001I have five o'clock. Director Gold, are we with uh we have Cat TV and Richard with us? It appears. Perfect. Thank you. So, uh welcome folks to a special meeting of the Southwest Vermont Union Elementary School District. It is September 25th. It is now five o'clock. My name is Chris Murphy and I have the privilege of serving as chair of this board. Um, I'm hoping to add an agenda item, please. Um, there was an incident in one of our schools last night that the superintendent would like to update us on. So, I would entertain a motion to add an agenda item immediately following the pledge of allegiance for superintendent report, please. >> I'll make the motion. >> Thanks, A. >> Thank you, Jefferson. Second. Any discussion on amending the agenda described? >> Hearing none, all
002those in favor of the amendment to the agenda, please signify by saying I. >> I. Any opposed? >> The abstensions very good. passes. Uh so the first agenda item of the pledge of allegiance. I would introduce invite anyone who dares to stand up and join us. Pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you everyone. And Superintendent P, we turn it right over to you. Um so uh an update for the elementary school district. Uh there was a reported break-in at the Molly Stark Elementary School last night. Uh I want to confirm that an unlawful entry and unlawful mischief as a building was entered and there was damage done. The individuals
003have been identified using uh video and we are working with the Bennington Police Department. Um they are aware of the situation and are assisting. Uh it's an ongoing investigation. the school safety team is following up with uh those folks who uh are connected to the individuals. >> Great. I think they can share. >> Um so with the understanding that this is an open law enforcement investigation and there may be things the superintendent either knows and can't share or simply doesn't know. Does anyone have any questions for the superintendent? >> Yeah, I do. Mr. P, is are there alarm systems on the school buildings? >> There are. So, why was the alarm not activated once the building was breached? >> I don't know about that. >> Okay. But we'll find out about that. >> Yep. >>
004Working with uh Vic Maline, who is the district's safety officer and the school team to understand that. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Any other questions? >> Very great. So, moving on. Uh public comments. Uh Director G, I don't see any There are no members of the public in person. I don't see anyone online. Okay. Very good. So, moving on. So, um we have a discussion on the conflict of interest policy. A copy of the policy was distributed to everyone here. Um for anyone who's listening to this either live or subsequently on CATV, the policy specific specifically we're referring to is SPSU policy 7205 u which if you navigate to the sbsu.org website, there's a a tab for policies. You can click on that and find it pretty easily after that. Also, hard copies can be
005picked up at the SVSU office. And I'm not sure whatever what other accessibilities accessibility accommodations are made, but certainly accommodations can be made for folks to access that policy if they don't have it. Um, I won't read it to I won't read the entirety of the policy out loud, but I will note a few things specifically, please. within the body of the policy. Um, conflicts of interests are are treated in the exact same way as the appearance of conflicts of interests. Um, both are treated in the exact same way. Both are treated in in the same manner. And so, in other words, this policy treats appearances of conflicts of interest just as seriously as it treats conflicts of interests or what we might call confirmed conflicts of interest. Um, for the purposes of this conversation,
006I am intending to only refer to appearances of conflicts of industry, conflicts of interest. If I accidentally simply say conflict of interest, it's meant to be understood as the appearance of a conflict of interest. Um, as per section D2 of the policy 7205, there is a written complaint that's been signed. It's been distributed to the board members. I will read this and then I will extrapolate on this. to the SVU ESD board of directors. The following complaint is furnished in accordance with SVSU policy 7205 entitled board member conflict of interests. Sandra Foster is an elected member of the SVU ESD board of directors. While she was serving in that capacity in late August 2025, she applied for employment with the SVSU as the interim assistant superintendent. This action created the appearance of a conflict of
007interest. The ramifications of this appearance of a conflict of interest will persist whether or not Sandy Foster is hired as the interim assistant superintendent. The specifics of these ramifications will be articulated in full at the special meeting of the SBU ESD board of directors on 9:25 2025. This written complaint is inclusive of all comments by the made at that meeting relative to the appearance of a conflict of interest. Sincerely me, Christopher B. Murphy dated today. So here is what we're up against. question first. Sure. Who's the person that brought the complaint? >> I'm bringing the complaint. >> How would you know about the How did you know about >> she applied for a job? >> Because when you're applying for something, it shouldn't be released. >> Additionally, as the leader of the board, >> that's
008not your position. Your position is to decide in this capacity. You're you're not only acting as prosecutor, jury, and judge. That's a conflict of interest. >> So I will say so the policy spells out exactly how we're to deal with conflicts of interest or appearances of conflict. It begins with the person who creates the appearance of a conflict of interest coming forth and declaring as much in the minutes. When that doesn't happen, either because of oversight or because of um it being intentional or because there's a disagreement on whether or not there's a conflict of interest, then any board member can bring that complaint. It does not specify that the chair needs to recuse themselves of that responsibility. It's a matter of bringing the bringing the complaint to the board for us to discuss. And
009I would say like there is no there's no function within this policy for us as a board to decide anything necessarily merely to note whether or not there's a conflict or the appearance of a conflict. >> That answers one of the questions. >> Okay. Specifically to how I found out Sandy had applied for this position this time. I I don't recall. Um, there have been so many conversations and emails that have ex occurred around this with other board chairs, with Sandy, with attorneys. >> So, this has been discussed out outside of our board. >> This board has not discussed this at all, but your board chair has sought some legal guidance as to what we need to do. I have spoken to members of this board individually about what appears to be the case here
010and have had conversations with other board chairs. um those board chairs being boards on which Sandy sits. So, and I would say so to answer to use the language specifically, Glenn, there's no prosecution, there's no judge, there's no jury because there's no decision that needs to be reached merely. >> So, then why are we here? >> Because we need to according to this policy declare in the minutes of the meeting that there's the appearance of a conflict of interest and that's what I'm bringing forth today. >> Did you seek to communicate with me? So this time, no. So what what I'd like to do is what I'd like to do is finish the the the commentary as I've prepared and then absolutely we should discuss this to the board. I do want to note that
0115:30 there's an SPSU meeting. So if need be, we can table this and continue it later on. But I will say this this moving forward. So here is here is the appearance of a conflict of interest should Sandy be hired for that position. Um, the only conflict that I'm aware of, the appearance of a conflict that would persist if Sandy were fired for the position of interim assistant superintendent is if she also stayed a member of this board. >> That's illegal. >> I'm not speaking I'm not speaking of the MAU board. I'm speaking of the SU board. Um, that's their that's their matter to decide. >> That's illegal. That >> so maybe I also think this conversation will go best if nobody interrupts anyone else because everyone will have their say. Um, so however, if
012Sandy is not hired in that position, the appearance or the appearance of a conflict of interest has begun. The problems persist. And here's what I mean by that. Among the functions and responsibilities of this board that we've been elected to serve, elected to do by our constituents is that we are the last stop for the employees who bring grievances to their chain of command. Should an occasion arise when a member of the screening committee or hiring committee that doesn't select Sandy as the interim superintendent arrange such agreements to this board, should Sandy not vote in favor of that person, it could be construed as retaliation and thereby potentially opens this board to litigation. So that's problematic. I would say similarly if Sandy as a member of this board goes on to criticize a superintendent or
013the assistant superintendent the assistant the interim assistant superintendent regardless of what other whatever credibility such critiques may have those things could also be construed as a conflict of interest and there I'm sorry not as a conflict of interest those could also be construed as being retaliatory in nature and again potentially opens up this board to litigation by those people right the integrity of this board to do certain certain functions that we've been charged to do are are compromised by this appearance of a of a conflict of interest that has been created by Sandy applying for this job. I would say when we stop to consider the fact that Sandy is also one of our chosen representatives to the SU board, further complications exist in that one of the chief responsibilities of the SU board is
014to is to assess the superintendent. And again, if Sandy were not hired as the interim superintendent, any critique she may offer in that capacity also can be construed as retaliation and also again opens up the board opens up the SU board and potentially this board as well to possible litigation. Also, the SU board is the final stop for other employees to make grievances against their their management, which includes the interim assistant superintendent, the assistant superintendent, and the director of HR. And if if any of those people were to bring a complaint to the SU board and Sandy were to vote against them, again, that could be considered as retaliation and opens up the SU board and this board to litigation. So all of that is problematic. >> What's what's the bottom line in this issue?
015You trying to get her thrown off this board? >> Not at all. That's not at all. >> It sounds like it. >> Well, so let me be clear. The policy, which again, 7205 makes it clear the board, no board can get rid of a member, right? That's up to the vote of the public 100%. And there's nothing in this written document or what I'm about to say that suggests that we get rid of Sandy as a member of the ESD board. So, not at all. What I'm saying is the actions that she has chosen to take have created complications for them. And what we our our responsibility as a board above and beyond the feelings or the image of any one of its members is to make sure that our integrity is is unimpeachable and
016that we can move forward and discharge the duties that we have been elected to do. And when a board member makes that job difficult, we need to acknowledge that and put it on the record as per our policy. And that's what this is about. >> Just because she applied for a assistant in whatever position it was. So Sandy, as a member of three boards, all of whom have an oversight capacity over the superintendent, said, "Hey, superintendent, hire me for this job." And so if she doesn't get hired for that job, there's there's the problem because any action she may take against the superintendent can be viewed as retaliatory. Now, I so so that is is is the bulk of the problem right there. Another issue within this is that this policy specifically talks about when
017a member of a board of directors has the appearance of a conflict of interest, they need to come forth and say that declare that in a meeting to be included in the minutes >> and you're the only one saying it, >> right? Yes. And it's problematic because even though Sandy applied for this, >> I don't agree. >> Sandy applied for this job in late August for the the interim assistant position. We had a meeting like two weeks later in the beginning of September. That would have been Sandy's opportunity to declare that apparent conflict of interest, the appearance of a conflict of interest for the minutes in accordance with the policy. I don't know why she didn't. It's not my It's not my business and I don't think Sandy had any ill intent in any of
018this. I should make that clear right away. But the absence of ill intent does not remove the problems that are created through her actions. Now, I know for a fact that Sandy was aware of this policy when she chose in early September to not declare that conflict of interest. I know that because in the spring of this year, Sandy applied for the assistant superintendent position. and she and I had a conversation both fa voice to voice and via email wherein all of these problems that she would create were outlined to her as well as steps that I felt incumbent upon me to take as board chair to lessen and mitigate the damage that I saw she was creating. Ultimately Sandy chose to withdraw that application. So there was no issue at all. But into the
019springtime, these problems were outlined to Sandy. And yet now in the fall, these same problems have come to bear because she is applying for what is essentially the same job. So again, I don't think Sandy had any ill intent, but she also knew full well what was expected of her and what the problems would be if she were to persist and apply for this position. So we don't need to make a decision as a board about anything, right? That's not what the policy calls for. That's not what I'm asking for. What I'm doing is putting it in the minutes, which is exactly what our policy says needs to happen. But I would say this, we have elected Sandy as one of our three representatives to the supervisory union. That is an elected position. And I
020think we all as a board, none of us should make a decision tonight on this, but we'll be meeting in early October. And I think each of us as a board member should stop to consider whether or not Sandy can fulfill the responsibilities that she's she owes to this board as an SU given the appearance of the conflict of interest that she's created. And I what I think we should do is come back in October and have a conversation as to whether or not we ought to vote someone else to fill that slot that she currently holds as a representative to the SU from this board. So I put that out there. That concludes I think what I wanted to say and I would open it up for the board for us to have a
021conversation. >> I absolutely think that it's important that I get a voice at this table because it is the ethical duty and responsibility of me when there is an appearance of conflict of interest to share that. And if you're telling me right now that you are not acknowledging that I've sent you an email after speaking with our legal team, our legal, then I I don't know what happened to your email. I can tell you I did send you an email specifically outlining that I was had spoken to our at our school attorney, not mine, our school attorney. and she had not only advised me but she had also reviewed what was written before I sent two to three board chairs. And in that um I did re uh recuse myself and step away from the
022SU board um as I did well I was away anyway May so it's irrelevant but um I did that the only reason that I would ever want to step in is because I was taught if you're going to voice an opinion about something that is happening and you have a way to change it or to support it, then you should inherit this trial. And I have been vocal in the respect that we have not had an assistant superintendent who has had any elementary background. Not the last time, and certainly didn't happen in this round. We didn't get we didn't get to the point of nominating or appointing um an assistant superintendent. So becoming an interim for me only meant that I was going to help my community and the student body and the teachers of
023this district of this of our community to step out of retirement. You might think is an easy thing but it took a lot of thinking and deciding whether or not it was something I wanted to do and if it was something I felt I could be a benefit to our new superintendent. understanding that there were so many pieces that had to be learned and that I already had that knowledge. It almost felt selfish not to to step in regardless of the outcome. The point is I'm here to serve the community and that is what I'm here to do. I absolutely followed the the conflict of interest policy by sharing that I would step back and sharing with you in order to maintain this transparency. So I am disappointed that we have to have a special
024meeting to discuss it and I don't quite understand what I can do to help you to see that my participation is only to help RSO. That's it. >> So to respond to the questions you asked specifically made yes I received that email but nowhere does the policy say that sending an email to the board chair covers you. What it says specifically is that you need to make the declaration in open session so that it's recorded in the mix. That's what it says. And yes, I I know that you spoke with Dina. A lot of us have spoken to Dena about this. And Dena also clarified for you that this had to happen in open session. It did. And I would say just lastly, Sandy, your motives for applying I think are probably great. I have
025no question about your motives, but your motives don't change the results and the problems that are created by the choice that you made. It doesn't like the two are not connected. You have but from what you just shared you have the best of intentions and I believe that but it doesn't change that now there's this mess that exists and it will and I and I don't know where the hiring process is but if you don't get hired for that job those those results persist and they will persist for as long as you're on board. >> Um that's an assumption that you're making. You're making a lot of assumptions. >> I'm saying no I'm I'm I'm pointing out these are things that may happen. That's exactly how I phrase that. These are all possibilities and they
026are real possibilities. >> I don't think so. I don't think that's my >> I believe that you don't think so. I believe that that's part of what the appearance of the conflict is. >> Last word says you have to provide potential. >> Don't see um C2 talks about it. When a board member becomes aware that he or she is in a position that creates a conflict of interest or the appearance of a conflict of interest as this defined state law or this policy, he or she will declare the nature and extent of the conflict or appearance of conflict for inclusion in the board minutes and will abstain from pardon me voting or participating in the discussion of the issue giving rise to the conflict. >> So it doesn't say you know it leads to petitioner
027voting in the discussion. >> I'm sorry say that again please Jeff. applying for a position. It's not I just don't see it's covered here. If I was if you guys were giving me the BNA in hospice and I had to sit here and vote on that, you know, that one for me, I'd have to say yes, I'm a member of the BNA hospice. I'm getting imported by them. I'd be a stain because it says, you know, you know, you're not participating in the discussion of the given issue can rise conflict. So, you know, like I'd have to step back, you know, I understand that. But it doesn't say if you're applying for position, you know, and that's the part I'm having a hard time with is like nothing and like, you know, it says look
028at the state law. I just don't know the state law for this policy. It doesn't apply for a position, >> right? No, it's going to stop anybody from a board. what it says if the if a conflict is created or the appearance of a conflict is created and that could be the result of any number of decisions but certainly one of which is asking the person you supervised to hire you for and that's what this is and again I Sandy I think took the right step of in an email saying she would recuse herself of that process of course that is the right step to take >> but it doesn't change all of that other collateral possible fallout that I outlined at the beginning that that's and I I guess back speculation fall. >> Well,
029sure. But like that's all we can do about what might happen in the future is speculate. But I think it's an informed speculation just knowing about how these things can can play out. >> Here's a little something to look back at from what happened from the results of the past in that her application should have been held in the highest level of confidence where you were, you know, not saying you Chris Murphy, but that any other board chair should be made aware of the hirings of another board. That's like >> Tell me why. Tell me why. >> Because that's a violation of her privacy. >> I I and I get and I don't know whether it is or not, Glenn, but I would think that as that any document that is submitted to a public
030body like a school district is open is not protected by any kind of private >> question that they're not released until a certain point. >> I I don't know. I don't know one way or the other. >> I can say that I have because I've served on a number of committees where we've signed off on confidentiality agreements. >> Okay. I mean are you if you can find somewhere I mean and I guess this you know whether we want to apply that whether we want to say that me becoming aware of the hiring of applications to another board like removes the conflict of interest. I I don't I I don't believe that that is a conflict of interest. I think that whether it was Sandy, Cindy, any of us should have had the anonymity of the
031application seen through its conclusion >> because so in the very end this could all be for none. >> Mhm. So so let me say so let me reflect >> or could be for for so I I can't answer that. >> Let me reflect on a couple maybe part of Well, let me just to answer that. Maybe what we part of what we need to do is to get clarity from our own legal council about what the expectation of privacy is for people applying for public positions, right? Maybe this board, the SU board, any of the boards can do better moving forward about how we handle such information if it were to come to us about who is applying for what. But I would say that is a separate issue than the issue that we're here
032to discuss tonight about this very specific conflict of interest. If anyone has a has a view of any one of us having a conflict or the appearance of a conflict, we need to follow the policy. Every single one of us needs to follow the policy. I need to point out we had a situation, I mean a board member applied position within the district. A supervisor visited this position and they're serving the school board. They're off the job while they're serving the school board, but they were not asked to step down until after they position >> from the board. Okay. I'm not asking. So I'm just >> Yeah. So I mean it seems like there's double standards between different you know it's happened in the past where this person actually said you know they didn't disclose
033to the board we found out after they found out after we they bought the position and they're sitting on the board applied for a position in the district then after the position that's when they were told they needed to resign. So I mean it seems like you know same situation different approaches. So >> the super you know super the prior superintendent knew that person because he interviewed him. >> I mean you know it seems like there really is a double standard in some of these things. So I mean I think it seemed caution because he did not disclose he applied for the job and if if we're saying that we can look at applications which is we're implying that anybody in the public can look at applications for jobs. I mean that is I believe
034that you know I I'm not a employee expert but I don't think anybody can walk this door and say I want to see who applied for this superintendent position. >> I would guess that's right Jeeoff that's not what I was implying. >> That's what was said. >> Yeah you're saying anybody public look at that >> could be access. I mean I think it really is a you know sacred when you apply for a job it should go to the whoever's taking those things like there's an issue you know we should not be it should be done effectively you know probably an open session because somebody's applying for jobs and you know if Nick wants to release someone who applies for a job's name I believe there are some issues around that I mean I just
035don't know >> sure so I I guess what I would say that if anybody has so one I think we talk to as a board get legal guidance about >> how we deal with information from another from how one board deals with information coming from another board. I think that is that's a valid thing for us as a board to figure out so that we can move forward because if that is problematic how the information came to me we should be able to firmly identify that and avoid it in the future >> and there should be you know there should be a you know because it doesn't matter where you're applying for the job I mean name should not be released to anybody that has not gone through the full process >> sure a job
036>> can we also agree though that that the way that a problem comes to light does not change the fact that a thing may be a problem can we also agree to that because I I I I grant anyone that that maybe the way the information came to me was improper. Sure, I I can grant I don't know what the proper avenue would have been or even if there is a proper avenue, but that is a different issue we as a board need to take up and it doesn't remove the fact that I have I have viewed this as the appearance of a conflict of interest and according to policy and making this making if I could just say I want to turn to Stephanie is because we've been talking >> I just want to
037ask some clarifying stuff because what I guess what I'm wondering is what's what are you looking to put in the notes because I'm I'm hearing like Sandy saying she didn't do anything because she didn't think that it was even an appearance of a conflict of interest and you were taking it as it is an appearance of a conflict of interest and I think you know she sought legal counsel you sought some legal counsel with the same person and maybe feels like there's some conflicting information so what would go in the notes because right now I don't feel like I confidently have enough information either way to hear that like um this this is an appearance of a conflict of interest. So, I'm wondering what you're documenting or what you're expecting, you know, to be documented
038in the notes because if this is um >> everything's being documented. >> I know, but I guess I'm that's not what I'm asking. I'm wondering is like what is the message that we're looking to prevent? Like is this a message of like the board as a whole is saying this is a conflict, you know, or an appearance of a conflict of interest or is this the board chair has presented this and we're >> going to hear more information because I'm just wondering um you know, what you're looking to get out of that and what you're looking to kind of have reflected. >> It's the lead. It's it's again this board does not need to render a decision whether or not what I presented was in fact a conflict or the appearance of conflict. >> Right.
039I know we're not voting on anything. I just wasn't sure what you were hoping to come across as like a unified message. >> Right. And I don't even know that we need a unified message. What we need in order to be consistent and compliant with the policy is for this conversation to take place in open session and be placed in the minutes. That's what the policy refers to. Okay. >> And it could have come from Sandy at our September meeting. I believe she was aware of the appearance of the conflict of interest at that time because of the conversation we had in April of this year. She didn't, which is why we're having this meeting now. >> When did I apply? >> Uh late a late late August, I believe, prior to our September meeting
040from what I understand. >> I I don't know that that's true. >> So, you're again sharing information that may not be true. >> It so I again depending on now that questions have been raised about the legality of how we even know we know. I don't know that I should even ask the question of how I know that apart from saying that was information that was presented to me. If there can be information that we want to share tonight or at a subsequent meeting that you applied after the 9th of September, I think that was >> I just want to point out one thing. >> Sure. Let me just finish the thought please if I could. John, if if there is if there is documentation that your application came after September 9th, which is when
041I think our last board meeting was, I'm pulling it up now. Then let's put that on in the minutes as well. >> Um the 9th. Yeah, the 9th of September. So maybe if you applied September 10th or after, then this isn't a problem. But if you applied prior to September 9th, I think you were in violation of the policy. >> So >> and again, that's not a judgment on your motives at all. It's not a judgment of you as a person at all. It's a matter of of me trying to document this to protect the integrity of the board moving forward so that this board can demonstrate that the board is not complicit in what might look like a cover up. I don't want that. I don't think any of us would want that whether
042it exists or not. >> So are you in violation? >> The bottom line, my bottom line is the inclusion in the minutes that I find there to be the appearance of a conflict of interest and what the policy calls for and that all the policy calls for. Karina, please. >> Are you in violation of these policies by receiving this information that you shouldn't have received? >> I don't know. Some that's I think that's a that's a valid question that's been brought up about whether or not that information should have been shared with me. I don't know whether it should have or not, but I have the information and so my view is I need to be I like every other member of the board needs to be compliant with our policies and share it. >>
043So I just want to point out one thing. So you file the complaint and it says I'm following the policy right now. It says you know we can address the person who the complaints against and if they don't concur there's a conflict exists the following board procedures must be followed. The board members discuss conflict of interest concerns that the member may have conflict of interest regarding a specific agenda item. >> What agenda item this board have to deal with. It's very clear I'm lying to that policy specific agenda item. >> Right. So the >> we don't have a specific agenda. So this should not >> Well, I'm trying to answer your question. So the specific agenda and those things that I talked about about the responsibilities, >> but they're not written agenda. or but there
044is no written agenda right now. What I'm saying is >> not that's an elementary board. This is SVSU board's issue. So if we're following regarding specific so can you please specify >> tell me what you mean by that. I didn't follow that. It's not it's not the ESD issue is you write that there's a complaint there's not a complaint >> part of this was called and it makes it very clear the members may have a prompt regarding a specific agenda item. >> Yes, >> that's what we need to discuss. So what's the specific agenda item? >> I have outlined those potential specific incidents, those which do come forward those agenda items. >> Agenda items would be something we vote on. >> Well, no, we don't vote on an agenda. >> Well, but there is no
045agenda items. I mean, I think I think what we had to do is I think we recognize there's potential conflict of interest, but when you follow the policy, it's regarding a specific agenda item. So I mean I'm asking specific because your your conflict of interest is based on a conflict of interest whether we behind for putting a new roof on the bill. >> Sure. You know if you know we want to have the ATM machine here and what Len Thurbert machine that would be the concept but you know it should be a specific agenda item. So I mean we're we're looking at a poll. I mean I think if this was an SPSU question yes there are specific agenda item. the hiring of assistant superintendent. >> Yeah. >> So for us as the elementary board,
046I don't see what that specific agenda item is. >> So So let me let me answer that again. Let me attempt to answer it. So the specific agenda items that I see as potentially creating the appearance of a conflict of interest would be an agenda item about a an employee bring a grievance >> or an agenda item wherein this board potentially critiques the superintendent or assistant superintendent. But by then >> those are not the the sub of tonight's agenda but those would be a specific agenda items. >> So you're already assuming like these things will sorry it's 5:30. >> Yes. Sorry. >> Yeah. So we had another board meeting but I just want to point out like that that for me is the line. >> Okay. >> And are you stuck in that you disagree
047with how I just answered the question? >> That is not part of this board. We don't hire this assistant superintendent. >> Okay. Do you disagree that this board might have to render a decision about a griev grievance made by an employee >> at some point? Certainly. But certainly but but this is for assistant superintendent. So that's the conflict of interest is that position, >> right? And so >> and the reason why I raised that was because there are ESD employees who who are on the screening committee who would be on the hiring committee who potentially could view uh this board not siding with them as a form of retaliation. >> Are you on the board? Are you hiring on the hiring comm? So I'm not on the hiring committee. So >> do you know where
048the status of my employment is? >> Nope. I don't I don't know who's applied apart from you. I don't know who is applied. I don't know who is on the screening committee. I don't know who's on the hiring committee. I don't know what that office is a problem. You know, but you don't know of anyone else. >> I I but I guess I would say if any other board members were applying, I would probably know about that because that's where the issue. >> Can I offer? So the next meeting for this group is >> they've opened but they pause >> August 14th >> October 14th sorry >> October 14th >> we we can we can invite >> your council to come to the meeting and clarify any questions folks have sounds like a lot of
049question and that's and and that would be an executive session because we're getting direct legal advice. >> Everything should have been an executive >> except not according to our policies. Not according to our policies. So, so last just just to quickly round out the agenda, committee appointments. Um, I want to just put on the record that I volunteered to serve on the negotiating committees that are that are upcoming. So, that process will be going on also because so one of the functions that that the board chair is charged with is making appointments to certain committees. Some are elected, lots of them are appointed. I have I had appointed Sandy to the policy committee because I believe there is this conflict of interest and because as I've stated I believe it is the role of this
050board to be crystal clear to the public that we are not complicit with any appearance of conflict of interest. Part of that strikes me as as me as board chair needing to resend that appointment of of Sandy to the policy committee. The pol >> I thought we were um actually voted on. You're not not the policy. The only the only voted sort of committee representation, if you maybe want to call committee, is to the SU. Everything else is appointed, >> right? >> No, >> the the policy committee, and I I'm wearing time. The policy committee has functions that I think are potentially uh uh uh compromised due to what I view as this appearance of conflict of interest. So, I'm rescending Sandy's appointment to the policy committee. >> I am against any rescending of anything
051until we consult with Dena. Yeah, I agree. >> So I I will say I have consulted with Dena on that point and she said yes the board and in fact Sandy has seen that email. Sandy has seen the email wherein Dena had or at least she was you were you were a a um recipient on that email but I don't know if you've seen it wherein Dena talks about the points and wrongs of that govern exactly what I'm talking the rescending of appointments. So the lawyer has to pin. So this is not a pleasant conversation. I would like to reiterate I don't think poorly of Sandy at all at all. >> It's one thing there's a difference between holding someone in high regard and still being able to deal with the consequences of their choices
052and not thinking of them in high regard. Imagine if you shot somebody. >> I hold Sandy in incredibly high fair regard as I think is evidenced by by the times that I have appointed Sandy for positions. I've turned to Sandy for advice, even talked about talked to Sandy once upon a time about being board chair. I hold Sandy and continue to hold Sandy in incredibly high regard. It doesn't change the fact that I think the integrity of this board has been compromised by a choice that she made. And we as a board are answerable to our constituents, not to each other. So I would entertain a motion to adjurnn. >> Go forth. >> We got one. We got two. No discussion about adjourning. Thank you very much. All those in favor, please signify by saying
053I. I. Any >> opposed? Any extensions? Very good. Thanks everyone. Thank you.