001Sorry, I'm gonna call the policy meeting to order. Didn't mean to scare everybody. Sorry about that. I was channeling my inner Pete Wabbor. That's what I was doing. Very aggressive. All right. Um, Miss Kadetsky, will you call the role? >> Melissa Mason, >> here. >> Dr. Merrick, >> yeah, here. Pat Bradford, >> I am here. >> All right. We have an in-person invocation today. Um, and that is going to be done by I'm sorry, Pastor Mike Ashcraft of Port City Community Church. And then following that, I will lead us in the pledge. So, go right ahead. Turn it on. And >> um what? Thank you'all for standing up. Um, I'm gonna try to do this like this. Um, but it is, I guess, odd for an inerson, uh, invocation, but I just wanted to say,
002um, you know, what you guys do, um, I'm sure, behind the scenes in a million ways is is so important for our community. And, um, I I personally just feel like it's a way for us to really honor what you guys do by by showing up and being in the room with you guys for at least a few minutes. And so, it's an honor to be able to pray, uh, for you guys. So, if you'll join me. Father, I do thank you for the day. I pray for the men and women gathered here and the weight uh that they feel uh from both their personal responsibility, I'm sure the pressure from a million different places um outside and they they work for the good of our community, for our teachers, for administrators, our students, uh
003the parents. I pray for the discernment and wisdom for them. I pray for meaningful and authentic commu uh cooperation that um is is not tainted by by fear and all the pressure that just tends to come with positions like this and responsibilities like this. And I ask father for um just a fresh sense of vision for the dignity and worth of what they um are entrusted with for those who teach to empower the children uh to bring dignity and honor the dignity and worth of each child in our community. And I just pray father we recognize that good public schools are good for all of us. And I pray that they would become a place of belonging uh in such a way that each student can become the very person they've been created and intended
004to be. And that these schools would work to close all the gaps uh that create you know most of the tension and pressure uh in service to all of our children and for the good of our community and the flourishing of it. And I pray all these things of your son Jesus. Amen. >> Thank you. I pledge 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 all. >> Thank you. >> All right. Next up, the approval of the agenda. I will entertain a motion to approve the amend. >> Any discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor signify by saying I. I >> opposed. That passes three to zero. Um I will entertain
005a motion to approve the minutes. >> Okay. I will move. I have read them. >> Okay. And I will second that. Um is there any discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor signify by saying I. I opposed. That passes three to zero. All right. So these are all policies that we have either voted on or had some discussions behind the scenes about. Um and so the first one is policy 2300 which is just at this point under regular meetings um changing the statement that says the meeting will not last more than four hours to the meeting will not last more than three and one half hours. So um I will make a motion that we pass this on to the board. >> I second that. Any discussion hearing? None. All those in favor signify by
006saying I. >> I. Opposed. All right. That was easy. The next one I think is going to take a little longer. So, we have 2230. There's a couple things on this particular policy that um we had talked about changing or that have been talked about changing um in previous uh policy committee meetings. But we'll start from the um the top under the number five employee benefits and retention committee. Um this was submitted to Mr. Mr. Blanchard by the individual who created this this committee um as a summary. And so if there's anything Mr. Blanchard would like to add. I >> I did want to add one thing. I hobbled this together based on uh his description on um one of board members descriptions of their goals for the policy commit for that particular committee. Um,
007with one uh minor exception, I I think that the the version that I was looking at suggested that the uh employee members of the committee should be um chosen by you know the the board member sitting on um the the committee and I modified that just as a suggestion after conferring with um the administration to say the superintendent, you know, just so that we keep uh that clear line of demarcation between the elected folks and the and the administration in their focus. It's how we created the finance committee. Um I asked Dr. Barnes for his suggestions and that's what we went with. >> Okay. >> I believe there's a >> Yes, Dr. M. believe that there's a a question at hand about whether there should be a standing committee or an ad hoc committee or
008an advisory committee. And I would say from my um point of view that it doesn't seem to be uh appropriate to be a standing committee. Um it's not something it's it's it's a short-term uh see uh it's really like a discovery about what we can and cannot create. I don't think it's something that's going to continue in perpetuity. Uh, and I don't also think that it's an advisory committee because an advisory committee is chaired by the staff. It's driven by the staff and I don't know that the staff has asked for this committee. I think this is something that's come wholly out of the imagination of of the board and I think it would be appropriate to be therefore an ad hoc committee. >> And um, if I might in in the description it even
009says the committee is advisory in nature. So, um I would have to agree with my colleague that I don't know as it belongs in standing and we did talk about this um back in February when this was first voted on and we didn't ever come to any kind of conclusion just moved it forward to policy to kind of discuss and so I'm in agreement with my colleague that I don't believe it necessarily belongs in board standing but it's you know will of the board where we decide to place it. So Mr. record. >> Thank you, Madam Chair. And I will agree too, when you It's one thing in the in the heat of a meeting to say, "Oh, I think it belongs here." But when you read this from start to finish, some things pop
010out. And I have another housekeeping item for this before we leave it. Don't let me forget that. Um, but when you read the purpose and then you see the committees that are stacked understanding, um, and then you and then you drop down to advisory, some of our really important committees are under advisory. um the calendar committee chaired by um Dr. Hamilton, you know, it's it's extremely necessary. It's advisory and I sit on that or I sat on that till I didn't get him get on this time, but um I learned a lot from it. But also she chairs the curriculum committee. Curriculum committee is advisory. There is no more important committee than we have. So if curriculum is advisory, then I think this one could be. You could persuade me to go to ad hoc.
011Um, I don't know if you could persuade me to say it's a one-time deal. ADOK is is has always been in my impression. You're here for this one task and it's going to take this amount of time and when it's over, it's over. So, you could possibly persuade me that, but I don't think it needs to be a monthly standing committee. Absolutely no way. Finance is not even a monthly standing committee. Um, we didn't meet more than 10 times last year. We took two months off. And as we get through the bond process, uh, well, excuse me, if we get as we get through the budget process, we're going to slide into bonds. So, we might meet the next 12 months solid. But after that, it depends on what the agenda is. It may be
012this technology survey situation that we're looking not technology, excuse me, um, >> what's the word I'm looking for? Infrastructure, infrastructure, sustainability. It may be that, but it it it es and flows. So, I don't believe it should be standing. Now y'all can convince me ad hoc or advisory. Thank you madam chair. >> And you want me to tell you about other issue? >> When you read through this from start to finish, it talks about attendance at some of the committees but not attendance at other committees. So I think if we just skip this housekeeping issue straight down to the bottom under item number five, board committee expectations. I think we just need to put a five there and put the same language that is in some of these but not all of these. And it
013says um where is it? There's there's it's at least in two of them. >> What the expectation is on attend attendance is mandatory to remain on this committee. So I think that should be for all committees and we just make that number five. Doesn't have to be in each each individual one at that point. So that I will make a motion for that or at least whoever makes the motion for this tech tail it into that. Either way, >> I would second that. >> Okay. So the motion is to add a number. Well, there is a number five, so it would probably >> be five. Five. >> Um, there's already a number five there. A couple of them. >> There's Yeah. >> Oh, no. Sorry. Sorry. If you scroll all the way down to the
014bottom, this is five board expectations. >> Okay. >> And there's one, two, three, four. So, it' be the fifth one. >> Nope. There's three more on the second on that next page. >> Oh, whoops. >> So, it be number eight >> if we keep all of these. >> Sorry. You're right. So the motion is to add verbiage. I'm looking for it. Um there's so many >> attendance is mandatory to remain on this committee. >> Attendance is mandatory to remain on committees and council because some of them are councils and some of them are committees. >> I'm writing it. All right. So, there is a first and a second to add attendance is mandatory to remain on committees to >> it's a little vague though. How how how much how much like every single meeting or
015there's a a number of >> regular attend mandatory means you need to show up. >> I would say probably regular attendance >> but it's in two of them now. I'm not creating new language. I'm just saying if it's in two, it needs to be in all so it's consistent. I don't want to change the language. Um would regular be more sufficient to have a that way. It's not saying you have to be at every single one because we know that there are sometimes exigent circumstances that can come up. Um but I do know that having served on some of these advisory um committees that there is attendance stipulations if you miss more than three they ask you to that's a third of the year. So right so how do I guess how do we want
016to define that? Sure Dr. My standing expectation for principles is if you have something student related safety centered at your school, you don't come to a meeting. >> So I know that that we'll deal with that as it comes. But just for for the school system staff in meetings, they're going to always pick student safety first. Absolutely. So that is a thing. >> Well, you know, there is such a thing as illness. there's other >> well there's always exceptions but if you if you say it's mandatory then you put the pressure on the committee member to actually show up or andor speak to the committee chair andor the board chair to say hey I missed because of this reason but we do have board members who don't show up for their committees >> um you
017know I'm I'm in my fourth year we do have board members who don't show up for their committees and I chair a committee and if I had somebody who missed two meetings in a Oh, I'm going to want to call them and say, "Hey, you know, we're covering really important stuff. What's going on?" And in the beginning when we founded, we had a hard time getting some people to serve that committee. It wasn't the piece of cake that it looks like now outside of the staff that had to. That was that was a that was a a toll thing. But we requested members of the community to make up that community service. And and in the beginning, there was one or two people that missed. and I almost said, "Hey, are you really committed to
018this?" So, if I'd had this language, it would have said, "Hey, my policy says, "Let's talk about why you haven't been here." So, that's kind of I I think all chairs deserve that ability to to work it out. But when you say it's mandatory, then there's always an exception to a rule. But if you say two meetings or three meetings, then you handicap the chair to do what they need to do. My concern simply is anytime we put something in policy um now it's enforceable >> and so if we say mandatory it doesn't necessarily I agree with you I think we would all say oh you're sick of course you know that's an excused absence >> but if it says mandatory someone could could pull that out and say you missed that one meeting and
019you know you're off >> and I'm just trying to avoid that sort of >> well ACES has it now there's at least do. Um, and that that inconsistency just jumped right out at me. >> Is there is there a clause in there that says an unexcused absence or >> I >> So, it's under both um ACES and calendar, but under I don't see it under any other ones and it may >> Yeah. Again, calendar would be one he shouldn't miss a meeting. Um, >> yeah, there's only a couple a year, right? you know, so that that was my that was my thinking >> and I know advisory has their own set of >> policies and procedures that they do as well as gifted advisory also has their own bylaws and things like that and so
020that may have come from some of the bylaws that they had already established. I would be in favor of saying that uh attendance is mandatory uh except for in you know certain circumstances uh you know in case of illness or whatever. I mean I we're making it clear that we expect you to be there unless there's a darn good reason you're not there. >> Mr. I could do that. >> I could do that. >> Takes a lawyer to really say this the right way. >> There's some big words there. Sounds smart. >> 25 cent words. >> Yeah. >> It's what he paying the big bucks for. All right. So, um I'm Can you read that out? >> Do you want to amend that like to say >> absent >> I I move to amend what
021the board attorney said which I cannot repeat. >> Absent exigent circumstances attendance is mandatory to remain on committees. >> Yes. >> Second. >> Okay. Um any discussion hearing? None. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. Any opposed? That passes three to zero. So we leave that section amendment. So we have to go back and vote on adding that to the policy. >> That's number eight. >> Yep. Um so any discussion on that? >> All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Any opposed? That passes three to zero. Now there's other >> we we do still need to address this employee benefits and retention committee. Is there any such motion to >> Wait, ma'am, before we do, why don't we just stay right where we are because number seven is in red,
022which tells me it's new, and I have some concerns about number seven in that same section. Members of committees other than employees and staff should be residents of New Hmer County. Um, members of committees other than employees and staff should be residents of New Hmer County. And I don't know the motive behind that. And when I think about it in terms of the committee that I chair, I have one person I need to ask because it didn't matter to me where they lived. As long as they were subject matter matter expert, I needed them on the committee. So I would I would table that part until we find out, do we have people who live outside the county on any of our committees? Um because if we don't know that fact, how can we put
023that into the policy? >> I can speak to that, Madam Chair, that I have been on committees that do have members that are outside of the county. Um, and it's also I think when you ask about motivation, I know that part of the motivation that brought this was that the city council has this in their policies and the county commissioners has this in their and their policies. it seemed to be, you know, consistency across the county and um and I think it does speak a little bit to um having local input and you know sometimes uh issues in in other counties or other parts of the state may not reflect the the concerns that we have locally >> and I think also to the point of making making sure that We're also protecting because we
024do know some of our staff do not live within the county. So, making sure that that stipulation is in there as well, that we're protecting them, that they can be a part of it because we want them to be a part of it. Um, I think that's important to to have in there. Um, >> so, but could we maybe between now and our general meeting find out if where where we stand with all of our committees, not just one? And I have to find out on mine. Um, because it was never something that mattered to me um in terms of where they lived. Um so before I can vote on this, I need to know how many committees have residents that are living outside. And if somebody lives in another state, that's another whole deal.
025Um that's another whole deal. Um but you know, if they lived in Pender, they lived in Brunswick, that might that might if they just live just remember we had a case one time when this family just moved one mile over the border, you know. So to me, that would that would be important. Um, can we get information between now and next week on our committees and do we have I mean there's a board liaison to every there's a staffer to to every committee the staffer should know or be able to submit an inquiry and get back an instant reply. So, we should be able to do it in week, right? Mr. Barnes, you want to speak to that because it's it's your people. I mean, do you know >> kind of um I don't necessarily
026feel comfortable asking staff where they live. >> I wouldn't say staff. Oh, no, no, no. We're committee members. >> And this says excluding employees and staff. So, you're safe. >> Staff are excluded from this. >> Yeah. Excluded. >> So, just devil's advocate. >> If I have um we invite Eric Cradle to be a part of our finance committee >> because of the role he does, the job he has. I don't know if it's necessarily relevant where he lives. >> Correct. >> So, I don't know. I mean, what's the purpose in opening the door? I think that if you're going to say something like if you are a parent on the committee, you have to be child in the school system. I think that's appropriate. >> Sure. >> I think that um if you're someone who
027like so I would think it's more relevant the job they do versus where they live. And I think if you want to say if you're a parent representative, you are a parent of the school system. >> That's really simple. And then that would take care of that problem. >> I can appreciate that. Um, I think with finance it's definitely a different arena, but like when it comes to I'm just trying to think of like some of the different committees that were on that it may I mean I'm an advocate for special education students. Do I have to live in the county to be part of >> but also the laws and and procedures are different based on state. So if it's a different state or you know what I'm saying? So it it >> I
028think with things like finance, it's not super unreasonable to think, oh, an expert in finance is an expert in finance is an expert in finance. But when you have somebody in like a more specified field that isn't in our area knowing the past and the procedure and the you know or even being invested or um I think that that kind of could draw some concern. Yay. No, I'm just throwing that out there. >> And Madam Chair, I would agree with you. Would it help y'all's reasoning if it said something like the surrounding tri county area because again I'm not going to want to get somebody that an that's an expert in Boone >> right >> to come here. I'm definitely not going to go out of state for somebody but I might not even go
029to the Charlotte Mech area because it's it's not the same as us but if they live >> Brunswick Pender um I would be so I'm not sure what the intent here is. I think it's a good intent but I'm not sure the unintended consequences like Dr. Bar is talking about. We could pass it and then have pop up somebody that's on a committee that we really need to keep or I I don't know. >> Sure. >> Dr. Mayor, case in point, we might have u some of those things pop up. And I would point out that the phrasing here says should be residents. In other words, it is not mandatory. >> So in which case, why do we even have it? >> Right? Is this something we've created not something from the NCBI? >> This
030is something one of our board members suggested. >> Board member brought it forward. If I understand it, uh, a board member was concerned about the activity in one of the committees. Um, that seemed to be, um, they wanted to narrow the scope of who was who was having input. >> If the person's not in the chair, then the chair could deal with that. We have somebody that doesn't live in >> if you would like me to to do that. We certainly I can certainly delegate that on. I contact everybody. I can certainly delegate that on >> not one of them looked at oh >> um but if you guys I mean obviously if this goes through and then gets to the board and gets approved then we will of course do that. Um just making
031sure you don't accidentally cut off your nose just by your face. >> Yeah. And I I I would right now I'd be in favor of just removing this until we get more information. I'm not saying I wouldn't be willing next month to come back and look at that, but I kind of need more information um to be able to do that. Okay. >> So, I would move that we remove currently number seven and then the next one comes up to seven. Remove this. We table that discussion on that till the next meeting. Let's do that. Let's move that that part of it. going to keep going on everything else we're doing, but that part of it and we'll know by then whether we want to talk about it next month or not. >> I'll second
032that. >> Also, some of these committees, >> we haven't even gotten through all of them. >> Some of the committees aren't necessarily run by us. We are members. Correct. >> Right. >> That is a I mean, if it's the policy committee, obviously we have influence over that, but if it's a committee like >> advisory, >> gifted advisory, >> right, where we're not really in charge of that. That is another link of concern, >> right? >> And gifted is a >> that's advisory. >> Advisory. >> All right. So, the motion is to table that particular sentence until the next meeting. Um any further discussion on that? Hearing none. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. Any opposed? Right. That passes three to zero. The meat and potatoes. >> We do have a couple
033of things. I I'll go with the simpler one first. um sustainability committee. >> Uh so I am going to move that we take uh the last sentence of that paragraph out. It says, "Additionally, one board member will serve on the soil and water conservation committee." Um I'm going to move that we remove that sentence. >> I will second that. >> Pardon me. Point of inquiry, Madam Chair. I'm not sure where you Oh, you're talking about the >> number nine page 26 on the paper. the blue instead of the red which I overlooked because >> these pages aren't numbered on our computer. >> They're not numbered on on the computer but I have numbers on my on my pages. Um >> committee >> and if I might just kind of talk like just briefly about it
034uh at this point the purpose that when we initially joined the soil and water conservation committee that was to kind of start the ball rolling on this sustainability initiatives within the district. um once we started the sustainability committee and now that we're doing some more digging and learning more about what we have um we want to make sure that um we're definitely keeping that focus on on the district. So um we do not currently have any members on the soil and water conservation committee. So that's why I I feel we need to remove it. So >> is there a reason we want to and this is just total inquiry. Why was the decision to have two on the sustainability committee? >> Um that was a because we had two at the time >> that no
035>> initially the sustainability committee was created with one one board member participating. Um that was me. I can say that I I helped uh start this. And so, um, with the removal of the soil and water, I believe that another board member had asked to add that, um, verbiage in there so that we had two two individuals because we don't have the soil and the water, having two people that are able to add their their input and their resources. Um, I think that that was, >> but we do have one person. If we if we approve this, we will have one board member on the soil and water. >> No, removing I'm saying remove that. >> Oh, you're you're suggesting we you to remove that last state that last. >> Yes. Take it out. >>
036Yes. Delete it. >> Strike it. >> It's not clear to me reading this with blue and what's what's removed and what's not. So, thank you. >> So, striking the additionally one board member will serve on soil and water. So, we at present don't have anyone serving on soil and water. >> Correct. Um and in part that was also because we're trying to pull in some of the experts within the county. Um at present we have the uh county sustainability manager. We have people that are doing some county initiatives that are on the committee already. Um and so double dipping just didn't seem necessary. Um the motion is to strike. Additionally, one board member will serve on the soil and water conservation committee. Um, any further discussion hearing? None. All those in favor signify by saying
037I. >> I. Any opposed? >> That passes. Three to zero. All right. Back to the initial, >> the bigger one. >> The initials. >> What do we want to do with the employee benefits and retention committee? >> Let's start right. Is the title now correct? And and does the title now match what we voted on last meeting or did we actually vote on it last meeting to change the title? >> I think we voted to bring it here. >> The title? >> No, the whole policy. >> Yeah. I'm just because I think the board approved another committee with another title and so we need to deal with that issue to officially change the title to this. If if I'm correct, >> I ghosted these meetings, but I wasn't a member for the last year. >>
038I'm going to go to the agenda for when we voted, which was the February regular meeting. Um, because that's where the title will be. Uh, and it says on old business employee retention committee. Okay. So, we have the benefits in there. I'm not and I don't have the paperwork that that individual had sent to us presently with me. I don't have it presently with me either, but I remember from the meeting that what we did is strike his original >> request for a committee and took it completely off the board and began a new >> this one. >> All right. That's just a housekeeping thing. So, have we determined then next? Have we said we haven't reached a conclusion whether it's going to be advisory or ad hoc and y'all are going to present your
039arguments? Try to change my mind or pissuade me in some way. Although, you could do it without me. Well, I I'd rather not be a persuasion. I'm hoping that we all can sort of collaborate. >> Just like to hear your arguments why it should be and you're advocating for ad hoc. >> I'm asking for ad hoc. Um ad hoc does not mean a oneoff. It does mean that it's temporary in in nature. It doesn't go on into perpetuity. It might last for five years, but it's not, you know, it's not a forever thing. Uh I don't believe it belongs in advisory because that's driven by staff and I have not heard anything that says the staff is driving this and I it would be kind of awkward to show up and say okay staff what
040do you got and you're like hey this wasn't our idea be kind of funny and I don't think it needs to be standing for the very reason that it's not I don't believe it should go into perpetuity and I think in my mind and and and in talking with my colleague who who is pushing for this it seems to be more of an exploration than anything else because we know it's a long shot. Um, and I'm in favor of doing the exploration because I think it might show up giving us ideas in other areas, but I don't know that it's a standing committee. >> And just to kind of um go back to the original the title under the supporting documents, I'm looking at the February regular meeting. It says employee benefits and retention committee
041as the document. So it is that is the name. Um but looking at the definition and what we have here for the board ad hoc committees, it feels like this falls into it a lot more. Um it says as time and situations demand, ad hoc committees may be created by the chairperson with the approval of the board. The chairperson assigns up to three board members, which three board members to serve on the ad hoc committee. Additional committee membership is determined depending on the nature of the committee, which is what that says. Ad hoc committees are temporary and formed for specific purpose. There's definitely a specific purpose. Um, and ad hoc committees have no final authority and are subordinate and advisory to the board. Also noted in there. And so it says the board clerk will
042maintain a list of ad hoc committees. So typically obviously we don't have a list of the board ad hoc committees on policy. So what it would mean is if we move it to an ad hoc committee, we would >> in my opinion remove it from this particular policy. >> Yeah. And Madam Chair, we did that when we remember we had Mr. Anderson, I served on that >> the safety committee. >> Yeah. It was safety that brought us all the changes and and stuff. Yes. And it and when we added it and then when we ended it, we took it out. >> Correct. >> So you you'd have a good point there. Um I'd kind of like to hear what the super says. Super said >> super has just landed in Switzerland. >> It's a good
043place to be. >> I think for me this is one of those things that it's at will of the board. I'm going to say that it's always essential for someone to be keeping their eye on retention and employee satisfaction. I think that obviously that's been a real focus for the past couple of years. I don't want us to get tied up too much in thinking that this is budgetary solution. >> So, Miss Geller, soon to be Dr. Geller and I have talked and there's a committee that Ashley has, this committee Rob has is a curriculum committee. HR doesn't really have a committee that represents it. So, if that's the will of the board, that's certainly fine. Whether it's ad hoc or whether it's permanent, I think you guys have to decide what the temperature of
044the district is, right? I think that's an important part of that decision. >> Huh. >> So, let me see if I interpret that right. If it went to advisory soon to be Dr. Geller, >> I didn't know that. >> Could be the person >> soon is in quotes though, right? I mean, >> the person the person >> just, you know, shephering the committee. That has a lot of appeal to me. really does because I see how Ashley does because I work closely with her and I see how Dr. Hamilton does because I work closely with her on the committees and it's a really important part that they play in it. So that would that would put me back to looking at at advisory and again to your point colleague across this could be more than
045just a short-term ad hoc thing because an ongoing problem from generation to generation. The problems evolve. Um when we started finance, we didn't well just assigned me to finance when I got elected. So, but but it evolved into what it is now. And it took us pretty much three years to get to there. Um so the involve the the evolving was great, but it couldn't have done it without, you know, the staff that that hold it together. So, I would based on what he just said, I' I'd be more interested in in >> shifting it to ador >> shifting it to advisory. And if it doesn't work, we can always come back and and and redo it. But you're right, it's it's all about your department. These are your people, our people, but your people.
046>> Yeah. >> Just a little side note, Rob's done a great job of leading as well the committee. >> I don't >> I didn't want him to feel left out. I don't serve on any of his committees. >> I know. But he's done a great job. >> Maybe next year. >> Actually, that's true because he's plays a huge part in in finance, capital, and bond. He really does. >> Dr. Merrick, I >> I think and I I I I'm just kind of going by by what I have believe I have seen, which was that the original intent of this uh brought on by doh by Mr. Perry was he wanted to create a a bonus structure of some kind for staff. That was the original intent. I like what I'm hearing from my colleague across
047the way and and Miss Geller and the superintendent that this can go far beyond that original intention. And if that intention was about awarding staff, um then it certainly could go well beyond the monetary. And I did notice that there was a lot of friction amongst folks about whether or not a monetary reward was appropriate. Um certainly uh we don't have the money within our our ouruding about even if the original intent was was monetary uh it is inside of a greater purpose of retention and so if we broaden that for the use of this committee u then it would actually fit very nicely under uh an advisory committee and I could be persuaded. I should probably find out if you want to shoot me now for having said that. >> No, >> she's smiling.
048She's not looking down. >> I love the idea. And I think part of I think to Dr. Barnes's point, part of keeping a pulse on retention, recruitment and retention, you know, an example I might give you is, >> you know, I think if you think about it generationally, right, many of us um maybe even more so in more, you know, northern states where there are unions and things like that. People were career teachers. That's what you did as a as a as a career for your life. We don't see that being the case anymore, right? So, I think that has resulted for several years now in how we have to adjust our recruiting strategy, right? So, now we're seeing five years is a tipping point for some, right? So, we can either um adjust to
049that and that our recruiting cycle is different as well as our retention strategies now change. Um, and so I think having that information about what our workforce is doing, how things are changing for our teacher prep programs, what our incoming staff look like. I think having more of an advisory like that would be very helpful along with ways that outside of financially compensating, how could we expand those things around our community? And it is a community who I love to say love their teachers. This Wilmington loves their teachers. So, what are the what are some other ways that um they can wrap their arms around their teachers and employees overall. So, I I welcome Andy. I think it's exciting. >> Okay, Miss Bradford, all of a sudden I got excited about this and you know,
050I've been like the least excited of everybody on the board, but now I'm excited. So, I going to throw out a motion. So, let's see if I can get through it. I am going to move that we take employee benefits and retention and move it down under advisory and then we amend paragraph two and we strike the language there where it says the committee will consist of to mirror the consistency of advisory committees and I and it will be under the direction of human resources um assistant superintendent Jen Geller And I think that covers what I'm trying to do. >> Could I amend that to remove the name just because the policy should persist with or without Miss Geller? We hope that she never leaves, but we don't want to under. >> No, we want
051her forever. >> She's going to stay forever. Forever and ever and ever. >> Yeah, that that is a smart move. Yeah. >> Um, does that make sense? >> So, there is a motion. Is there a second? >> I'll second it. >> Okay. So the motion is to move employee benefits and retention committee to under advisory and edit paragraph to paragraph two to mirror the consistency with advisory committees and I can sit down with Miss Padetsky if you'd like and and we can talk through that. Um any further discussion on that hearing? None. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. Any opposed? >> That passes three to zero. So, I'm going to move that we send this amended policy to the board. >> Second. >> Well, now >> discussion. Oh, wait. We need
052you we need a second on that. She did. Oh, she did. Okay. My discussion simply is that we never we did not finalize uh what section number seven or whatever it was that we we said we'd talk about later. Right. You want to send it to the policy, you send it to the full board as is without addressing >> We struck that, didn't we? We >> we said we tabled it until the next meeting. >> Yeah. No. So, no. And I and my motion was to cut that section out, move this forward with the revisions we just made. And then if we need to come back next meeting and look at that after we do some investigation, then we just put it right back on the agenda to fix that one little thing. >> I'll
053second that. >> We already did it. >> I know, but I'm still seconding. >> You can't take that away from me. >> I did the second. >> No problem. So >> congratulations, Miss Galler. >> All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Any opposed? >> That passes. >> So we're striking that idea of number seven. Uh that'll have to be started from scratch. >> Correct. >> Yeah. It would it would if we approve it at our next board meeting, then that new revised policy would come back for another revision. >> Right. >> All right. without >> we are on 2310. >> So that's public participation at board meetings. Oh, that one. >> Um, so the changes that were made to that one, um, when some of some of the board members, um, went to,
054uh, the NCSBA conference in November, um, and some of the information that we gathered was that there were some, um, some things that are that are allowed. And so I wanted to kind of reflect that in policy. And so if we look at I think it's page there two of three. >> Page two of three. So or page 31 if you're on your paper. Um we have under direct comments to the board chair and not to individual members directly. Um, I asked the attorney to add comments must be limited to matters relevant to the work of the board and may not include commercial advertisements or solicitations or comments about issues, activities or organizations that are unrelated to the board's functions. So, um, Mr. Blanchard, could you speak? There were some questions that people had about
055the commercial advertisements and solicitations. Could you speak to that? >> I I um try not to recreate the wheel. I handed out a copy of a coat cannon's uh blog that the late professor Bluestein had published for the school of government a few years ago. It's this is on page three rolling on page the fourth about ling limiting comments to matters related to the unit of government. Um actually it's at the top of page four that that was the language uh that she had uh proposed in in the uh blog post and I I just essentially cut and pasted that. Um there's nothing magical about that. As I understood it, the idea that we were trying to get to was this germanine limitation that we don't want people coming up as Professor Bluestein's article provides
056and talking about their child's birthday party um next week at the at the uh call to the audience or you know going up and and making um solicitations for whatever businesses or civic organizations that are unrelated to the school board. You're trying to hold this into, >> you know, the school the school board. Um, you know, somebody standing up like they do at the Oscars and talking about environmental issues is probably not appropriate for a school board meeting whether it's a good idea or >> relevant to the work of the board. >> Okay. Dr. uh >> I will wait, >> Miss Bradford. >> So, my question is probably for Mr. Blanchard. How would this be enforced? Would it be as we do now? Um, >> point of order, madam chair, this is not your main
057and then the chair rules >> or just, you know, uh, su sponte by the chair, you know, just saying, hey, >> he's using big words. I know. >> Yeah. On the raised on their own, you know, on own initiative when they see somebody straying >> um out. I mean, part of the problem with that is that people come and talk about things that really are kind of loosely related to it. Some of them you like hearing, some you don't. Um, but it does chew up a lot of time. Um, the other thing is, and this is an an argument for not having this language, you don't want policy to be used as a weapon by somebody on the board who disfavors an idea that someone out there is speaking about. Does that make sense? I
058don't want to get any more. >> Wouldn't it If they objected, then it's going to go to the chair for an opinion, and if they appeal, then it's going to go to the whole board. So, that kind of covers that. It's interesting. >> Well, you know, I I do think that many times parents will come before the board and they want to say, "Hey, you know what? We don't like maybe the way something's happening or we don't disagree with something and it may not be about the business that's before the board, but it is about the schools and then do we tell them sorry that's not business before the board." >> Uh, and that wouldn't that wasn't the antenna. It was it was purely unrelated matters. you know, the general societal issues. Um, you know,
059>> well, let me take it. >> Global warming, you know, whatever. I'm I'm trying to come up with an example like that. Something that really >> is is so unrelated to the education business of the board. >> I will, without putting too fine a point on it, I do appreciate one of our uh public members who comes every month, just about every month, and prays for the board. I like the I like the positivity generally speaking if it doesn't get political which sometimes it does but I like that and I could see someone making a very clear argument that is not about business before the board. Madam Chair, >> Miss Bradford, >> as you know, we discussed this yesterday because that was my concern and you know, as one of my besties, you know, I
060like what she does. Brings a real nice piece to the meeting, but she typically has something that's going on on our meeting that she is addressing. >> She typically does. You may not hear it when she's doing it, but um she does. And so with if this were to pass, I'm sure that she would have no issues with complying with the the the language. It's an interesting notion. Um I objected to it when I walked in the door, but now I'm going to move that we adopt it, see how the whole board feels about it. If it were to pass, Mr. Mr. Blanchard, I would love for you to just like make some side notes that you discussed with us at some other time that says, you know, you had three violations that you could
061have tightened down on and one that you did and you shouldn't have kind of deal just to get us the feel legally of where we are. I >> I was just thinking if you wanted a more economical way of saying that you could chop it off at the at the at the the word board, comments must be limited to matters relevant to the work of the board and just get rid of the rest of that that long runon sentence. I mean, that's a simple way to to I think to get the idea that I'm hearing from from the three of you here, >> but I can remember when we've had people come with their advertisements. I distinctly remember I can't remember specifically what, but I know I' it's happened at least two or three times
062um and solicitations um you know in the five years I've been looking at this. So, it happens. So, and if that's then published on our call to audience info, yeah, we could have more room for regular comments from local people and not solicitations or advertisements. So, I'm going to be in favor of leaving it. I'm gonna I'm going to move that we keep it the way it is and see what the whole board says. >> I guess I would want to make sure that in my previous example that someone is saying, >> I'm gonna pause you. I'm gonna just second that so that we can just keep going. Go ahead. I second. Go ahead. >> Oh, you second it. Sorry. Sorry. Thank you. Um, if someone brings something that they care about in our schools,
063which is the idea of the call, the audience is that parents or other community members can say, "Hey, we don't like this that's going along with our schools or hey, why don't you do this in our schools that I would want make sure that that was listed under relevant to the work of the board, which I think it would fit >> would be >> unrelated. Unrelated would be, you know, >> nonschool." >> Yeah. I can't think of an example right now, but it makes sense. >> Dr. Barnes. Yeah. >> Is it appropriate to add in there um include commercial advertising solicitations or references to personnel related >> incidents? >> Well, looking again back at using the guidance, we've got good old uh um Professor Bluestein. That was one of the things that she was saying
064that's very suspect. Um, you know, members of the public do have uh a first amendment right to complain about activities in the government, government employees. No, I guess I mean what happens if there if we're in the middle of a personnel related issue and people come out to call audience to talk about that issue, doesn't that then create its own echo chamber that creates an issue? >> That did and I think she had an actual suggestion there, you know, like I We have another policy >> that we direct people to, you know, raise their issues with you, members of the public complaints. And I believe it's actually more about board member relations from the public. Um, but, you know, that that is the policy goal that we're trying to get at. Telling people, you know,
065what you can and can't say in in an open forum like that, a limited public forum starts to become problematic. That's why Look, I'd love to make it as tight and you say get us out of it honestly, but it's not it's not a concern we have that comes up very often, but just the board chair to know that direct personnel issues to me not practice is the best way to do it. You know, again to have board chair from their own out of their own initiative just say you know Mr. Smith complaints about employees Well, >> because we don't act >> we have the we have the we have policy. We don't have we have procedure in place to direct individuals. I know um sitting on the board for this much time it's definitely
066come up and in the past what has happened is the individuals who have named specific employees of the district um have been paused and taken over and I think they talked it was when he was HR um and talked over on the side because it is personnel that that's that's not something so I is that what you're referencing >> it's diffult for too because the only employee they manage it's me and so I I don't want to say it's cool to do it to me but everyone else they need to direct it to me because >> it's not our business it's not the business of the board actually >> it is but it also impacts our quasi judicial if there anything comes to >> if anything comes to us and we have to rule on
067it we then lose some of that >> objectivity in order to fairly rule on it. And so I don't know if I'm I I I think that's a reasonable request to add that it can't be that it can't involve any personnel because there we do have procedures in place. >> I would say pending personnel matters because if it's and and or or or not mention employees by name. >> What's is matters the right word there? I mean I I'm agree with with the chair. Um, and devolve is a nice word, but is it personnel cases? Personnel issues, personnel matters, personnel, what's the word? >> You could make it more I I'm trying to think of the word not advisory, but a more language like um personnel matters should be addressed to the superintendent out. I'm
068trying to think of a way to say this on the fly. >> Reverse it. Um if you want to if you want to get that in that you know personnel matters should be addressed in superintendent >> not in public comment >> right rather than in public comment >> but it's not is it matters or is it cases >> what do you call it >> matters matter >> matters and the reason I I was saying it that way is you know that's not an outright prohibition that just tells people where the right place to go is do you get what I'm saying it's it's because it's let's face it if they're coming and talking and open in the in the this part as you just pointed out that there's nothing the board can do about the
069vast majority of personnel matters because they're a superintendent issue. You only have one >> employee concerns about the superintendent should be brought to the board chair. >> Hang it all out there. >> No, >> I mean I I don't want people to feel like there's no avenue for people who are dissatisfied with my work. >> Absolutely. And that's part of why we have call to audience for people to come up and say, "Hey, we don't like what's what we're seeing here." >> Yeah. >> And that's their right and their and their privilege uh under state statute to come and and say that. But how do we protect the sanctity of the of the case so that we can remain objective? >> Can you what about individual personnel matters? Does individual then hone it down to
070where it's something they're looking at? >> Offer food proof of thought too. We get a lot of people who want to offer compliments to staff and I think it's worth identify somebody when they show up. I think about board members when I was sitting here in board meetings and you'd have multiple people come up and talk about something positive regarding >> your concern. matters. Yes. Not >> specifically identifying staff members because if somebody wants to get up in public and talk about how incredible Ashley Sutton is, why would any of us stop them? You know what I mean? >> And it happens frequently. >> That would work. >> Yeah. >> I'm the one who brought this up to start with. Is there a feeling that maybe if it's not broken doesn't need to be fixed?
071I don't know if it's a common >> It's marginally broken. I think to your point, I think the the board chair if it strays into personnel issues has the ability to say, you know, kind of cut that off and say we cannot uh you know, it's we can't hear uh prejuditial information about personnel matters that we might have to rely on, you know, have to be able to rule on later. >> But do we want to codify it? What about this? What if we leave what's there and we add Dr. Morgan's suggestion, concerns about personnel matters, send it to the board and let seven people vote on it. >> Okay. So, I'm going to I'll I'll make the motion. I move that we add concerns regarding personnel matters should be directed to the superintendent and
072not addressed during public comment under direct comments to the board chair. Do I have a second? >> Second. >> Okay. Any discussion on that hearing? None. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Any opposed? That passes three to zero. And then I'm going to move that we send this forward to the board. >> Second. >> All right. Any discussion? >> This is a really good piece, by the way, sir. Thank you. >> Hearing none. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. I. >> Any opposed? That passes three to zero. And then the last one >> hopefully is short, sweet. Um 2340 parliamentary procedures. During our um board retreat, we had some um training on Robert's rules. And one of the things that came up was when motions require a second
073and when they don't. Uh, and so I asked our attorney to add some verbiage to say, um, notwithstanding the exception for small boards contained in Robert's rules, motions shall generally require a second. >> Manager. >> Yes. >> To adopt as is. >> Second. >> I will second it for the so for the sake of discussion. >> Perfect. I'm I'm I'm concerned about the word generally just anytime we put in a okay a wiggle room right I think we need to determine when that is because we don't know >> there are some motions that don't require just as a matter of course that right off the top of my head exception rules so whoever called that was correct generally speaking of the day. Doesn't need a second. >> Enforce rules doesn't need a second. Avoid main
074motion. Doesn't need a second. Demand rising vote. Parliamentary law question. Request information. >> Um there are quite a few that don't need a second. >> We generally don't use some of those. We have a smaller What's interesting is when you dig into it, the ones that don't need debate and can't be amended. That's fascinating. >> My question is simply whether or not we need or when it says generally shall not require perhaps we could say except in cases codified in Robert already, right? There are there are certain motions that do not require >> well that was the idea I was trying to get across without making >> extensively long >> and again I don't know that this is going to become a problem. I just anytime you put something in I want to be clear
075I might want to change it. It doesn't it does make it just a tiny bit longer to say the small boards contained in Robert rules except those already specified in Robert's rules. >> Well, can I offer a suggestion? Notwithstanding the exceptions already contained in Robert's rules. Stick it right there for small boards. What already says that contained in Robert's rule? It says that. You might want to rearrange that sentence, but it says it. Except the exception that small boards contain in Robert's rules. It says it right there. I think that's what the point you're trying to get across is. >> No, not withstanding means >> two different things. >> Yeah, the small board exception says that we don't need the second, but because one procedurally and over the course of time, we've always done seconds.
076Um, and there are some that do require seconds. We're wanting to maintain that generally requiring it. >> What if you made it say exceptions plural strike for small boards? Would that then solve your problem? Exceptions contained in Robert's rules of order. >> Do you need small boards mentioned? >> That would catch too many. >> Okay. >> That would catch the things that you don't need a second that just to say, you know, we're not going to use the small board exception, you know, for lack of a >> Oh, >> I'm just trying to issue. >> Interesting. >> So, Dr. Merrick, is there is there anything that you would want to change? >> Um, notwithstanding the exceptions of small boards contained in Robert's rules, motions shall not require a second unless specifically codified. >> No, we're
077wanting to require >> the other way. I guess I'm not familiar with which motions do not require. >> Will you pass that to Will you pass that around to quick glance? Just run down the column where it says seconds. >> Got it. >> And if there's I don't want to have to list them all, >> right? Because I think that there are Well, there's more there. Those are just the main the main ones. So, >> there's quite a few, right? >> Yeah. Yeah. >> So to list them all with >> So I understand. I understand. And uh if it's not broken, don't fix it. Let's try this. And if it turns out that there's an issue later, then >> yeah, I think we just keep doing what we're doing. >> Understanding with everyone understanding what
078what we're trying to do right there. I think that should inform how the chairs on >> true >> any issues. That makes sense. >> Y >> All right. The chair can certainly pull out that chart to say, well, according to this, it does not meet or it doesn't meet or etc. >> Oh, somebody will. >> All right. So, the motion is to move 2340 onto the board. Um, all those in favor signify by saying I >> I opposed. That passes three to zero. >> I'm move to adjourn. >> No, she's got a list what moves on. >> So, justart for your chart that you have. fill out this chart. This is um so as of right now I have existing policies for amendment with no changes 2300 and 2340. Um existing policies with changes 2230
079and 2310. All right. >> 2230 >> 2310 >> and 2310. >> All right. There's a motion to adjurnn. >> Second. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. >> Any opposed? >> Opposed. >> That passes two to one. We're adjourned.