the 1st reading if we were to read it. Tim Warren: I think you would need to warn it for 1st reading for the 9, th Second Reading at the subsequent meeting, and then the following meeting would be the where you would warn it for action. Right? Because we don't. I mean, I'm going back to the agendas, and we never really formally warned this from a reading perspective at all. Seamus Abshere: We discussed it according to open meeting law. We have discussed this twice in open session. I think that Seamus Abshere: deciding that we should not Seamus Abshere: begin to adopt better public participation and formal clear public participation guidelines now, but instead, push this out into August or September would be another example of how this board is not effective and cannot get anything
020done because we are warned about Seamus Abshere: violations such as you know, not including the words 1st reading for you know, and in this case a policy that is intended to increase our engagement with the public. Bring more of them to our meetings. So I would. Seamus Abshere: I would be happy to entertain a motion to change this to the 1st reading, the second reading. I'd be happy to entertain a motion to pass this but I Seamus Abshere: would do anything other than passing this under protest, because, you know, if we can't warn something you know, and I also object to Tim's characterization of how this was done. We have this formally warned as a discussion item, twice Seamus Abshere: over the last 2 months. We've discussed it in recorded meetings, for, as I said,
02122 min in one case and 32, 38 min. In the other case, I don't think that that is fairly referred to as a slippery slope. Seamus Abshere: And I think if this board wants to be effective, we need to be able to get through business instead of continually. You know, finding bureaucratic reasons to kick the can down the road. Seamus Abshere: So I would entertain a motion for any of those options. Jennifer Lawrence: Well. Jennifer Lawrence: my motion would be to adopt it, and I mean again, if there's if this is a violation of open meeting law, then I would say, you know we we will learn from this. But I say that you know, Seamus, I agree. This is, you know, it's it has been talked about, and if we didn't have the right formality surrounding
022it. Jennifer Lawrence: You know, then then we will learn from this, and we will do better going forward that people can come, and now they have. They understand what their public participation is, and and you know and and how they can engage with the board and opportunities there, but I feel like Jennifer Lawrence: you know. I don't see that there's been any changes to this other than anyone who may address the board as well. I mean, I feel like this is a very generous statement that clarifies how we will, how we will be doing this, and I feel like this is not a contentious issue that we need to be splitting hairs over. In my opinion. Seamus Abshere: Do I have a second on that. SBSD Helpdesk: There would need to be a motion. Seamus
023Abshere: So do I. Do I have a motion to adopt? The policies and procedures. See public participation in board meetings. Jennifer Lawrence: I guess I could make that motion. Seamus Abshere: Do I have a second? Seamus Abshere: Right? I believe the motion fails. Do we have a another alternative motion? Dan Boyer: Well, it's it's look quick discussion. I mean, it's on the agenda for today. I know it's listed as action. But can we Dan Boyer: start over. Read it today, since it's on the agenda. Consider this the first.st Seamus Abshere: I mean we can do we? Dan Boyer: I know we. Seamus Abshere: We can do what we want to do within the letter. In the spirit of the law. The spirit of the law is that it is to be read multiple times in
024public. I'm pretty sure the letter of the law does not say that you must put the words dash first, st reading, dash, second reading, etc. So you know we could. Seamus Abshere: you know, I mean. And and if we're going to count this as the 1st reading you know we can do whatever we want, but the law is is not in the. Seamus Abshere: you know, in the realm of of dashes and the and and words. SBSD Helpdesk: I would just advise. The Board is not, you know, above the law, and that SBSD Helpdesk: warning something, a conversation, you know, on public participation SBSD Helpdesk: when there's not a soul in the room on a topic that has had a lot of attention. I I would just advise I do not see the upside of
025that and SBSD Helpdesk: So I think, sufficiently shared my concerns. Seamus Abshere: Yes, thank you, superintendent. Seamus Abshere: Well, I would entertain a motion to Seamus Abshere: Consider this the second reading of the policy, and then Seamus Abshere: I would expect that we would then amend the agenda on Wednesday to take action on this. SBSD Helpdesk: In order. If you're trying to be compliant with open meeting law, we would have to specify what reading it is in a warned public reading rather than through a oral amendment. During the open session. Seamus Abshere: Yes, I understand your perspective on that. Emilee Hoffman: Seamus, can I ask? Will Laura be at the meeting on Wednesday? Seamus Abshere: Yes. Emilee Hoffman: Okay, I guess part of my hesitation is that this was part of Laura's project, and I
026just would. I feel like I would like her to be Emilee Hoffman: there when we might adopt this as a Emilee Hoffman: as a policy, I know, to put a lot of work into it. And Emilee Hoffman: so I I kind of. That's why I would feel like maybe Wednesday would be a better day to practice. Seamus Abshere: So I would entertain a motion to consider this as the second reading, and then amend, and then I would expect on Wednesday to amend the agenda, to add an action item, to Seamus Abshere: to take action on this. Jennifer Lawrence: Hi motion! Seamus Abshere: Well, I have a second on that. Emilee Hoffman: I second. Seamus Abshere: Any discussion? Tim Warren: I again. I'm I'm I'm stymied that we're we're making a motion to just Tim Warren:
027say we're doing the second reading. Tim Warren: I don't alright. Tim Warren: I guess I find it very unusual. Tim Warren: and not at all in line with what Tim Warren: the Board has done in the past, and how we've Tim Warren: reviewed and discussed and presented policies to the public. Tim Warren: So I'm just gonna throw that out there because I I disagree with the motion. It just is a very unusual motion to me. Seamus Abshere: Yeah, I I think that the Seamus Abshere: best interests of the district and the taxpayers are served by becoming a more efficient board that pursues policies Seamus Abshere: and and monitors with greater dispatch, I understand from I I believe. Seamus Abshere: for well, from various sources, that Seamus Abshere: This board has not taken a great deal
028of action Seamus Abshere: over the last few years, and I would like to, at least. Personally, I would like to change that, as as I see, the direction the district is going in, and I believe, public comment Seamus Abshere: that we have received so far, whether it's from staff or taxpayers does say that we are facing serious challenges right now. And so again, I would say that if we are finding what I would consider to be bureaucratic reasons to that they're not substantiated by either the letter or the spirit of the law. I worry that we will fall back into the relative passivity of the Board from the last few years. Seamus Abshere: So that would be my discussion element. SBSD Helpdesk: I would be concerned for the Board to move forward after having a
029discussion and acknowledging an open meeting law violation, and I do not think that that would serve to improve the legitimacy of the community's perception of the Board. Seamus Abshere: I would just like to correct the record. I did not acknowledge this as a public meeting law violation. I said that there may be those who may believe that it is an open meeting law, violation. And if they, if they feel that that is the case, and we do take an action that they believe to be in violation, I would encourage them to do the right thing and file a complaint. Seamus Abshere: However, I have not heard any legal advice. That would tell me that that we are, you know, especially if the motion or consideration right now, which is to consider this as a second
030reading, even though it's 3rd reading. I would. You know it's 1 of those things where, when the evidence becomes overwhelming. Seamus Abshere: you know you you know, you just kind of have to question what you're doing. So. Jennifer Lawrence: Seamus. I agree, and if people have any comment now, they have an opportunity, through a policy and procedure here that they can express themselves, and they know exactly how to do it again. I don't consider this to be such a sensitive topic. We are providing this clarity for how this comment is to happen. I mean, if this was more of a contentious topic Jennifer Lawrence: that does not provide this kind of clarity, I think that would be a different matter. But I think that this is just a semantics. Logistics issue in the way things
031were classified, and I agree in the efficacy of this Board that we need to keep moving forward, and I was part of the committee that put it together. Seamus. Obviously you were part of it. Laura weighed in on this. And I think that's a good solution is to have the 3rd reading be. Jennifer Lawrence: you know, for for Wednesday. And just, you know, because it actually says on the agenda right now that this is the 3rd reading. But you know that's fine. And again, if the comment, if people show up and they take exception to this. Then I would say, we have that opportunity to go back. And Hey, we're going to learn from it. And maybe there's some amendments and modifications that need to be made. Jennifer Lawrence: I don't see any harm in
032that right. It's not like the the ship has set sail forever and ever. Any of these things can be amended at any point. I would believe. Seamus Abshere: And we're a citizen board. Seamus Abshere: We're, you know, we're acting in our elected capacities Seamus Abshere: according to our conscience, our conscience, and our belief as to what the best interests of the district are within the law, so. Jennifer Lawrence: I'm looking. There's a comment that just came in on here, and it is from Diane Bugby, and she says I'm a member. Seamus Abshere: Wait. Wait! Hold on! Sorry, Jen. I don't think you can read that. Oh. Jennifer Lawrence: Sorry. Seamus Abshere: Sorry we don't. Yeah Jennifer Lawrence: Okay. Seamus Abshere: Is there any further discussion on the motion to treat this as the second reading.
033SBSD Helpdesk: We just offer that that wouldn't remedy a potential open meeting law violation, because we would have to. The Board still hasn't warned a 1st SBSD Helpdesk: reading, and I again, I'll reiterate. You know some. You know the majority of the Board has been on the board since early March, but this is a topic that the community discussed for a long time. And so it is a very contentious issue, and there are SBSD Helpdesk: pretty heated opinions on this in a lot of different directions. So again, I just advise the board. If you want to follow open meeting law, this would need to be warned in writing as a 1st reading, I fully understand your points about discussion. I'm just simply advising on the structures by which public school boards in Vermont are obligated
034to operate under. Jennifer Lawrence: So I have a question, so could we then warn this one, or is it now too late? Because it wasn't warned? It was warned as the 3rd reading. But if we were to change it and say, All right, then this is, then, if we make on Wednesday is the second reading. Would that suffice? SBSD Helpdesk: Of course. Seamus Abshere: Do you know what Violet is? Saying? According to Violet's interpretation, the answer is, no, we would have to go into the next meeting. In fact, we could not even do that. We'd have to warn the 1st reading of this Seamus Abshere: sometime in August. Seamus Abshere: So I think that that is such a clear violation of both Seamus Abshere: the spirit of the law and also the interests of the
035district and the taxpayer. That I would be shocked if that is what we did. Emilee Hoffman: So I guess I would say I mean Tim. At this moment on this panel right here. Is the most senior person, and I do appreciate the Emilee Hoffman: wisdom he brings with that in the experience. I also think this whole conversation has taken way longer than it needed to, because Emilee Hoffman: of. Emilee Hoffman: I'm not exactly sure why, but I would be totally fine with having. I would like to hear what Tim thinks we should do moving forward in order for us to stay within open meeting law. Emilee Hoffman: and I would be curious what he has to say, and I would be Emilee Hoffman: willing to adopt that if he felt in good faith for this
036Board, that that is the way we should go in order to remain within meeting law appropriate. And also I do understand that Emilee Hoffman: it seems like that will take a long time, Seamus. I hear what you're saying, but it is summertime, and we won't have a lot of people at our meetings moving forward. So I don't think it is a Emilee Hoffman: huge loss if we have to wait to cut through all this red tape. And also, you know, take the advice of a person who's been on the board and been through these kinds of things Emilee Hoffman: for many times. So I guess I'm just gonna say that. And I'd really love it if we could just wrap up this conversation and move on to something else. Tim Warren: Did you want me
037to speak, Emily? I I appreciate the vote of confidence. We'll see. No, I I don't see much difference in if I don't see much Tim Warren: advantage to trying to pass this within the next week or 2 versus following an appropriate procedure to ensure that it's done correctly and appropriate procedure would be to on an agenda, warrant it as a 1st reading, and then have a second reading, and then do your 3rd action. That means we would potentially adopt this, perhaps by the end of August. But that's there's no rush to adopt this. Tim Warren: There's no difference in adopting it between the 1st of August and the end of August, from where I can see by openly saying, Hey, we'll just risk it, and you may be committing an open violation or open meeting
038law violation just to get this out a few weeks ahead of time. And this is really important Tim Warren: that I see as a big problem, and I think we that the Board will pay a price for that, regardless, I think we should adhere to past practice, which has been to officially warn it for readings Tim Warren: on the agendas, so that the public is aware of it it it, and and has a chance to participate it, especially since we have actually changed the language in this draft versus what was officially read. But I don't want to say officially, but what was read on the la in that last meeting. So again. Tim Warren: from an expediency perspective, I think it, it is not worth the risk. Emilee Hoffman: Tim, can I ask you one
039more question? If we were to do warn it? 1, 2, 3 more readings. What if we made changes to it at some point along the way. Would that start it all over again with reading it? 1, 2, and 3. Tim Warren: No, certainly not I. I don't believe so, and Violet may be able to to pipe in here. I you know the the reason we would read it is so that we can have discussion around it and potentially make changes to it before we we take action on it. SBSD Helpdesk: That's correct. You could change the language and not have to start over. Tim Warren: Right. SBSD Helpdesk: And best practices to have discussion about a topic, especially one where there's a lot of community interest before actioning it. SBSD Helpdesk: You're right, Tim. Seamus
040Abshere: All right. So I think that the motion to have this is the second reading has also failed. Seamus Abshere: so I would entertain a motion to Seamus Abshere: I guess. Just move on from this discussion point. And Seamus Abshere: you know, move this to a future agenda. I I will say that. Seamus Abshere: I think that this is an example of our actions being chilled. Seamus Abshere: and I'll leave it at that. Jennifer Lawrence: And Seamus, you know. I think one other thing is, I think, that you know part of this could just be the learning curve for some of the new Board members, and the way that this should have been warned on an agenda previously, and perhaps working with the former chair to say, like, look here, we have this policy that
041we want to, you know, because we read it Jennifer Lawrence: so you know, perhaps I mean I you know what I mean, like, I think, learning going forward like this is what we need to do to have the efficacy that we need. Seamus Abshere: Yeah, it's also I. I would say that the primary mistake that was made here was I expected our lawyer to be here today and his. Seamus Abshere: He was in a mediation session that, as far as I know, is not run over by 3 h, and so, unfortunately, he was not able to join us today, but I believe that he would have been able to resolve this question. Very quickly. And Seamus Abshere: I believe I had already gotten approval from him to to do this. So I might suggest that what
042we do is move on from this action item. And then if we get word from the lawyer that well, we'll just see what the lawyer says, and then we'll take, you know we'll we'll take that into consideration for what we do next. Jennifer Lawrence: Okay. SBSD Helpdesk: To your point. I I did advise that, prior to warning this, that this be a 1st reading. Seamus Abshere: You are correct. The superintendent has provided the advice that she gave today in open session before. Seamus Abshere: Alright so shall we move on from that action item. Seamus Abshere: Dan, did you have any thoughts. Dan Boyer: I say, we move on! Seamus Abshere: Okay. Seamus Abshere: so now we'll move on to discussion. Item, a policy, 2.9 communication and support to the board 1st reading and this I
043will. Seamus Abshere: I will read this out loud. SBSD Helpdesk: Yeah, miss, I'm gonna object to this agenda item being discussed publicly in any capacity. This is incongruent with the Board's policies. SBSD Helpdesk: 3 point O. 3.1 3.2, and also the Board's policies. With respect to the governance process, 4 point oh 4.1 4.2 and 4.3. Seamus Abshere: Thank you for that, violet. Seamus Abshere: So this this amendment is was prepared by our lawyer Seamus Abshere: and we are going to read it and. SBSD Helpdesk: This afternoon who said that he had not reviewed this language before, and that it's incongruent with our policies and the language in my contract. Seamus Abshere: I'm sorry, Violet, but I'll I'll recognize you if Seamus Abshere: you know, if you'd like to provide further comment. But Seamus Abshere: this
044Policy amendment was written by our lawyer. Seamus Abshere: and it is still subject to further legal review, as I believe you were attempting to point out. But I will read the language of the motion. Seamus Abshere: and then I have a short statement prepared to go along with this motion, and I'll also recognize that in public comment Daisy Brayton expressed her Seamus Abshere: concerns about the Seamus Abshere: Another another section of it. SBSD Helpdesk: Yeah, I would recommend that you strike it as improper, and it's not a properly warned meeting. Seamus Abshere: Thank you again, Violet. Seamus Abshere: So Seamus Abshere: The motion, as stated, is Seamus Abshere: so. This is a 1st reading is that I move that the policy, governance resolution adopted by the Board of School Directors be amended by adding the
045following text to the end of section 2.9 communications and support to the Board to read as follows. Seamus Abshere: further, except with respect to complaints of protected characteristics, discrimination against the superintendent, or grievances Seamus Abshere: under this district's collective bargaining agreement, which shall be processed in accordance with the separately adopted district procedures. The superintendent shall not prevent or interfere with the right and the ability of any district employee to address the Board orally and in writing with respect to any work related matter, and shall not retaliate against or discipline a district employee who has exercised this right Seamus Abshere: now, I would like to read a statement. Seamus Abshere: that explains that a little bit. Seamus Abshere: Because I think that a particularly important point Seamus Abshere: about that is that we are not responding
046to any particular case or individual Seamus Abshere: the intent of today's amendment is to limit the use of discipline when employees communicate with the Board. Seamus Abshere: We are responding to the recent monitoring report on treatment of staff. Seamus Abshere: We believe that the 1st step to healing relationships is to ensure that the act of communicating with us the Board is not a cause in itself for discipline. Seamus Abshere: and I believe. SBSD Helpdesk: Assured for anyone who has spoken to the board. In fact, I've made clear the complaint process exists. SBSD Helpdesk: And people have utilized that there have been no. Seamus Abshere: Superintendent. I'm sorry. I'd like to remind you that I'm the board chair, and I'll I can recognize you immediately further after my comments. But please don't interrupt me. Thank you.
047Seamus Abshere: So this does not. This amendment does not contradict our existing policy governance, because our code of conduct already states a Seamus Abshere: meeting discussion content will consist solely of issues that clearly belong to the Board to decide or monitor according to board policy. B information that is not for neither monitoring performance nor board decisions will be avoided or minimized and always noticed Seamus Abshere: noted as such. So again, information that is neither monitoring performance nor board decisions will be avoided and minimized. See, deliberation will be fair, open, and thorough, but also timely, orderly, and kept to the point. Seamus Abshere: Furthermore, in our code of conduct we commit to only being influenced by a fair presentation of all sides of the question. Seamus Abshere: 2 more points. If we adopt this amendment, it
048may impose an additional burden on the board. If more employees reach out to us, it is our responsibility to ensure the communications are sent to the appropriate channel. Again, in cases of protected class discrimination grievances covered by the collective bargaining agreement. And Seamus Abshere: the recognition we need to make a recognition also that this is not in response to anything other than the monitoring that we have already done. Seamus Abshere: Finally, I will say, if we adopt this amendment, I believe it will support the superintendent and increase engagement with her initiatives, such as the All Voices Initiative, because it is an explicit district-wide commitment to the protection of free speech, and I hope my fellow school directors will consider this amendment so that we can all focus on helping the superintendent with monitoring on treatment
049of staff. Seamus Abshere: So, Superintendent Nichols. I'm sorry to have interrupted you before, and I'd like to turn it over to you again. SBSD Helpdesk: Thank you. SBSD Helpdesk: There was no, the board did not take action on 2.2, so asserting that corrective action is needed when there was no action taken on the June 18.th Monitoring report is SBSD Helpdesk: inconsistent. This meeting is illegitimate and improperly warned, and discussion about a policy that has no basis in any Vermont School Board Association policy is SBSD Helpdesk: against past practice and is SBSD Helpdesk: is reckless. The governance model which is outlined clearly in my contract States very clearly that SBSD Helpdesk: the superintendent so 3 point O global governance management, the Board's sole official connection to the operational organization, its achievements and its conduct will be
050through the superintendent of schools. SBSD Helpdesk: 3.2. Accountability of the superintendent. The superintendent is the Board's only link to operational achievement and conduct, so that all authority, and all accountability of staff. SBSD Helpdesk: as far as the Board is concerned, is considered the authority and accountability of the superintendent. Accordingly, the Board will never give instructions to persons who report directly or indirectly, to the superintendent. This is in my contract, and it's in the Board's governance model, and I'm growing SBSD Helpdesk: more concerned by the moment that the Board seems to view open meeting law and its own governance as red tape. SBSD Helpdesk: I SBSD Helpdesk: think the policy is very clear on board members responsibilities. If we look at the fours, what your role is. SBSD Helpdesk: governance style 4.1 the Board will govern
051lawfully observing the principles of the policy, governance model with an emphasis on outward vision rather than internal preoccupation. See strategic leadership more than administrative detail. SBSD Helpdesk: I have a lot of operational concerns with this proposed language. Again, there is no Vermont School Board Association policy that recommends this. SBSD Helpdesk: I would also offer that there's significant Federal and State laws that, in fact, support fair treatment of staff. We do not have any of these integrated into our policies under governance because they're political and they change. SBSD Helpdesk: This is essentially inputting a political idea into the district's constitution. SBSD Helpdesk: The I'm just flabbergasted. Truly. Seamus Abshere: Are there any comments from other members of the Board. Dan Boyer: Yeah, I'd like to say something. I mean, there's nothing in the statement that Dan
052Boyer: says that we are going to go into the schools and tell people what to do. This is simply people. Dan Boyer: We're trying to make sure that people Dan Boyer: have their guaranteed right of free speech. They should be able to come to the board and speak, write to the Board about their concerns. It doesn't state anything about the board taking action. It's just the board listening to people, and without fear of any kind of retaliation. SBSD Helpdesk: We already have that in place, and it's the complaint process. Dan Boyer: And there should be nothing wrong with this. SBSD Helpdesk: That process I support, and I think is legitimate. I would say to the Board, with this, I wonder? I will ask the question, is the board seeking operational control of the district. And
053how do you view this work? Being taken away from unionized staff, from human resources to legal staff? Who is supporting these requests? And what budget lines is this support coming from. Seamus Abshere: Do we have any comments from Emily Jen, or Tim. Jennifer Lawrence: I mean, I don't think the intent here is that it is to undermine executive authority. I don't think it also is intended that this will be a board interference and operational matters. I mean, I understand the concern that it breaks the single employee rule. But I think the critical thing is here is that you know we need to Jennifer Lawrence: provide that Jennifer Lawrence: you know clarity and ability for folks to engage with the Board if necessary, and not have a fear of reprisal. Jennifer Lawrence: You know so, and
054I don't. I do not feel that the existing policy governance is sufficient, that we have that our policies are sufficient. So I feel like this is necessary. Seamus Abshere: So. Jennifer Lawrence: But you know, explicit employee. Right, I believe, is is Dan just stated for freedom of speech. Tim Warren: So I I would just ask where. Tim Warren: So we we are looking at, fundamentally changing our Tim Warren: our governance policy here, which to me is a significant step. Tim Warren: And I'm trying to understand, 1st of all. Tim Warren: what the problem is here. Do we have examples of retribution and retaliation? Because otherwise, why are we implementing this particular policy change? I would also ask my fellow Board members to point out to me where a staff member is prevented Tim Warren: from
055speaking to the board. I've sat through 2 budget cycles already, and I've heard from numerous staff members who dissented and prepared and came in with their opinions and talked about how hard work was, and at no time was anybody prevented from speaking to the Board. I believe that's also in law that anybody can come before the board and speak to the board. There is no, there is no nothing in our policies now that prevents that. I see this as potentially Tim Warren: a a just sort of again, a curious move. Because I'm just wondering if we look at this, we are going to potentially have to monitor this particular new policy going forward. Tim Warren: So what are we expecting from a policy monitoring perspective and evidence? Right? We're going to, you know, to say,
056Hey, there was no retaliation. Are we looking for examples of grievances or complaints that's already covered in treatment of staff? Right? We already covered that there. Interestingly enough. Tim Warren: I actually looked at some other monitoring reports. Essex, Westford. Last year treatment of student or treatment of staff had this very issue of retaliation covered under treatment of staff under under an existing policy. So I don't see as I don't understand Tim Warren: the drive behind this, and how Staff is not already protected in their ability to come forward and speak to the Board about any particular matter. Jennifer Lawrence: So I would just say. Seamus Abshere: And Emily would. Do you have any thing you'd like to say. Emilee Hoffman: No! Dan can ask her. Jennifer Lawrence: I mean, it was more of just a
057statement, I mean, I think it shows due diligence by the board, you know, and provides a layer of protection for whistleblowers. And I think that you know, Tim, to your to your point. You know, I think there have been multiple reports that suggest a chilling effect on the staff's ability to speak openly. Jennifer Lawrence: And you know we've seen that there is noncompliance with 2.1, and so I I feel like 2.2. I'm sorry, so I feel like this is just ensuring that the conduct aligns with the expectations of the Board. Seamus Abshere: Yeah, and go ahead. Dan Boyer: Yeah, if everybody or what I've heard is Dan Boyer: the employees already have these rights. Dan Boyer: all this does is reinforces it. Dan Boyer: There's nothing wrong with that it's not a power grab. It
058doesn't state anything in there about the board going into schools Dan Boyer: trying to control things, give orders. Anything like that. All it does is reinforce an employee's right which Dan Boyer: Violet you have said. And, Tim, you have said they have come to the board meetings, and they have spoken. They've written notes. If they've already done that, all this does is reinforce it. There's nothing about a power grab. Seamus Abshere: Yeah, I have a couple more comments on this. I think that this, 1st and foremost is not an accusation Seamus Abshere: of any kind. Seamus Abshere: This is simply a suggested action following the finding of noncompliance with treatment 2.2. So that's the 1st thing. So I am certainly not saying that the superintendent has ever retaliated. I'm certainly not saying that. Seamus Abshere:
059And then Seamus Abshere: The second piece of this is that this protects Seamus Abshere: the action of communicating with the board the simple act of communicating with the Board right? Which? Seamus Abshere: you know it doesn't. It's not saying that no matter what you say to the board is totally kosher, like there is as we have discussed on other occasions. There can still be very inappropriate things that might be published to the board Seamus Abshere: and those things would be, they would have a separate cause of action in them. And so we're not trying to restrict that we are simply saying, and I think this is an easy clarification, because I I believe, Violet, when she says that she does not retaliate against people. I just want to make that a policy, so that there
060is never a question of that. And I think that that is again in support of the superintendent's initiatives to move forward. Seamus Abshere: Violet, please go ahead. SBSD Helpdesk: Thank you. I do have a couple questions. There was no discussion of the addition of this on the last agenda during agenda planning, and it's very unusual to. And I was not a part of this discussion at all. And so it's very unusual to see a policy modification offered as a 1st reading one without being discussed in an open meeting on an agenda. SBSD Helpdesk: 2 without discussion before a 1st reading, as we've just discussed, and so I would like to know, where is this agenda item coming from? And when the discussion for this occur, since it did not come in an open meeting, either
061through agenda, planning discussions or reading. So I'd like to know who put this on the agenda. And when was the discussion had regarding this. Seamus Abshere: Would you like me to answer that now, or would you like to ask further questions? SBSD Helpdesk: I have one statement. Seamus Abshere: Okay. SBSD Helpdesk: As well. I've been twice now accused by both Director Lawrence and and Chair absher of impacting the board through chilling effects. SBSD Helpdesk: Chilling I I, if suggesting that the word follow open meeting. Law is chilling. SBSD Helpdesk: I I think it's SBSD Helpdesk: really just intended to shame the superintendent. If you refer to that as chilling. Likewise, I'm adhering to the policy that we have where the Board and the district have given operational authority to the superintendent, and I again would
062object to be accused of having a chilling effect by trying to follow the governance process by which I signed my name to, and said that I would agree to adhere to and support the board. SBSD Helpdesk: So that's my statement. Seamus Abshere: Thank you. So. SBSD Helpdesk: Like how the agenda item came up, and when it was discussed. Seamus Abshere: Right? Yeah. This agenda item, came up in response to a Freedom of Information Act Request. Seamus Abshere: And I, when I saw that Freedom of Information Act request. Seamus Abshere: I believe that as the Board chair in order to ensure the efficient compliance with that foia request I would probably need to have a policy such as this in place. So I did not discuss this with Seamus Abshere: I don't think I really discussed
063this with anybody before I asked our District council to draft it, and then I sent it out Seamus Abshere: after it had already been drafted. So there's been no board discussion, certainly not in quorum of this before this moment. Right now. So Seamus Abshere: You know, I may have Seamus Abshere: told somebody that this was coming. But this is the 1st time the Board has considered this, and that's why I felt it was important. That we that we talk about it together, and I. And I. Seamus Abshere: Does that answer your question? SBSD Helpdesk: It does. I appreciate that. And I would say, that's a violation of 4.3 agenda planning and 4.4 chairs role. Seamus Abshere: Any other comments from the board on this? Seamus Abshere: So Seamus Abshere: since we're together we could edit
064this, if there are any suggestions, or I could collect your feedback to pass on to our lawyer. Tim Warren: I guess I'll say shame. This my final thought on this is that it's redundant. Tim Warren: If we're going to add and change policy simply because we want to reaffirm something that already exists. I find that just unnecessary. And and I'm I Tim Warren: I'm not quite sure why we would go change our base policies. Just to reaffirm a right that people already have. Tim Warren: So that's that's kind of where I stand on this. Thank you. Seamus Abshere: Okay, Tim. So from you, I actually have 3 bullet points. How might we monitor? How would this affect monitoring? Seamus Abshere: I. And I'm paraphrasing you, and I kind of say, like, shouldn't this be in
065treatment of staff, not Seamus Abshere: communication and support to the board? Seamus Abshere: And shouldn't we establish that this is not redundant, so thank you for that. Tim Warren: Well and just for clarification. i i i Tim Warren: it. This, this particular policy. What is being said here, I believe, is, is covered in many other places already by Vermont law, by any number of statutes in place already in existing policies. And so Tim Warren: it is redundant, and I don't think it's necessary to change our existing policies. With this statement. Seamus Abshere: Then you have your end up. Dan Boyer: Yes, I don't see anything wrong with something redundancy or reinforcing something. If it's done to protect the employees. As I stated, we're not trying. This isn't a power grab or trying to, you know,
066grab operational control. It's just another way to make sure that employees are protected. And there's absolutely nothing wrong with that. Seamus Abshere: Emily, do you have any thoughts? Emilee Hoffman: I would just say that. I I echo what? What? Dan said, and I don't. Emilee Hoffman: I don't see an issue with reinforcing what's already in place. If that were to create Emilee Hoffman: an environment where people feel that they are Emilee Hoffman: sure that they are able to share Emilee Hoffman: what they would like to share with the board and with the community, because I don't think anyone can ever be too sure that they're allowed to do that. Seamus Abshere: Jen. Jennifer Lawrence: Yeah, I would just re-emphasize that as well. But you know this amendment. It's not about. From what I can see,
067it's not about micromanaging. It's just ensuring that every employee feels safe and speaking the truth to power any power, including the board. Jennifer Lawrence: So I think that you know it seems like it should go without saying. And there's lots of other laws that are out there. But I think this specifically calls that out, which I think is good. Seamus Abshere: Alright, I think that we can probably move beyond beyond that. Seamus Abshere: Any other comments on that. Seamus Abshere: Okay, alright. So. Jennifer Lawrence: Do we have it on the final agenda for today that we would do consent agenda today. Yes, yes, okay. Seamus Abshere: Alright! So. Seamus Abshere: Is there any discussion that we need to have of that violet or. SBSD Helpdesk: Yep. So you could take a so typically, what happens
068is that you would ask for a motion for the approval of the minutes and the Ap. Orders. All other items are approved through consent. There'd be time for discussion during the the motion piece during the discussion section after the the second is called. Seamus Abshere: Okay, so do I have a a motion to approve the consent agenda. Seamus Abshere: The Ap. Orders you said. SBSD Helpdesk: Specifically the minutes. SBSD Helpdesk: typically, those are called out by date. So June 3, rd June 12, th and and list those, and then SBSD Helpdesk: you leave. You can have discussion before a motion is put on the table for those so you know. Are there any amend typical language would be? Are there any amendments or modifications to the June 3rd minutes, and then you would wait, pause,
069hearing none? Are there any amendments to the June 12, th and so on, and go through those one by one. SBSD Helpdesk: and then same thing with the Ap. Orders. But then, section 3 is typically done in one, you know? Do I have a motion to approve items, see and action items in consent? Agenda. Seamus Abshere: Okay, thank you. So I would entertain a motion to approve the minutes. Seamus Abshere: Diverse. Jennifer Lawrence: Well for June 3.rd Seamus Abshere: Okay, read them out. Do I have a motion to approve the minutes for June 3, rd June 12, th June 16, th June 18, th June 23, rd Seamus Abshere: 2025. Dan Boyer: I make a motion to approve all those minutes. Seamus Abshere: Do I have a second. Jennifer Lawrence: I, I second. Seamus Abshere:
070Alright. So for discussion. Are there any amendment? Are there any Seamus Abshere: there any comments on the June 3rd minutes. Seamus Abshere: any comments on the June 12th minutes. Seamus Abshere: Any comments on the June 16th minutes. SBSD Helpdesk: Any comments on the June 23rd minutes. Yes. Tim Warren: Sorry I have one. I have one question on the 16.th So just in reviewing that one. This was regarding the approval of the superintendent's evaluation self evaluation. It was noted that Hoffman, Lawrence, and Boyer abstained from the vote. In reviewing the recording, I think what happened? Seamus was you asked Tim Warren: for approval. 4 of us said, aye, and then you just said the motion passes, and I don't think Jen, Emily and Dan actually vocally abstained. So they just weren't given chance to respond. I
071just don't know if that needs to be reflected in the record, or if that's considered an abstention. Seamus Abshere: Okay, thank you. Seamus Abshere: So that's on the 16.th Seamus Abshere: Yeah, that was. And I can send. I can send you the note where I saw it. I just Seamus Abshere: that'd be great. Tim Warren: Want to make sure it was. It's recorded correctly. Seamus Abshere: Okay. And Violet, you were saying for the 23.rd SBSD Helpdesk: Yes, personnel records are highly protected. The Board invited me to not attend the meeting on June 23.rd As such I did not. My personnel. Matters were then discussed in an open session, where there is a provision in open meeting law for personnel records to only occur in executive sessions. SBSD Helpdesk: Because of these reasons I would like
072all records of my personnel records to be stricken from the June 23rd minutes. Seamus Abshere: Okay, would you send me an email with that? Seamus Abshere: With those specific redactions. SBSD Helpdesk: Yes, thank you. Seamus Abshere: Okay? So I think. Let's I think that motion should probably fail. And let's state a new motion here. I would. I would entertain a motion to approve the minutes from June 3, rd Seamus Abshere: June 12, th and June 18.th Seamus Abshere: Do I have a A motion. Jennifer Lawrence: Hi motion! Seamus Abshere: Okay, do I have a second. Dan Boyer: Second. Seamus Abshere: Thank you. Okay, so do we have any discussion of the June 3, rd the June 12, th the June 18.th Seamus Abshere: Okay, all those in favor of approving the minutes from June 3,
073rd June 12, th and June 18.th please say aye. Jennifer Lawrence: Hi. Dan Boyer: I. Emilee Hoffman: Bye. Seamus Abshere: I, Tim. Seamus Abshere: maybe Tim is muted. Okay, so that motion passes. Okay. So next is approval of Ap orders. Do I have a motion to approve the Ap. Orders. Tim Warren: I'll move to approve. Seamus Abshere: Do I have a second. Jennifer Lawrence: A second. Seamus Abshere: Any discussion. Seamus Abshere: Okay? All those in favor say, aye. Tim Warren: Bye. Jennifer Lawrence: Hi. Emilee Hoffman: Bye. Dan Boyer: I. Seamus Abshere: Right motion passes, and finally, Seamus Abshere: Do I have a motion to approve the hires listed there. Jennifer Lawrence: I'll motion. Seamus Abshere: Okay, do I have a second. Emilee Hoffman: Second. Seamus Abshere: And then any discussion. Jennifer Lawrence: Welcome aboard! Seamus
074Abshere: Alright all those in favor say, aye. Tim Warren: Bye. Emilee Hoffman: Hi. Dan Boyer: I. Seamus Abshere: You, and then, do I have a motion to approve the action? Item? In the consent agenda. Jennifer Lawrence: The payable check to Bell Kate. Jennifer Lawrence: My motion. Seamus Abshere: Okay, do. I have a second. Emilee Hoffman: A second. Seamus Abshere: Alright. Any discussion? Seamus Abshere: All right. All those in favor say, aye. Jennifer Lawrence: Alright! Emilee Hoffman: I. Dan Boyer: I. Seamus Abshere: I? Okay? And that motion passes. Seamus Abshere: Okay? That was the last item in our agenda. Do. I have a motion to adjourn the July 7, th 2025. Special meeting of the South Burlington School Board. Jennifer Lawrence: Emotion. Seamus Abshere: That a second. Dan Boyer: Second. Seamus Abshere: All right, all those
075in favor. Tim Warren: Bye. Dan Boyer: Bye. Seamus Abshere: Sorry I should have asked any discussion. Dan Boyer: What are those lights on your face. Seamus Abshere: Yeah, the kids are getting impatient. Okay? Seamus Abshere: Then, the motion passes and the meeting is adjourned. Thank you. Everybody. Dan Boyer: Thank you. Everybody. Thank you. Jennifer Lawrence: Bye.