Board of Education Work Session Meeting on Monday, February 2, 2026, at CES at 7 00 P M

001Oh, hello. Good evening. Thank you for your patience. Our executive session um obviously ran over a little bit and then I think everyone had a bio break, so forgive us. Um but if you could please stand and join me in the pledge. United States to the republic. God. Okay. Um so we begin our our evening with public comments. Recognition of vis visitors for any item on the agenda or for any other concern. The board of education welcomes comments from the public. Each person each person wishing to speak is asked to speak into the microphone identify themselves and respectfully limit their comments to three minutes. Two opportunities to speak are available. One early in the meeting which will be limited to 30 minutes and one at the end of the meeting. Each speaker may address the

002board only once at both the opening and closing portion of the agenda. Please remember there'll be no cross dialogue between speakers and between members of the board. All speakers are to conduct themselves in a civil manner. Obscene language, liest statements, threats of violence, statements advocating racial, religious, or other forms of prejudice will not be tolerated. Persons wishing to discuss matters involving individual district personnel or students should present their comments and or concerns to the superintendent during regular business hours. Would anyone like to make a public comment? There's microphones right by Loftton. >> Good evening. I'm here as a parent and a member of this community who believes deeply in both compassion and accountability. What I wanted to speak on tonight was a discordance amongst families and the way they are feeling right now between the

003seriousness of a gun threat that was made by a sixth grade student last week at Cornwall Central Middle School and the response that followed. A threat of mass violence was communicated by a student. That is not hypothetical. It is not a misunderstanding. It is not expressive speech. It was a threat. The school district's policy in the past has been zero tolerance and a mandatory mandatory 5-day suspension. That was not done with this student. She was back in class today. The discordance erodess trust not just between parents in the district, but amongst the children themselves. Children are perceptive. They notice when words and actions don't align. I'm just asking for transparency around the safety decisions that were made for the families that are not left filling in the blanks. I we can hold compassion for a

004child and uphold standards that keep everyone safe. They are not competing values. They are the foundation of a functioning school district and community. I did receive a call today from Mrs. Palumbo and Superintendent Arjino graciously responded promptly, but people are left speculating, is this child IEP? Why was the absence of school policy around threats removed? My name is Angela Shapiro. Any other comments, Miss Shapiro? We don't we don't um like cross dialogue at this time. We take the comments and then we come back the next meeting and address them. Um so I just wanted to make sure that you know we weren't ignoring your comment. No, that's okay. We're not ignoring you. I just wanted you to know that that that's how this um portion operates. Other public comments. Hi, good evening. This also is

005my first board meeting uh in my life, but I'm a local resident. My name is Sam Davies. Um I'm also a veteran. Um I understand that uh late last year a law was passed for uh veterans tax exemptions. Um I think it's called um bill A74. Just curious uh the uh if if Cornwall has any plans to do anything with that bill, adopt it, if there's been any discussion about it. Just looking for information. I did reach out um to the school. Somebody called me back. We've been playing phone tag maybe, but just wanted to to ask. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Other public comments. >> Okay. Now, uh superintendent update. This is Arjunia. >> Hey, thank you. So January has been very busy. Uh from incredible drama plays and winter concerts to a

006flash mob even right here, a dance mob I should say. And actually we have Mrs. King in our audience. I'm not going to call her out, but I'm totally calling her out because she was one of our leads in this and it was amazing and she set up practices before school and it was fantastic. So thank you for that. Um we also have had some great uh unified basketball happening. Uh last weekend our um we hosted all county festival over 350 of the best musicians in the county. So we are literally rocking and rolling throughout January and February we are not slowing down. This is officially uh you know the second part of the calendar and we are moving and grooving uh to the end. So one thing though that did slow us down a

007little bit was the weather. And I have to admit and I've shared this before that this is the least favorite part of my role. I never realized how stressful it is to call the weather because you know uh meteorologist meteorologists get a lot of slack but I have to tell you like it changes very quickly. So um thank you to everybody who supports that the early morning calls. You know John Frink and I are on the phone. Walter Moran and I are on the phone very early in the morning and I'm looking outside and I'm like I don't see anything yet but supposed to be coming. So, you know, one of our my personal big things is making sure like our kids are driving on the road. So, I want to make sure that that's

008the first layer of safety and then we go on from there. Um, but I just want to thank everyone. Uh, you know, as I came into this role, I was asked probably the number one question I was asked is, "Are you going to sing on snow days?" And that is no because trust me, you don't want to hear me singing and I don't think you want to wake up to me singing. Um, but thank you to our students and staff who have been super creative. They've created some really fun social media posts to close our schools. Uh, even the last storm was um, Storm Fern and we have a teacher out with Willow Avenue who her last name is Fern. So, they made a cute little clip about that. Um, so having some fun with

009those things. Um, but what's not fun is what happens on the back end. So, I just want to really thank our um, buildings and grounds team. They have been nothing short of incredible. We had a couple safety meetings before the last um storm and you know just the immense um dedication and seriousness about all facets that go into getting our buildings open, getting our grounds open. Um you know, people taking full responsibility. If you're the head custodian in, let's say, this building, what do you need to look at? Where where are the gaps? What rooms are going to be cold? What if we lose power? Um you know, a list of things that they went through. And then on top of which, what if we have machines that go down? We we may have a

010salt shortage, you know, stuff like all these pieces that necessarily the community may not be thinking about. We may not be thinking about, but they're thinking about it. So, a huge thank you to them. And also a huge thank you to our um you know, our local local people who are working on that, local transportation, sanitation, um getting those sidewalks clean. I know that took days. There were some serious machines out there that were rem removing the snow. So, thank you to them. West Point Tours for getting their their garages moving, their buses moving. Um, you know, and also a thank you to our town supervisor. Him and I were collaborating throughout the storm, just kind of like how some of his decisions might impact us opening up on Tuesday and so on. So, it

011was really a true collaborative effort. And you look in other parts of the country. Um I was recently in North Carolina with my son on a college trip and they had this storm over the weekend which was significant, but like they are closed down now for the week and like I'm like we had a day and a two-hour delay so we're nailing it. Um so thank you again to everyone. You know, we're we continue to get through the winter and this is a true New York winter. So hang on. I'm I'm optimistic that we're going to be at the end of it, but we are just in February. So, thank you. >> Thank you. Um, so president's update. I do just want to I I just want to address I have to say when I

012attended my first board meeting, it was the weirdest feeling to come up and speak and then have no one respond to me. So, um I just and since it's both of your first meeting, I I just don't want it to feel like it's it's just dropped and and left. It's something that we as a board come back and speak about after to make sure that we have the right answers, the right facts, and we're not giving misinformation. So, um, just I I want you to know it's not just, um, you know, left in the middle of the room, so to speak. We we're listening and and we will circle back around at our next board meeting. Okay. Um, so I want to give an update on the superintendent search. Um, we have a candidate review

013meeting tomorrow night, 6:30 p.m. Reminder to my fellow board members to please come with your potential questions. Um, we will be doing interviews the week of February 23rd. And as a reminder, we're going to be using the information from our uh community survey and the forums that were that were held, excuse me, to inform our process, but we are getting in the home stretch getting into the home stretch of that project. Our strategic planning project will be kicking off at our next uh board meeting on February 9th. HYA will be here to present the plan, the next steps, and the ask of the board and the community. I also want everyone to know that um PPS um people services is going to be doing a presentation for the board at our next executive session which

014will be on Monday, February 9th. And then there'll be a board meeting presentation on February 23rd. And a reminder as well that uh the capital project community forum is February 4th at 7 p.m. here in the auditorium. I had some excuse me, cafeterium. I had somebody um say to me recently who no longer has kids in the district. They said, you know, I I'm really out of touch now because I'm not I don't have a child in school anymore. And so I would just say, you know, tell your neighbors, tell your friends if they're not with kids currently in school. You know, this is important information. Everyone has a vote. People should be informed about, you know, what the capital project's going to entail. So, we're going to do our best to get the word

015out, you know, through all the media ways that we can, but I encourage everyone to um talk to your friends and neighbors, etc. that might not necessarily have kids in the district. So, thank you. Um, I will just make a note that our reports for January from the schools, good news from the schools, our student representatives, um, they don't attend two meetings in a month. It's a lot. And because our meeting shifted, that's what happened. But those reports are available online if you would like to see what the good news is from our schools. So, now we're moving on to our consent agenda. We have items 2 through 10. Would anybody like any of those items pulled from the consent agenda? >> I'd like to pull uh item three, please. Personnel actions. >> Also, I'm

016sorry, we have 2 through 11. The 11th is the um the action related to the the nurse sub rate. Sorry. Yeah. So, so that was added. So, that's 2 through 11. So Jim, we're going to pull number three. Anyone else? >> Um, and to pull number nine and 10. >> Nine and 10. Okay. So, the consent agenda uh permits the board of education to make more effective use of its time by adopting a single motion to cover those relatively routine matters which are included. any member of the board who wishes to discuss individually a particular piece of business on the consent agenda may so indicate which has already happened and we will consider and vote on those separately uh preserving the right of all board members to be heard on any issue. It is recommended

017that the board of education approve the following consent agend consent agenda items as submitted by the superintendent of schools items 2 4 5 6 7 8 and 11. May I have a motion to pass the consent agenda? >> Moved. Thank you, Brendan. May I have a second? >> Second. >> Thank you, Christian. All in favor of the consent agenda? >> I >> opposed. Obstain. Thank you. The motion passes. Okay. Um item number three, Jim. Yeah. I just I think it's a question for clarification. Um down at the bottom of all after all of the uh appointments um it says that the superintendent has recommended adding a full-time uh one FTE teaching assistant. Um we made this request as a result of students IEP needs. We typically don't add uh positions in the middle of the

018year, but obviously if we had a new student move in the district or a student, you know, got a new classification that they needed this help. I'm just looking for a little clarification there because on what that is. So Megan, Brent, John, whoever. >> Yeah, exactly that, Jim. So there there was a need in the middle school as a result of an IEP that warranted unfortunately an additional we've traditionally put that resolution at the end of the personnel. >> That answers it. Thank you. >> Any other discussion on number three? Okay. Okay. May I have a motion for approving uh the personnel action? >> So moved. >> Thank you, Brendan. A second, Carl. Thank you. All in favor? >> I >> opposed abstain. Okay. Personnel actions number three passes. Thank you. Okay. Numbers nine and

01910. Christian. Um nine. Are they Are they related? >> Um they're probably related, but I'm take them separately. Nine. Number nine, >> I am pulling just to for the purpose of abstaining. >> So, >> okay. So, number nine, um I have a motion to approve I'm trying to summarize this because it's long. The resolution to approve tax thank you soiary testing me settlement agreement uh between the v with the village of Curious Joel. May I have a motion? Thank you, Brendan. A second. Thank you, Loftton. All in favor of the resolution to approve taxiary settlement agreement. >> Show hands opposed. Abstaining. Absention. Thank you, Christian. The motion passes. Consent agenda item number 10. A resolution to approve intervention in taxiary proceedings Thomas Droan Waxman Pedigro and Male Male LLP. question. >> Um, so people who

020know what I've talked about, this has been something that I've been calling attention to for several years now and I am very glad that we are taking some concrete action on this because of how it affects and also the equity or fairness concerns in our district. Now, there's not an outcome, but I'm glad we are taking uh I think really for the first time serious action on this topic and I just want to note that and I hope that um it has an outcome that is fair to all the members of our community. Okay. Number 10, be it resolved. I would like a motion for this particular um action item. Be it resolved that the board of education of the Cornwall Central School District hereby authorizes Thomas Rohan Waxman Pedigro Mayo LLP to take any

021and all action necessary to intervene in the following proceeding commenced in the Supreme Court of the state of New York County of Orange pursuant to article 7 of the real property tax law. Number one, the village of Cornwall and Hudson versus Town of Cornwall at all index number EF007222-20225. Be it further resolved that the board of education of the Cornwall Central School District hereby consents that Daniel Pedigro appear in the above enumerated taxiary proceedings and that Daniel Pedigro is hereby authorized, empowered and directed to sign the notices of appearance to intervene. May I have a motion? >> Moved. >> Thank you, Brendan. A second. Thank you, Richard. All in favor? I >> I >> opposed. Abstensions. Thank you. The motion passes. Moving on to all business discussion. So the board will have a discussion and

022update regarding a proposed May 2026 capital project bond referendum. This was the whole reason of having this meeting today initially was an extra meeting on the calendar to have this very rich thorough discussion. Um and then we had the snow day. So it it proved very useful. But John, I'll turn it over to you. So I'll ask the uh facilities committee members also to jump in wherever appropriate. Um I I put in front of all the uh board members a packet. Um luckily we did get to give the the board a really healthy and robust update at our last meeting. Um so so we did meet as a facilities committee um on January 21st. I believe that was a Wednesday, Thursday at this point. Um and we've arrived as a committee at some general consensus

023from that committee. Um so in front of you you have again some large sheets and spreadsheets and packets and I'm going to take you through the first uh proposition. Um the the general consensus from that uh the facilities committee was to move forward with a proposition one which is a tax neutral project. Uh the sum total of that project is approximately 44.5 million. Okay, there's scope of work scoped for all of our schools, high school, middle school, three elementary schools, buildings and grounds, and the district offices. Okay. Um, some higher level items that that we need to construct a uh bathroom and concession stand adjacent to our tennis courts for our stadium that was mandated by uh New York State Ed. Um, we have some roof replacement. We're looking to do PA replacements and clock

024systems in all of our schools um because we have some issues there. Um fire alarm replacements as well in the middle school. Um some major upgrades taking place. We're looking to have an addition placed on the building for our kitchen and cafeteria. That way we can renovate the current kitchen and cafeteria and make additional classroom space there. We are also looking to place a parent pickup and drop off in the rear of the building. So, we would take the the the gravel road that runs along the um track and football field and bring it behind the building for a a a new parent drop off. There's also some paving work going on there. Um and then you'll see some interior drainage um and as well as the replace PA systems. If I walk along to

025uh Cormal Elementary School, you'll see some other items in there in terms of replace um backflow uh preventers. Um uh additional fencing around the playroom uh areas. There's some some uh pavement replacement work going on there. Um converting some steam labs, some classrooms, and upgrading those classrooms. You'll see um a red notation there. It says unsat or unsatisfactory. That was from our building condition survey. So, we felt that it was appropriate to take action on that um which is addressing our chimney chimney deterioration uh as well as some of our PA work. Willow Avenue um additional parking and widen a one-way road and we want to do kind of a softball field uh shift uh pavement uh replacement in the bus loop, some additional fencing, some roofing work, um gym floor replacement which has been

026needed for quite some time. unsatisfactory for some um composite slab under the kitchen. Um auditorium air conditioning was added to this project. That's a little bit different from the last time we met. Um we knew we needed to put that into this project because it is a classroom space and classes meet there regularly. So we wanted to make sure that it was air conditioned. There's some plumbing and electrical upgrades there as well. at Cornwall um on Hudson Elementary. You'll see again some backflow preventers. Um and we also did um auditorium air conditioning there as well. That is also a classroom space that meets regularly and they have uh a number of events there. So, we felt it was important to add that into the scope of the project. That was not included the last time

027we provided an update for the board. There's a PA system there as well. Uh buildings and grounds remains. We we want to put a uh four bay garage um storage. That way we can get more longevity from our equipment and our machines and our our uh crews can work indoors instead of outdoors on any of our machines. Um expand life expectancy. Uh district offices full window replacement. So we're not um we're we're becoming a little bit more efficient with our heating and cooling in that building. uh replace some timber retaining walls uh adjacent to the masonary stairs that was an unsatisfactory from our building condition survey as well um as well as provide fire alarms. So again that was a quick overview of proposition one. I don't know if any of the committee members want

028to add in any information um from that that tax neutral project um at this point before I move on. So, John, do you want to do this like in stages or do we want to just introduce the different propositions and then have a general discussion? >> We could do I just didn't know if anybody wanted to stop me. I can keep going on forever unfortunately. Yeah. Um just I know this was covered in our last meeting but perhaps for the edification of the public just explaining the why it's tax neutral um even at this larger number than our previous one that was tax neutral might be understanding because it's not tax and I said this at the previous meeting but I think it bears repetition >> sure >> about and also that it might even

029be since we haven't really worked out all the aid that is correct >> under this that it actually might be even more fiscally beneficial than what we're currently discussing at this point and I think if you could just expand on that. >> Sure. So, we we use the term tax neutral or no additional tax burden to our our uh taxpayers uh for two reasons. Number one, we have a $7.5 million capital reserve fund. So, it's kind of a a savings bank that the district has put aside uh over the past several years to help offset costs for future capital expenses. Um and and Jim Kan here likes to use the kind of 3:1 model. So, you know, spend some money and and get some more money back from New York State. Um uh and then

030we have um additional debt that would be falling off. So, Christian, you're getting you're going to steal some thunder here at the end where we're going to have some additional money that's going to be coming our way uh in the future. So, this project, this $44.5 million project is likely to balloon a little bit bigger in the tune of 50 to $60 million. Um, but we don't know how much building aid we're going to get. So, the way we are forecasting it at this point, kind of as of February, is that we have to forecast very conservatively and that we're not going to get building aid. Um, we have to go through something called a preliminary submission process with New York State Ed. So very lengthy paperwork process um where they ask for a lot

031of information, enrollment numbers, statistics, classrooms, things like that. Um building current building size and they weigh that into their factor of how much more building aid we would be uh eligible for. And that's a very simple way of just expanding upon that. if they determine that we're eligible for more building aid, this project be can uh be more tax neutral and we have more buying power to that. So, so kind of a simple way to look at it. Christian, I don't know if I got every point you want. Um, you said that's the point about why it's tax neutral, but you mentioned that it might balloon to a larger total number. And does that mean we are spending on more projects than currently what is budgeted here or that these will be uh have less

032of a um a you could say local tax impact? Correct. So out of the facilities committee meeting we the facilities committee had the consensus of proposition one. So I think right now it's important to go into what was proposition two. Uh the facilities committee came to a consensus with moving forward with a secondary proposition and we're calling it the classroom proposition. And you'll see that on your sheet two. It says proposition two classrooms. It would be adding classrooms to the middle school. So we call it the connection between the B and the C wings, which is classrooms and improve the flow. Um at Cornwall Elementary School, uh we're going to have an addition put on. It's called the four on top of four. Four classrooms on top of four classrooms. And then at Cornwall on

033Hudson, we're going to renovate the kitchen and cafeteria. We're going to expand that space out the back of the building and then renovate the current kind of kitchen space across the hall that would become classroom space. So the total project cost here is about $21.1 million. So potentially this scope of this Proposition 2 could go into Proposition One and be tax neutral, but that is all still to be worked out as we move through our time series here. So would that depend upon the public voting on proposition two or does it shift naturally because there's more space in that? >> So that's going to be a decision for the committee to recommend to the full board and the full board to decide how we can parse this out. So there >> so this would be

034decided before the referendum and propositions would be actually written and put in front of the public. >> Correct. That's correct. So again as of this time there's some decisions that need to be made. We have a facilities committee meeting coming up again this Thursday. Wednesday is the community forum. Thursday is our meeting. Um so we're going to bring this back to the facilities committee. Um, and we have a proposition three that I'm going to talk about in a minute to see how the committee wants to kind of move through this and make a recommendation to the full board of education because ultimately we're going to need as a timeline from the board of education all the propositions, however they're written out and that plane has to be landed by March 9th because when we come

035in here on March 23rd, that has to be voted on by the board of education and then it's done. So the last the kind of final discussion will be March 9th unless we scheduled another meeting. So between February 9th or February 2nd today and March 9th we might want to schedule a couple facilities committee meetings and that way March 9th the decision's ready to go. >> I think we should just for for purposes of what we're doing now I think we should just hold the discussion that you want to have Christian because I want to have it too. Let's introduce Proposition three. just sort of introduce the um recommendation at at with the information we had at our last facilities committee meeting to the full board and then we can have a more comprehend. I

036apologize. >> Yeah, it it's a lot. Uh Proposition three came out from the committee as well. Um it's called the athletics proposition. Um and the the committee felt that this warranted a further discussion with the full board of education to add additional fields. Um so we have some pricing for the high school to relocate the baseball and the softball fields um and include synthetic turf. There would also be kind of a multisport field in the outfields of those um athletic fields. The cost for that is about uh $14.6 million. And then we had um scope of work at the middle school. Um there would be a new turf field and track. So replacing the current turf field and track that exists now um kind of inind with new lighting. The cost for that would be

037$9.4 million. And then we also scoped project work for multisport athletic field baseball, softball, soccer, lacrosse. Um and that would be off to the side uh on the other field at the middle school. all synthetic turf with some lighting and the cost there is about $9.6 million. So, an all-in cost here was $33.6 million and the committee felt this was something that the board uh should discuss because there was no consensus one way or the other. Um there were some leanings that maybe the field could go at the high school. There were some leanings that it could go at the middle school. How many fields do we do? One field, do we do two fields? Um I think the consensus was probably not three fields but again I think we can have that uh discussion

038here. In the uh next packet you have in front of you is really the pictures of everything that you have here with some price tags on it and some some drawings. So you have a lot here at the middle school because there's a lot of work going on. So, you'll see what we're calling affectionately as the parent um drop off uh and pickup as a kiss and go. Um it has a price tag of $5.1 million. It it paves the road. It puts in parking. It creates a bus loop uh sorry, a loop in the back um for that to take place. You'll also see the kitchen and cafeteria uh addition. And then you'll see where we're renovating the current kitchen and cafeteria. Then placed on this diagram is what does it look like if

039we uh redid the track and the turf and then the multisport athletic field that goes alongside that as well. And then the last piece you'll see is the um the classroom addition uh connecting the B and C wings um all the way in the um kind of top right hand side of of the picture. On the next page, you'll see kind of a a little diagram of what it looks like for the uh cafeteria edition at uh Cornwall on Hudson. Okay, that kind of pop out. What we're not showing is the renovation of the classroom space that would occur inside for Cornwall Elementary. You'll see where we're proposing the classroom addition to come out the kind of right hand side of that that building or the the lower side of that building. That would be

040four classrooms on four classrooms with a stairwell in it. Um I think some janitorial space um a vestibule. And then the last one is what does the field space look like at the high school? This was one uh drawing that they had. Um square footage wise, if we were to move this around and maybe put the softball field uh positioned differently or the baseball field positioned differently, um it would probably be the same cost. But this was just one kind of concept that we had to to bring forward to the board. And then the last packet here was uh our debt service schedule. And I shared this uh the last time and this is a different debt service schedule. So this takes into account these propositions as I just explained to you. Proposition one, proposition

041two, proposition three. So I'll put my glasses on because I can't read it even though it's on big placemat paper. You'll see four blue boxes. The first blue box on the lefth hand side is our current debt service schedule. These are uh debt payments that we're currently paying to NIPA for an energy project that we did. Um uh the project that built the high school. And then you'll see in there in column uh five is where our building aid kicks in for the current 22 project uh 2022 capital project that's going to be wrapping up next summer. And then we start catching aid on that. In the second blue box, you're going to see what that proposition one looks like at $44.5 million. And then column 12 is that tax impact uh on assessed value

042at $100,000. And you're seeing negative balances with the exception of really one line. And those negative balances tell us that we are below tax neutral. So there's room in that in that project to add more money. If I move over to the second uh third blue box, it actually says it's propositions one and two. It's an additional uh $21.1 million. And then you're seeing the the impact of Proposition 1 and two uh on assessed value in in column 18. You're seeing an impact ranging from roughly 63 uh $63 and then we have one outlier at $100, but 63 and to a low of 49. And that includes proposition one and two. You'll see at the top of that box up there. That's assuming no aid again on the on the additional classrooms because again we're

043assuming worst case scenario in this. And then if you move over to the last blue box on the right hand side, you'll see Proposition one, two, and three, um $33.6 million. It's now adding in, if we were to do the fields, all the fields. Um and you're looking at the tax impact over $100,000 assessed value um at ranging from $191 roughly to $250 um on assessed value, $100,000 assessed value. So, we have a broad range kind of coming out here at this point based on the information that we are working with and and move to fiscal adviserss. I know I've said a mouthful. I apologize. >> John, can you remind me columns 18 and 24 those numbers um tax impact on $100,000 value that is is that compounded? So every year we're adding 60 plus

04460 plus 60 or that's what the anticipated is for that year. >> That's that's what it is for that for one that year 6375 for one year at $100,000. So if you have $300,000 you're going to right >> but the next year is it $60 on top of that increase I had the previous year or is it the anticipated is just going to be six that's what I'm paying back on that loan that year. >> Correct. Okay. >> Thank you. >> Yep. While we're on this uh chart, because there are so many questions uh beyond this chart, uh you mentioned very quickly the debt service schedule for the 2022 capital project, >> correct? >> And I don't think you said this, but wrapping in the high school project from 2000 from 99 or whatever. Um

045just help me understand like where each where those numbers are in each column. >> Yep. So you're seeing >> Hold it up for myself. >> So column five was blank at our last facility. Correct. Right. And that's the one that got filled in and that's what changes the math from our last meeting. >> Yes. >> And column five is the estimated aid for the 2022 capital project. And we don't have that finalized because that hasn't been closed out yet. But >> since most of the work has been done, there's it's a very educated guess as to what that number is currently. It's not exact, but it's it should be pretty accurate. >> It is pretty accurate. We asked fiscal adviserss to take a look at that. We're um we pulled what our our job numbers

046and said, "Okay, these are the values of our job numbers." The last piece that has to be accomplished here is final cost reports. So now we take into account all of our contracts, all the work that was done, all the money that was paid out, and then we file that with New York State. Once those final cost reports are filed, that's when our building aid will then start kicking in. So we're going to try and look to get those filed before June 30th, most of them. >> So um to answer your question, >> so that's 22 >> that's 22 the money coming back in. And in column two, you're seeing the actual bonds and NIPA uh payments and you're seeing that year in 2030 um where they stop in column two. And that's that's the

047big shift is that our outstanding debt payments actually stop and so we begin to take on more debt in order to pay for that. So we're replacing that hole. >> And is everything in column two, the high school coming off or is that a combination of things? >> It's a combination. That's the NIPA loan as well which ends at the same time. >> It's mostly the high school. >> Correct. >> I think that NIPA project was a it was a like a power project to get fl you know go to some >> much smaller than the high school project. >> Yeah. >> The majority of that money is the high school. >> So that's >> I think it's the timing is just coincidental that >> that they align >> the debt rolls off in the

048exact same year for both of them. >> So then that's the I mean now it's all falling into place. So with that uh column 2 ending in 2030, then we jump over to column six. That's why we're basically leaping forward about $3.2 million a year into the negative. Why does the negative only last till 2033 in column six because then then it goes 20 starting 2034 it's not ne negligible but $12,000 $26,000. That's a question I'd have to ask for fiscal adviserss actually. >> Tell them that I asked that question. >> What's that? >> That's fine. >> Yeah. I I just want to also point out you're seeing on here column 4 estimated series 2026 DASney. That's because we're going to bond for the current capital project. So by by June 30th we'll be bonded

049for the current 22 capital project. So those are the payments that will begin for that. And then the estimated five is the um aid payments that we'll get back for. >> If you look at it, Brendan, uh the bond the the the high school and the NIPA bond gets paid off in 2030, but it looks like there's still building aid coming through all the way to 2040. So I think that explains the discrepancy that you're seeing in six, >> right? That's the same. I don't know why that doesn't that probably because the same issue um with the building aid for in column 5 you're seeing that expected to start in 2027 >> for something we voted on in 2022 >> probably going to be a three-year gap in all these >> there's going to be

050a lag >> right because I'm sure the same issue happened they built the high school did bond anticipation notes didn't bond it until it was complete Yeah. >> Yeah. >> John, do these numbers. Um, so box three and four for instance, and we have to get into the nitty-gritty, but these estimates include all anticipated aid, all anticipated. Um, when I was at the meeting, they were talking about how some of it's aidable, some of it they're not sure. Does this does this include all of what's anticipated or is there hope for some more? >> It's all inclusive of the spreadsheets here. Okay. >> Based on our conservative approach, okay? >> Right. So, we can theoretically we would receive aid on a classroom >> theoretically, but we don't want to rely on that until we know

051for sure. New York State Ed will tell us that in our meetings with that. >> They won't give you an answer over the phone, so to speak, >> right? Okay. So, so that is why we're saying, okay, we're not going to project aid at this or the maximum aid at this because we're concerned that we may not get maximum aid, right? We can't go out and tell the public, but we're going to get 75% aid on this. We're not overselling it, >> but we we're only going to get 57%. Got it. >> So, yes, that it's represented on here and you'll see that >> kind of project aidability 58.7% projectability 0%. >> Okay. >> So, it could be better. it it will likely be better but again I think the stance we'll have to take

052as a as a a board as the committee this is what we have to put out for them >> and I think that's the right thing to do because we don't want to overpromise but I just wanted to understand >> um there's the possibility >> so that Christine on on we're column 7 through 13 which assumes you do a proposition one in the amount of $44.5 million that to John's point it says the ability there's 58.7 seven. I think that number is not really a conservative estimate. I mean, I think that's what we think it's going to be, right? >> Yeah, they're they're pretty >> and that's because some of the projects are notable. So, we don't get that full 73% or 72% whatever our number is, it's only 58. um for the second box

053that says Proposition 1 and two. So that proposition two additional amount of 21,000 and that's what we called the you know the classroom um piece of this that has connect the BNC wings at the middle school the four4 at Lee Road and uh renovate the cafeteria to open up a classroom at CO that approve that's got an aability of zero and that number will probably improve. My question for you as we get into the nitty-gritty, you said we need to decide the propositions by March 9th. You have made a submission to um state ed to see what would be aidable. Will we have that answer by March 9th? >> We won't we won't have that. The process takes way much longer. We won't have that done before the vote, fortunately. >> Okay. So, we're going

054to have to essentially package a capital project. Well, first we have to make a decision as a board what we want to put in front of the public and then we have to go in front of the public able to say with confidence proposition one would be tax neutral. >> Correct. >> But proposition two hypothetically um might be tax neutral. So, they're casting a vote on I should be prepared to pay for this out of my taxes but I might find something under the Christmas tree further down the road. >> Yeah. And again, I think we're comfortable saying that there will be some aid, but we just don't know how much >> it'll be less than. So, I'm almost seeing the slide deck come together, you know, uh tax impact less than or equal to

055fill in the the number >> there. That that would I mean, very simply, yeah, but um we'd love to say, okay, yeah, we're going to get 75% aid, but we there's no way we could say that, right? So just >> spend a little more time on the the process and the timeline for the preliminaries. So we've started the preliminary submission process and then that's going to go through um through Albany. What uh what what rough timeline do we have? And just for our own understanding um what is the what are the likely ranges of out range of outcomes? you know, is it totally unpredictable or do we have any past precedent for these types of projects where we say this is probably where we can fall into not that we would take that kind of

056messaging to the public because it's so uncertain, but as as far as our own decision-m >> Yeah, I think it it depends on number one, are we comfortable with the scope that we have in front of us here? Is that what you want to move forward with? And because that's the scope that we have to send in for the the submission process. They need to know what's your scope. So we've done some of this work with them already. We have not put it on into paper for them at this point. Um so to for them to they will they wouldn't even come close to saying you know can we get a number? No they're not going to give you a number because they want everything in front of them and I think it's too risky

057for them. So, um I think the architects and engineers have had better experience. So, they might be able to say, "Okay, yeah, you know, in the facilities committee, we can ask Jim and Ingred to weigh in a little bit more on that." I think John and um John and Kevin from Triton would also be able to say that a little bit more comfortably as well, but um until we know, we don't know. >> So, if I could, >> which is frustrating. I did you have a line of questioning or >> I have so many I I don't want to occupy the whole meeting. So go ahead. >> I just maybe want to kind of recap for the board members who aren't on the facilities committee. I think John recapped it. I want to recap it

058again for the other board members not on the committee as well as the public here tonight and and watching um on the stream just sort of where we left it at the last board meeting, the change we've seen since then and kind of how that puts us moving forward. So, you know, really just to recap, there's three sheets in front of you. There is a proposition one in the amount of $44.5 million which um will be tax neutral based upon two factors. One spending the approximately 7.5 million we have in the current capital reserves in combination with the debt service falling off um that paid for the high school that was built opened in 2004. So combining those two factors together um at our last meeting we said okay this is proposition one uh it's

059a consensus of this committee to recommend this to the full board as a revenue neutral uh project. We then recommended uh the committee recommends to the full board to take a proposition two which is all of the the classroom the three different classroom projects at the middle school Lee Road and the smaller project at CO that's in the amount of $21 million um and that would not be revenue neutral so that would exceed a tax increase um for um for taxpayers Um what's changed since our committee meeting is the estimated bond payments for the 2022 capital project were added in. So some of that proposition two could be added into proposition one and still remain tax neutral. So I think the a question I'll pose to you John to bring back to the facilities committee

060on Thursday is okay you know you've got negative numbers in column 12 here your tax increase of proposition one now how when do we get to zero what's the knife's edge of that 21 million is it 5 10 15 um which is just you know yep the math there so I I would recommend I would I would guess we as committee on Thursday will recommend pulling some of that project into an expanded Proposition One. Um, >> but it doesn't look like we'll be we'll know by May how much of that can will actually >> but even if you assume 08ability by by fixing that column five which was not yet populated in this sheet in our last meeting, there's still some headroom to get to. Okay. I I was assuming I was assuming that uh

061what we had in front of us was inclusive of that, but we would so that $44 million number would go north based solely on the adability that we have now been able to predict. >> Yeah. If you look at column 12, those numbers are negative. So, we need to get column 12 to be zero. But the the third box, column 18, it's combining one and two. Yeah. >> And that's taking into account the negative >> the benefits will have. Yeah. >> So I Yeah. So that's another way to look at it. >> So So to look at it that way, >> the number there is is 21.1 million. What number do you put in place of 21 that's lower than 21.1 million that takes that that number in column 18 to zero? >> Mhm. Is

062it five million? Is it 10 million? Um, >> so what could we include? >> Right. >> I think what people are asking for is a rough estimate. Understanding the fact that there are no precise numbers. Are we talking the whole amount, part of the amount? Um, I think >> I think that's that's a number we could just >> I had access to the spreadsheet, you could get that number fairly quickly. I think we can have that number by Thursday, right? >> Sure. But >> the mathematical answer, >> correct? But some of this then we'll circle right back to what's the scope of the work that you want and we'll tell you if it's aidable or not. >> So we should have that we should go back to the one, two, and three and look at

063those projects. >> And then it's this that's where how we've worked through this whole process, right? We're trying to figure out what's the scope and then we figure out what's our tax impact. So, as we're trying to kind of do both things at once, we're we're at a point now where okay, you you have a fair question. How much more can go into that 44 million U tax neutral project to go make that balance zero? But what is that scope of the work? Is that scope of the work all aidable project work at at what we're assuming is 57%. >> So, it's I would say it's two pieces of good news. One, >> this is all very good news, right? So yeah, so I mean I would say one argument is since we're not going

064to know the aid percentage, uh we we will get our adviserss to give us their best guesses. Yep. >> Since we're not going to know that until we have to go, the conservative approach would be assume 0%able for Proposition 2. If you assume 0%able, Yep. >> what dollar figure can you work into proposition one? Yep. Um and so you know where we left it as a facilities committee to recommend to the full board was to recommend proposition one to recommend proposition 2 at 21.1 million for the voters to decide as a second proposition saying this is going to increase your taxes. Um and then we said we also would recommend a proposition 3. Now this here has proposition 3 of 33 million. We did not want to recommend all three fields which are laid out

065in the papers in front of you. Um we said that we would recommend one of those three. uh I think was the general feeling of the group and it was still a little up in the air whether that be um the middle school um the current football field at the middle school to um replace that track and replace that field with a turf field um which could be for football, soccer, um lacrosse as well I believe um or to do additional turf fields at the high school which would cover baseball and softball. So I think the committee was wavering on which of those two, but to to pick one of those two. So that's where we left it at the last committee to recommend to the full board. Amy, >> I just have a question

066on the logistics of the vote. So say if we leave it at three just like it is right now, do we say do you approve one, do you approve two, do you approve three, or do we say pick one? Uh so usually the way so so we can structure it any way we want but I think the way that typically is is that two doesn't pass unless one passes and three doesn't pass unless one and two passes. So there's kind of a cascade in terms of the order they're presented and I think that was the at least the discussion in the facilities committee as far as structuring the um the the proposition. >> We didn't >> we could write it a different way but I'm not sure why we necessarily want to. We didn't have

067a robust discussion about that, but I think a quick straw poll was um you vote on you vote on one, you vote on two, you vote on three, but you cannot pass two without one. You cannot pass three without one and two. >> Yeah, I use the language of daisy chain. You're familiar with daisy chain. It's plugging extension cords into extension cords to make it all work, right? So, if that's the approach or you could do the approach of all individual, right? So, Do you want to vote in the fields but not a $44 million tax neutral project? Right. So, it's up it's up to the purview of the board. Um, I just want to circle back to this is all good news. We're in a good news setting. Um, but I think it's just

068it's a little bit complicated and our timeline is actually still in place. So, February 9th um next week we will do a secret determination. Okay. the board. What are we impacting in in our in our purview and who's going to be lead agency? That will be the board. So, we are on pace for that February 9th. What we still can work on is scope and and where this lies in terms of tax impact over the next month. So, I guess I wanted to kind of reiterate that that that yes, we came out of the facilities committee with with a recommendation for Proposition 1, Proposition 2, and help us with Proposition three. Uh, but now we have a little bit more buying power. So, how do we h how do we want to break that out

069now? So, Christian, I'm sorry. >> Oh, >> I just want to get a process check if I could. What What are we facilities committee? What do you need us as a board to come back with tonight for you? >> You just stole what I was going to say. Um, no, I mean what I would love to see and I and I welcome um anybody else at facilities to jump in. I would love to see are there any questions um on proposition 1, two or three um from the the folks who are not in the facilities committee who haven't looked at each you know line item if you have them in front of you. Are there anything that you think that you see there that you think um you have questions about or should not be

070included or does everybody kind of you know okay with this as it's presented? And I think the discussion we'll have Thursday is can we pull some of Proposition 2 into Proposition One um and still be um tax neutral. Um, and I think that's the the discussion we'll have factoring in both the just the math of this spreadsheet as well as the the best guesses um of of our build and design teams um of of those projects and what percentage they would be able. So for >> I think the comm I think the board here um also coming out of that facilities committee was some direction about the fields >> because I think the committee was general consensus prop one and prop two go but we want some we want some indicator from the board as

071a whole. What are your feelings about proposition three and and the field decisions there. I know Christian has something he wants to say and then I thought we could kind of go around and and if just individually if you have a question a comment you want to comment on the fields kind of give everyone a chance to react. >> Um so two things I think we are maybe obsessing too much on the um the aspect of tax neutrality. We don't know exactly what that number is. And I think our discussion should be not so much about whether it doesn't cost us one extra dollar, but whether it's worth it. And it's like when you buy a house and they say, "Well, you have this budget up to this number and you can buy any house

072under this number because the bank will approve you for that." And so then you decide to spend all of it. And generally what happens is you you buy too much house because you feel like you're without a budget. And I think instead of talking about, you know, if it's going to be tax neutral or a little bit not tax neutral, I think that's letting the marketing drive the decision about what we should build and not build in the sense like what is the priority of different things and I think we can we don't know the number exactly and perhaps a better way to talk about it is are these the things we want to prioritize. So that's I think one way and I think we're getting maybe getting too caught up on that because it's

073good news and if we have maybe it's a little bit not tax neutral it's not going to be a lot and the point is if it's a project that's worth it I think that our community will support a little bit of a tax increase given that most of it is covered by um all the things discussed before um my question from earlier just because we were talking about the fiscal matters and um I know the answer to this but I think I'm going to hypothetically put myself in the position of a community member who says, "We spent all this money for the high school, right? And now it's shouldn't we get a windfall from like all this um debt falling off and that should lower our taxes?" Um I think I know the answer to

074this, which is how does that impact our tax cap on our program going forward and why would it be actually advantageous not to take that windfall now? And if you could just maybe John address that. >> Yep. um and why it's actually in our interest to make sure that we do use that fiscal space from the debt that's falling off rather than just returning that to um as a tax levy windfall to the community. >> You know, the tax cap is structured, we hear about the 2% tax cap, right? The way that is structured is um New York State makes it permissible and wants you to do improvements on your school buildings, wants you to do uh upgrades or additions as you see fit and local control is necessary. So once you have some debt,

075you want to replace that debt. If you were to not replace that debt, you could be in the position where in a couple years your tax cap goes negative and you're putting out to your community that you have to vote on a tax increase of a zero and get a 60% supermajority. So, you're fighting you're fighting for So, can I restate? And I >> um that means just to pass our annual budget, >> we would need a super majority just to pass even a slightly >> a slight budget, which is likely to happen because there are drivers that are going to make the budget at least slightly larger year-over-year. >> And that means instead of just getting 50%, >> we would probably put putting in jeopardy our core program on annual budgets and making them

076more difficult to pass in the future if we don't take advantage of this debt that's falling off. And you're you're we're heavily relying obviously on our tax levy and the components of which that drive the tax levy is debt service and your debt payments and your improvements. And if should that fall off, then you're in that position where you are looking for a a vote just to pass a basic budget vote um with maybe a very small tax levy increase, you would need a 60% majority. It it is it is possible. Can I follow up on that because I think this is such an important point and the understanding of this is is central to why you know you should not just let money fall off the table. So to put real we've been talking

077about the ideas. Now, let's put a real real number plug real numbers into that because I think that the part that people don't quite understand is when the tax levy goes down, why does that mean a negative uh tax cap? So, let's say you're at $94 million for your operating budget >> and what is it? $3.2 million comes off. So, I guess we would go down to 91, >> right? >> Okay. Um, tell me why that number going down three million, what effect does that have on your tax cap? >> So if So if you were if you're at 94 and you can raise it 2% rough, obviously >> you're 2% on your levy, >> yes, >> could be zero. >> But why is that? I I understand that that's that's the outcome, but people

078are going to say, I don't I don't that doesn't compute, you know, because you're you're at 94. So your tax levy well last year our tax levy was 50 52 something like that >> 53 something. >> Yeah you would know. Um >> so but why does the uh why does the tax cap become negative or or zero? >> You have allowable exclusions that factor into your tax cap. So kind of on the the back end of your calculation. So um your debt service is one is one of the biggest drivers of that um tax cap. When we do transfer to capital projects that is also a driver for our tax cap. So if we were to allow that that large $3 million it's large chunk to fall off your exclusion changes drastically and therefore your

079cap then goes down. I it's the best way I can kind of describe it without >> I'm I'm seeing it. So another way of looking at it is if you've got an equation, right? And the result of that equation has many variables in it. At the end of that equation is your tax cap which should result in 2% 2.5%. This is why it changes each year. It's not 2%. People think it's a 2% written, you know, in stone, but it's the result of a very complicated formula. If you remove certain variables from that formula or turn those variables to zero, it's going to have a direct impact on what the output is and it's going to turn it from 2.5 2.7 to zero or maybe negative.5 or something like that. So I think the simplest

080way is if you want to look up the tax cap formula. I'm sure um New York State Education Department gives you the full calculation. But the basic thrust of the formula is you have a 2% base number which is basically a cost an inflation target which is prices increase roughly 2%. And therefore you're allowing it to grow by that and then you have incentives in the system that encourage you to reinvest. Mhm. >> And when you take on certain things, it can either be higher or lower. So I know in my own district it was below two. We did 2.75 last year on our tax um our tax levy. Other districts to do even two would have had to have a super majority. >> Mhm. >> Because of what they've done in their past decisions.

081So that's why sometimes it can be more than two because you've taken on some of these things and therefore you have let's say a higher number that you can work under under a 50% rule or you can even go a lower number and and as we're saying if we let it fall off completely >> we might even have a negative one as you were saying >> which means any tax levy would require 60%. >> Correct. So you you have districts that have that have a 6% levy cap. So they can go up to 6.28. Are they going that high? They may need to or they may not to. They may not need to, but they only need the 50% majority to go there. Again, if we were to fall below this and if just part

082of that calculation process, the other part of that calculation process is our enrollment and um New York State assigns us some values as well. So, we just get assigned values and and it's we plug and go in order to create that. So the bottom line is that we should reinvest so that and not take the windfall necessarily because it that puts us in a riskier position long term. >> Down look down the road you're you're risking a lot. >> Okay. >> Maybe not even long term. I mean you might >> yeah two three there is value in looking at it on paper like oh why don't we just take that money and run but that doesn't behoove us in the long run or short run for that matter. You would survive for a little while

083on reserves, >> right? >> You would survive a couple years and then that's it. >> But there's no real value add. >> No. Then you then you've you've exposed yourself, so you have no protection whatsoever should something happen. >> And by the way, our buildings are continuing to age. And >> correct, >> we're not taken care of. And and by the way, so um and this will this will come up come up at the forum on Wednesday, but just so we're we're talking right now about questions that come up and arming oursel just with our own understanding and then hopefully even explanations. But one of the questions that comes up often and that has come up every time we've put up a capital project successfully and unsuccessfully is uh you shouldn't have to do capital

084projects because you should be paying for these kinds of improvements out of your operating budget. To John's point, the state has arranged these financial incentives to encourage you to do exactly what we are doing to not pay for them out of your operating budget which is maxed out for programming for the most part. um and instead they give you these uh these tools that you can use to do cap to invest in your capital plant at extraordinary value. >> So it would be foolish actually. >> You couldn't do it in your operating. You couldn't >> even if you tried to it would be foolish and you wouldn't succeed. >> You would fail. >> Yeah. >> You're you're destined to fail. >> Just to build on that point, Brendan, it's not just that that funding, but

085it's you can't have that effect of doing tens of millions of dollars of work if you try and piece it out every year. You have to have these big projects to get the construction managers and the construction firms and just to manage all of that work. It's got to be something that's done, you know, on a project once every 5 years or 10 years or whatever the case may be. Um, you couldn't you couldn't tackle some of these projects peace meal year by year. So for the sake of our the next phase of this discussion um if I heard correctly proposition one and two the facility committee essentially agreed upon and I want to give everyone a chance to ask questions and talk but could you give us a recap of proposition three where the

086um um where where it landed and and what you want the rest of the board to consider and what we should be asking. >> Yes. So the consensus of the committee was to recommend to the full board project or proposition one and two as stated on this paper. Um and to to go back to a point Christian made a little bit ago. He said, "Hey, we're talking about what's our budget and do you spend up to the budget and are these projects worthy?" Um and I I don't think you were trying to say that these are unworthy, but I just want to reiterate I I think you were speaking in kind of a hypothetical. So Jim, as we've said many times, maybe not publicly, >> our list is longer than this budget, >> right? >>

087We have a long list of worthy projects. >> So we're talking about priorities about what goes first in this line is really the discussion as opposed to >> um as you know um I have some disagreements about the relative priorities of different things that are included. Um, and I guess my point is we're talking a lot about, you know, do we have another million, $2 million here? And I think that kind of leads us into the wrong discussion. And I was trying to encourage us to talk more about why we want these things rather than just talking about the price tag part of it. >> And that is the way that I took it. I just wanted to reiterate for the public's understanding. Um, because I I think your comment could be taken one of

088two ways. and I took it the way you intended it. Um the committee strongly feels that all of these projects are worthy. Um most of these projects have been vetted, you know, over the course of of years really since the the you know, even going back to before the 2020 uh two bond going back to 2021 and and that whole process. So um to Christian's point, these projects have all been vetted. um the committee agrees in them some uh differences of you know relative rank um of course when you're dealing with a list this long but these are all worthy projects and there are more than than than are on this list but uh the consensus of the committee was to recommend project one and two as written here I think with some of the

089discussion earlier there may be an opportunity to move some of two into one we'll have that discussion as a committee on Thursday um project three as it's presented um lists three different athletics fields at 33 million. Um I think we eliminated um what I'll call the the multiport field here at the middle school which combines um baseball and football, soccer, lacrosse. It's on here. We just left all three available options on there. We didn't come to a final consensus there, but the I think the feeling was that we would pick one of these three. Uh, and the two leading contenders for that were the middle school replacing what is the current football field of the middle school with a multiport field surrounded by a new track. Um, that would leave the existing bleachers and press

090box there, but would give a new playing surface um or the fields that are drawn out here at the high school. So I don't think that we made a final decision between those two projects. So I certainly welcome uh comments from the board. Um and I hope that uh you know that you have had a chance to to discuss that more with Megan and Walter uh and Jason Simo. Jason couldn't make our last facilities meeting. I hopefully he can make it on Thursday. Um Jason recommend when I tried to pin him down to pick one, he said you should do both. Um, so I will try to pin him down again Thursday, probably unsuccessfully. Um, but perhaps you guys could discuss offline and and and see there. So >> what is what was the I'm

091curious what the impetus was not to do both. Why why do you feel like we have to pick one or the other? Not you specifically, but the committee >> cost I mean that we saw >> and perception too um of just you know we did a very large um athletic facility last time. And if we were to go back to the public and ask for, you know, $24 million or whatever, $20 million in fields, um it was I think the consensus was that that would just be too tall of an asset. >> The I don't want to get into the nitty-gritty again, but I'm going to ask the question. The sheet with the costs does include all the fields. >> Yes. Okay. >> Yeah. And that's just >> Okay. I just want to know. So

092that's what we started our meeting with that sheet. >> Yeah. >> Because those were um the meeting before we had discussed fields and having a new construction management firm. They sat down with um with the tetrate tech with the architects >> and those were the three options that were presented to us >> and then we had further discussion and we narrowed it down and said >> we would pick one of these three. >> Yeah. I just wanted to see the big picture before I could just characterize what my memory of the discussion was is that no one want no one thought three fields was doable especially because at that time because we weren't talking about this extra space we were already asking for around $21 million for the classrooms and then lumping another 20 plus

093million on top of that that is not tax neutral. Right? So, so we're now we're talking about $53 million that at the time of the discussion is all not tax neutral. Does that make sense? So that we're talking. So the point was though where I think there was a difference of opinion is okay, we're not doing three. I think most people were for one, there were a few people for two, but no, there was no consensus on which of these three doors do we want to for the people who wanted to have a field. It went back and forth whether middle school field, high school field, and and people had different ones about which one are you going to put first if you're only doing one. And I think what we wanted from the board

094as a whole is to hear about what they thought the priorities were and maybe kind of recapitulate the arguments that were made about why some people thought the middle school field was a priority, the the high school field or the second middle school field. And I think that's maybe what we want to discuss. >> I think that's a very fair recap. And I'll just add that I think that the um what's listed on here as the multiport athletic field in the middle school was nobody voted for that option when they said the middle school they voted for the turf and track option. >> Yes. My memory was that we had a high school principal advocating for the middle school field and a middle school principal advocating for the high school field and we were and

095some laughter because some other people were in that room with us and I think the point about it is is that there are arguments we made for both ways and perhaps in a sense maybe um replaying those arguments from the people who were not there and also ga gathering what their thoughts might be on what the merits of if you're just doing one would you do one before the And as I I think that's what we're saying is that I think it seemed to me my memory was really it was one field in addition to the classrooms or one of one of these three options and maybe two but that would that seemed to be a stretch for a lot of people my memory in the room and then that's where it led to >>

096agreed >> which door were you opening >> agreed >> okay so for this I'm not rushing us but for the sake of time I want to just get to a a >> a point here. Um, so in general, I think there aren't questions about Proposition One because that's essentially what we discussed in depth the last time and Proposition two. I mean, we spoke in detail about what the tax impact might be, but Proposition one and two are are there questions or discussion concerns about those things that anyone wants to bring up? I would just make sure everybody understands one of the next steps is that we will un we will get a better understanding from our financial adviserss how much of that could be absorbed into a proposition one but that's >> probably the next

097>> the content of what's in there is what I think we're talking about >> but just so that point that might be our next step on that >> yeah I'm I wasn't defining next steps I just wanted to I just wanted to give everyone a chance to react to what was on this page and if there was anything else to add or question before we move on to the field discussion >> I would just add one thing because I was a dissenting voice on this and I'll just lay out um what I suggested in the facilities committee meeting which is to me the priority of the uh drop off was not as high and it really should not be in the first trunch. It should probably be in the second trunch and I would adv

098I advocated for moving at least some of the classrooms into the first trunch to increase the probability that it would be passed. Um I remain unconvinced although I think I was a solitary voice on this in the facilities uh discussion which is that I have serious skepticism about the claims about the safety improvement that's going to occur from this project and I think if you look at what another district so my point is I would advocate especially if we have more room um in a sense moving one up in the queue and moving that back into the second group and I think the point is that there's more of a need for classroom space than there is for the drop off. Now, if we pass both or if there's more space, then this there's no

099tradeoff. Um, but that would be the way that I would structure this, but that's going to be a larger discussion. And I think our time tonight is better if we discuss the field because I think that was the that's the bigger um question dispute and I think there is at least I I will hold my dissent and let's discuss the field. >> Thank you. I think we can revisit that once we have a tighter look at the numbers and we think we know what some of that might look like. We can revisit that if anyone else would like to talk about that in terms of what stays and what moves to Jim's point earlier. So yeah, if I could recommend, I think you were right to say, "Hey, um, and and really it's Jamie and

100often and Carl because the rest of you, well, I guess you were in our last facilities committee meeting, but um, Christine, but um, are you okay with one and two as it exists knowing that some of two may go into one pending future discussion?" And I think really for tonight, I think just saying, are you okay with a Proposition three that is one of these athletic fields or make the case that you would like to see two athletic fields? Um, and let the committee go back and and make a less wishy-washy recommendation, but maybe just kind of get the consensus tonight of yes, we're okay with uh approving one or two fields to be put out as a proposition. >> Would you like the board's opinion on what field it should be? If if they

101have a strong one, I'm happy to take it. If they don't, I'm happy to say I'm happy to have them say committee, tell me. >> Okay. All right. Loftton, do you mind if we start with you? Just what do you think about the fields one, two, three? >> I'm comfortable with um one and two. And I don't know enough about the needs with the fields to be able to um make a decision. So, company or committee, tell me. >> Fair enough, Carl. >> I'm all in favor of uh projects uh one and two. And as far as ball fields, I don't >> you look for the committee to >> give a recommendation. >> What's that? >> You you'll look for the committee to make a recommendation, more formal recommendation. Okay, >> Richard, >> I'm on

102the committee so I >> forgot. waiting for everybody up else. >> Brendan's on the committee. Um, I was just gonna talk. Jamie, >> fine. Um, I'm just going to reiterate prop one and two sounds great. Three, I leave it to you guys and to the schools to duke it out and then to voters to vote on it. I think it sounds great, but I have no idea which is needed more. >> Um, all the above. I would just put my two cents in that um I would I would ask that you really look at the the high school. It feels like there's some inequity there with really, you know, with regards to the fields like the football field being brand new, the track there being brand new, but then baseball and soccer, the other fields,

103you know, they'd have to wait another however long to get those redone. Um and so I would just ask the committee to really evaluate that and the impact that could have c on the culture um you know the community etc. >> So the only um I think that's a great point. I'll just say that soccer though does compete on the new field. So football, soccer, lacrosse all do their games or matches >> on the new field >> on that field. So >> So the only thing would be the baseball field >> baseball and softball. Now, look, it would also um I don't know um I don't have a high school athlete um so I don't know the practice schedules, but I'm sure between a junior varsity and a varsity um for football, soccer, both boys

104and girls. So, that's six teams right there. Plus, I think there's freshman football. So, that's you've got seven teams who I'm sure all want to practice on that. Um, so I'm sure that they would welcome if you if you even to throw out the argument of, okay, you're going to play all of your games here, >> I'm sure they would still welcome additional area to have practices. >> And I'm and I know there's a lot of people in the community who would um the middle school field would serve the community, but when it's like our students and our school sponsored sports, I feel like we really have to look at the high school. That's just my opinion. >> Well, yeah. And the middle school would also give you modified sports and would give you um

105you know you could have competitions on that field. You could have varsity or university competitions at the middle school. Um if you need to double schedule, you know, boys soccer's playing here, girls soccer's playing there, varsity's here, JP's there. There's lots of different options. Um but yes, we >> But neither cover baseball softball. >> Correct. >> Okay, John. Okay, sounds like this is wrapping up and so I'm going to throw a fly into the ointment and I apologize, but I think it's important to just bring up because the last recommendation or consensus I should say from the facilities committee was the energy performance contract. Okay, where we last left that walking out of that meeting was kind of discontin the work moving forward for the energy performance contract. Um, and the committee asked that Walter

106and I sit down and kind of look at some of the work that was included in those EPCs to see if there's anything that's of priority that we think should go into uh the current capital project as proposed. So, I just kind of want some consensus from the board if we are not if we're going to discontinue that work because there is work taking place behind the scenes that we would stop and and refocus attention and energy. >> So, let me address that because I think of the members of the committee, I was the most in favor of the energy performance contract. Um if if I if I was the only decision maker in here, I would put the energy performance contract ahead of the fields and not do the fields. Um that was not

107the consensus in the room. The reason why and people should know that we can do the energy performance contract without a public vote. If we do it through a public vote, we improve or we get our full aid. I'm not going to be careful how I say this, but the point is that there is an advantage if we do put it to a vote and it's approved in a vote. Um, but I think the reason why I think maybe we want to suspend at least investigating that is that we put a lot on our plate. And I think the point about it is it's a very good idea. Personally, I would prioritize it among some of the other things that we put on in the first and second proposition. Um, but I think that this

108gets to the point where it just the total dollar number increases and I don't think that's as important. But I think it's confusing about what this capital project is. So the capital project becomes an energy efficiency fields classroom space drop off kitchen and you get this kind of like um kitchen sink type of capital project which given the time between now and the vote is not advantageous to any of those priorities you know and I think the point about it is that we have a we have a means to revisit that that doesn't go through the public referendum or public proposition process and so I think the priority right Now, and I'm saying this as an advocate for the EPC, is to focus on the other things that have the consensus and do those right

109instead of trying to do five things and, you know, half halfway do a few things. Well, I think would be the my advice for how to approach this at this point. >> Thank you. Any other comments? I just want to um add to that because I I agree with that and um you know I think that whenever we we've spoken to leaders from other districts for a variety of reasons whether we're you know asking them about we've talked to them in facilities committee those that have done successful projects superintendents from other districts that have done successful projects the theme that always comes out is there there has to be a story around the project. Like what are you and I only mentioned this now because Christian kind of just brought it up like you don't

110want it to be this hodgepodge of different things where it just feels like you're grasping for anything that you can reach. Um and I think that we, you know, when we talk about the the classrooms, the fields, I think we should keep that in mind. What are we trying to accomplish here? What are we what message what story are we going to tell the community when we ask them to support this? And I don't want any I I want us to be totally open to any combination of projects that m that fit our priorities. We don't just say what are our favorite things among that which is on the sheet in front of us, but what do we think this district needs and what are we willing to advocate for to the public? Um there's

111a lot of plates up in the air. You know, we're going to find out more about what we can afford. Um hopefully by Wednesday at 6:30 um prior to 6:45, 6:50 even I'll take um going to update the slides live. But uh when we get those answers, I think it'll be easier to prioritize this stuff. But I I know I'm just I want us to be open to like we don't want to let the marketing lead the way as as Christian said before, but we I I don't think it's a copout at all to say what story are we telling about where we are in in at this moment and where we want to take this district in the future with this project. Uh because ultimately we are going to have to take this to

112the public and we can't just say trust me and we've got to be able to convince them. And I I just want to be sure we have a uh that the projects reflect the priorities uh and that narrative. >> So can I just add something to what Brendan said? I my concern obviously the marketing is one concern and I think Brendan understands that better than anyone on in this day but it's also the stress we're putting on Mr. Frank because there's a lot of things that go into preparation. It's not just a matter of putting it out there and having voting on it. There's a lot of preparations. calculations are um Triton um tetrate techch that have to do the preparations to get these to a final state and we're not there on some of

113these things even right now and so the point about it is really the things that people don't see about the administration and the preparation work that is essential and we have a certain amount of time that's not going to change between now and May and that's where I think my emphasis would be in addition to just what the community will be able to understand or not understand and Not that's part of it, but there's even more concerns I think and doing this well given the time that we have >> and I think like you said earlier Christian that energy project can be done a year or two years from now more easily than a whole big capital project done. Okay. So um utilities committee is meeting. We're going to get some more data. I'm back

114with a recommendation based on the proposition number three and we'll continue the discussion at our next meeting. >> Anyone want to stand and stretch? >> Just thank you. I appreciate the support the discussion. It's very good. >> Thank you, John. >> And I appreciate EPC clarity. We're good. >> All our my very detailed questions and having all the answers right away. I I will say on the EPC if there are any things there that are ticking time bombs, we should move them into, you know, >> we did take a look at them. Um I'm going to ask Triton to review the ones that we did take a look at because that might be potential project work that comes in. So there there was there's >> a dozen >> maybe total across the district wide that

115we felt um there they could be some uh big ticket numbers. So we'll see. >> Thank you. Okay, our next item up for discussion is continuing continuing our discussion on alternate polling site. Um, John sent the board a very detailed recap of, you know, the options, the cost, etc. John, do you want to take it from here or >> Sure. I can just I can add a little color if that's okay. >> Great. So, the question came up about um adding an additional um uh budget vote site. Um and we discussed this last year, so I did recycle some information. There's some changes from last year's information, so I provided a new update. Um so, kind of the status quo is really where we um stood last year. Um has a cost of roughly uh

116$17,000, a little over $17,000. Um and that's kind of the all-in costs. We moved this year to using an electronic sign-in process. So, similar to when you go vote in general elections, uh you go and sign in. We were uh formally using a a poll book process. Um so, we moved to electronic signin number one for a couple different reasons. Um we were looking at the data last year, so I wanted to be able to look at data a little bit easier. Um I built some money into the budget for this in order to do that. Um we can reduce a couple costs with personnel. Um, but again, there's some initial upfront costs. So, so the May 26 option is is what we're calling it. It looks like it's $47,800 for for that cost. And

117that does include the cost if we have to do a second vote, right? So, if our budget does get voted down, we have to have the ability, the financial power to go back and do a second vote. Um, whether we're going out with the same tax levy, a lower tax levy, um, or or a zero. Um, and then if we are to add in another location, you're looking at $58,100. Um, and that's just kind of like the basic costs and does not include um costs for rental space. So that's assuming that we're we're assuming that role here in district if there's a space here in district um and and that our Wi-Fi can support it and all that. If we have to go outside the district, let's say, and I'm just for argument sake, we're

118going to use a firehouse. Are they going to charge us for a rental fee for that? And then can their technology infrastructure support our our sign-in process and the voting machine process? Um, so we would want to know we would want to know that all that information and what do we have to purchase there. So, those are just some of the outliers there. And I added some just considerations um in my uh update. And then I added some statistics, some data just about our budget vote history over the past 12 years really uh with a 10-year average, you know, what was our uh adopted tax levy, uh what was our maximum allowable, what was our approval ratings, and how many votes did we get. So I think there there is potential impact there if you

119do a second site whether you're going to get more or less people and what's your success rate? Thanks. >> So can I just recap some of the costs after um I I just add some follow-up questions. So with as is it's about 17,000 if we do it um with the iPads and and all of that it's 47,000 but if we're if we get everything passed on the first go round it's about $28,000 and that technology is aidable I learned so we get back around 17,000 so that will cost us about 115 to use that if if we don't need a second vote but we have I understand we have to budget for it, but that would be the case. And then if we add a second location, that is going to add 10,000 plus a

120rental fee to that 11,000 after eat. Even though that Adidable money comes next year, I'm just kind of like bottom line it. >> Bottom line. >> So bottom line to add a second location when it when all the numbers have been balanced out and if we don't have to do um a second day vote oh bless you. um we're maybe um $26,000 to to do a second day. >> Sounds about right. >> Second location, excuse me. Thank you. Okay. So, I think at our last meeting, um the board was in agreement, not in agreement, but they were open to the idea of a second location, not to the idea of moving locations. Um I think that was the consensus. So I'll just open it up for discussion, comments, questions. >> Can I just follow up

121on the numbers arriving at 26? So the um obviously I was I appreciate that. Um so the 47800 for the to go digital this year, you already factor that into the 2526 budget. Is that right? >> That's correct. Yeah. So, and and that's including the backup, the second vote. Correct. >> Um, and then to add the second site, so the 58 number was the 47 plus the $10,300 for the extra site. So, my understanding I I was expecting you to end that number that discussion with the actual year-over-year cost to well, not the year-over-year that then the cost that we would have to add on top of what you've already budgeted to add a second location would be 103, not 26. I don't understand. >> It would be about 10,300. Then you need if you're

122doing a that's assuming you're on site, >> right? And my math was not playing the already budgeted numbers. I was just >> okay, >> straight math. So the incremental cost, which is what we're deciding in terms of adding a second site, rough math, I was saying 15. The 103 plus a rental. I was overestimating. >> Oh, so Oh, so we said it was about 15 to rent it. >> No, no, no, no, no, no. I'm sorry. I was saying it's it's um 103 for a a second site and I just was overestimating if we went off site. Like what's worst case? Maybe it would cost us5,000. I I have no idea. I was just hypothetical. >> Got it. A uh an event space you want to rent for something on the water. >> I I

123don't know how. >> Yeah. You know, it could range. Listen, you could you could get it for free, right? Who knows? Somebody could give it to us for free. I don't know. We have >> I was worst case scenario planning to >> Okay. >> Yes. But the conservative approach I appreciate. So, the incremental cost to add a second site, which is what we were deciding, $13,000 roughly is the estimate. Christian, >> so I want to address a few points in uh John's memo. Obviously, the public hasn't necessarily seen the exact memo, so I'll try to describe them as well as kind of try to respond to them. I first want to address your third point about considering the impact on the outcome of the budget vote, candidates, things, and I just think we need to

124bracket that out and not not even consider that because in the same way where we can't advocate for we can only provide factual information, we're not allowed to influence the vote with the public money. You should never decide your election process or decision process by what you think might have a favor to one outcome or the other. And I think we really need to not consider that. That should not be a consideration at all because otherwise you would have politicians designing processes and democracies that would favor the incumbents over let's say challengers. And that's a very key part to the process and I don't think even I think we should not even talk about that or that should not be a consideration. The second thing is there is an assertion that this would be disruption

125to the high school which is why we're considering other sites. And while I'm not advocating for this, and I'm not sure I accept that, although I will defer to building administrators, uh the Friday of of that week is a school holiday. Some schools don't have it as a school holiday. If the logistics of having it during a school day are so so difficult to accomplish, there's a very simple no additional dollar way to do that, which is simply what we're going to we done every single year for different reasons, which is to amend the school calendar and move the Friday to a Tuesday. I'm not advocating for that. What I'm saying is there's a very simple way to do it if you actually think about the merits of having a voting site at different places.

126And so the point about that that doesn't cost anyone any additional money. The number of instructional days are the same. The contractual days for teachers are the same. And that is already on the schedule. And if we had a lot of school days, we'd be moving it anyway. I'll just leave it there is that I think this is a soluble problem. the I do have an issue and last year I voted against adding the iPads to the voting process when that was in the discussion and it's the reason why I voted against it despite my positions for increasing access improving the process making it more fair is that I don't see there's any value to the public for paying more for technology that doesn't necessarily is required because as I said last year school board

127budget votes are not governed by election law in New York State. They're governed by education law and there's a presumption of regularity which means you do not need to have a perfect book. You do not need to show that the burden of proof is on a challenger against let's say the entity. And what does that mean? When we take a vote, we do eyes, we raise hands. We could do it in a much more, you know, formal way, which means we could do it like our uh town of Cornwall does it and goes around the room and each of us casts a vote individually as we circle around the deis. We could get an electronic device which where we manually and correctly record our vote. And there are times when the vote has been misrecorded.

128Um the point is that we don't need to do that because there's assumption that it's a public process. It's visible. We can do raised hands. we can do a voice vote. And so I'm not sure what the value of where we won't have an extra the cost of an additional voting site that would likely make the election fairer and more representative of the actual community, but we will spend that same amount of money to add technology, which I don't think has any value to the outcome of the vote or to the community. It just makes our lives easier. And whether it's aidable or not, it doesn't seem like that's worth it to me. So I I don't know and this was in the discussion and the way that I said it last year is that

129you know if I ask you for Corolla and you quote me a Cadillac well the price is going to be higher and I think the thing is there's nothing wrong with the poll book process and I do have a concern about that because with the poll book having a digital probook allows us to analyze the data in a way that would allow people to see who voted in a way that would make it a lot easier. And as someone who went through two poll books the analog way, that effort that I had to put in is what prevents a lot of other people who have the right to view that. And it would allow us to have this information assembled in a very easable usable easy way to search and will allow that to information

130to be manipulated whether it's by local political parties who then would see who are the most likely and dedicated voters because that tends to be their core voters in a in any election, the ones who vote in a schoolboard election. And I think there would be a potential for abuse that would not be worth the cost. So I would advocate not doing that. I think the analog way is efficient. It serves a purpose. And I think overall that it's cheaper. And I think the value of having a second polling site um is more valuable. And I I just want to say that I've said a lot of words about this. And it's not because I think this is the most important thing in Cormal Central School District. It's just that the things that I presented

131the last meeting were fairly obvious over a year and a half ago. Common sense. And then, you know, you go and collect the data and you show that yeah, it's pretty much what it is that there is quite a bias in the school board, the budget elections about who actually shows up to vote. And you know, we have vote. Anyway, I'll I'll leave it there, but I think the point is what I would say is two voting sites. I think if there's one voting site, it really should be at the best voting site that's likely to have the fairest sampling of the district and reflects the community's intent and will be what we should aim for. with our comments. >> I think my only comment is what I said last time, whenever that was. Um,

132is that it makes me nervous to move instead of adding an additional site when there's so much communication about this vote on the capital projects and everything going on. I fear that there would be a huge amount of people who don't come out to vote because they go to the wrong polling site, whatever. Not like we can't handle the communication, but I just think it's a lot of information, which I think is why a lot of us move towards, okay, if we're going to move the voting site, which I think is a good idea, let's still have it at the original site as well. Um, and I still feel that way. >> Thank you, Richard. >> Just a question about what she brought up with the iPads or the technology. I know now they, you

133know, we have early voting for general elections. Would that would that mean that if we had two sites, people could go to either or or would they have to be assigned either the high school, let's say, or the middle school? >> We would um the way we would set it up is that they go to either or. >> If you wanted to set them up that they would uh have to go to a designated location, we could do it that way. Um I don't know if we'd be able to do that this year at this point because when you do your build, your build goes in one way. So, I think we built for for one location. So, if one location is just being split into two, I think we're okay at this. >> Okay.

134Follow up on that. Um, they can go to either or if we have digital because we'd be able to uh identify who voted instantly at each site. Now, I'm actually racking my brain if I'm remembering town elections or board elections. We don't we don't sign anyone in digitally. We just have we mark them off in the in the physical book. Right. Sign the book. Yeah. So if we have for argument sake if we were analog then we would have to assign people to specific polling places. Is that right? >> Correct. So that's that's the advantage to having the the digital. >> I don't think that's the case, but I'm not a lawyer and I don't think anyone else around this is on the education law because you have to go you can compare two voting

135books from two different sites. Remember the presumption of regularity is that there's not a right into voting. It's not like an it is carried out as an election. It is not an election. The original's budget vote was like a corporate me um corporate uh meeting or um like a condo board meeting. We could have the vote by just everyone gathering and doing it Iowa caucus style in a large gym and have a voice vote. There is no reason to actually record the individual votes. And that's why the concern for fraud, which is minuscule, as I said in the last time, is not a it's not a legal it's not a legal requirement. And if you look at some districts that have multiple sites, they collate it on a Google Sheets that they embed in their

136website and you can have it in real time. And so the district where I work in Wingers, which has six voting sites and I'm there in Cornwall and seeing us count the vote, they have their six fight six sites collated at least an hour before ours are out in real time because that's what the requirement is. You could do it actually on a spreadsheet. There are other ways to do that and that's why there's not a requirement to assign them to a district. If you're carrying out a regular town, government state election, yes, you would have to assign people to a voting site because those are voted geographically. Um, so if you go back to the original school budget votes where you had elementary schools, people would just gather at their local elementary school and

137that's why you're allowed to do it that way because that is actually what the original meeting was. it evolved into an election as a matter of efficiency, not as a matter of legal requirement. And so the point is while there is a suggestion that you follow election law um as kind of a model, there is not a legal requirement that you have to meet the same standard. In the same way as I was saying before, we can have a vote by a voice vote or we can individually record the vote. We are not required to individually record the vote and so we can carry out a vote that way. we don't need the technology to do that or necessarily assigning people in a particular order. >> So I hear what you're saying that we don't

138have to do it a certain way but I think um the means of you know public my opinion at least public trust and continuity and also you know what people are used to. I think people want to go in, cast their vote, have it count as a specific thing, and then there's there's little um banter of, you know, people voting more than once or um you know, so I understand it's not necessarily a requirement, but I I would advocate that we follow the election process. Um so I think what we're really need to decide is now sounds like it's twofold because one um Christians raised the issue of do we go stay analog or go digital um and then two do we pursue a second location for voting? All right. Can I just ask a

139question? Because the digital move was in the budget last year. Was that already decided or was that just something that you budgeted for? Just >> I budgeted for it and I've set up. We can do analog. Nothing prevents us from going poll books. >> Sorry. What are the advantages of going digital besides the fact that we can say like we know I don't think there's going to be voter fraud during the schoolboard election but like so we can say like this was all legit and this is like besides that what are the benefits of going digital? >> It's just a streamline approach. We we um generally hire about uh 13 people to sign people in on poll books. So what we narrow that down is really five or six people um on that and then

140they'd sign in through the iPad approach. You can still print out who who voted. You can look at their location. You can disagregate the data um very easily. You can f have live um real-time statistics. So I can look at that, you know, who's p how many people are voting per hour. Look at all that. And if we had two sites, we we have to hire workers for both sites. So digital would be less at each site. Analog presumably be more. Not the whole number perhaps because now we're going to split people theoretically. >> Yeah. You'd still want, you know, x amount of pole workers there uh with the books versus less for iPads. Those are what the numbers I are based on. So we weigh how many people we're going to need if we

141were to use digital. other comments, questions. >> Do we want to go around like we did with the uh >> Yeah. >> deals maybe? >> Um Jamie, can we start with you this time? Where where what are your thoughts related to pulling location and digital versus analog? >> Um it seems like since we already budgeted for going digital and that's hate to say like the way the world's going, but it like makes sense like why not get more information and be able to have that data year-over-year. So I say yes. And I think that two polling sites make sense. As I did last year, I support two voting voting sites, but if we decide on one voting site, I have a clear preference about what I think is the better of the one. I uh

142agree with Jamie. I think the digital um makes sense for a number of reasons and with the incremental cost of only 10,000 for the additional site. Uh I would be in favor of that. I am curious to hear where it would be though because I am not as uh enthusiastic about the site if we have to explain to people where it is. you know, if it's like in a place that no one's ever heard of or like a lot of people haven't heard of. Um, so I know we want to we want to build this progressively and make decisions and then figure out the you know how it's done, but uh yeah, I I give my conditional approval conditional on finding a place that actually works um and that is within a reasonable cost. >>

143Yeah. for the two polling sites, um, analog versus digital. Me, my priority is the two sites. So, if we had to, if cost was an issue, I would say don't do the iPads. Um, but either way is fine with me. >> Either way, meaning digital or analog is okay. >> I am in for the two sites. Um, I'd like to see the two sites and I'm also with the analog Jim, >> uh, I remain unconvinced that we need a second site. So, I would say keep it at the middle school and keep it with paper book and roll like we have been. But, uh, apparently that's not going to happen. So, there you go. often. I think I'm pretty close to what Richard said in that my priority is that there be two sites and

144um that you know if cost is an issue that I don't think we need to go digital but if we decide that we want to do that I'm fine with that as well but um priority being the two sites >> and I'll just add that um I like the idea of two sites I will say as someone who lives on the other side. I I kind of always knew where I was going to have to go for things, you know, at certain points. Um, but I'm I am in favor of it because I would really like to see the data in terms of, you know, what impact it has on turnout and, you know, the entire community having a voice. So, I'm in favor of it as a as a you know, a test. And

145of course, if the cost is minimal, I just there's no harm in doing it. Um, and then I do like the idea of digital giving us real-time data. Um, and you know, I heard I heard your concerns, Christian, but I I like the idea of uh, you know, real-time data, quick answers, etc. I understand other districts can do that. I think it would just might take us a little while to get there with everything else we have going on on our plate um to adapt those kind of changes. But um so I guess the next step from here is to put resolution on the agenda next the next meeting. Um and it looks like two sites. >> Wouldn't we need to in order to create a resolution with any teeth? Wouldn't we have to name

146the second site though? >> Would it be I mean >> I don't know if you have to to commit to having two sites. >> I mean I I don't know. I guess that's up to the board. >> Wouldn't we have to name what the second site is? If you're just writing the resolution, wouldn't you have to There would come a point where you'd have to say what that is. Not >> we'd have to bring up Exactly. >> We'd have to figure out where it's going to be. Yeah. >> Okay. and and um so one of the things I'd like to bring up is that we have the second one at the high school. >> So can I just um just about the requirement? I think the only thing we would need to do is update

147the budget calendar which is where we name the location of the sites. Um as you remember back in December I had mentioned leaving that blank or undecided until this was settled. Uh right now it says the middle school. I think if we just would amend that that is the only thing we need to do. I don't know if there's a time frame where we need to name that. Um, as far as before the election, I don't think I there's a there's a logistics about naming it and communicating that information. And then there's the um, you know, what I think the legal requirement about designating it is. I don't think we're close to either one of those. Um, as I So, my point about it is is that if the resolution is for two sites, I

148think we can do that and then also amend the budget the budget calendar. Um given I will just say this and I think it's pretty clear I've been one of the more advocates for this I don't think if we the more time we spend on this is going to make it better. uh as I've said we have a lot of things on our plate that are substantively more important and I think the point is that at this point we should you know opt you know have a tendency to toward the most direct way forward if this is what we're deciding and not spend a lot of time um putting angels on the head of a pin about exactly what the best site is and all the and all those types of issues um because it

149is now displacing some other concerns and that's why it was brought up as early as it was the past two years so that it would not bleed into the budget process. >> So, so, so Christine, basically what we're at with he's basically saying, "No, let's not pick a place right now, right?" >> And, and so I'm going the opposite way being that you're going to be writing this up for the next board meeting is that the second site be the high school. >> I know the next board meeting though, I don't know that we can commit to one or the other because we have to look at what the impact that would be on the building itself, on the flow of traffic, of people, of parking. So I think we just have to we have

150to assess is that truly the best site or is there an alternative that would have you know less impact and would be you know just an easier flow etc. So I just don't know that we'll have that information. I don't think it's a fair expectation to have that wrapped up by our next meeting. But I do think we should and I don't know if we have to have a vote on it but I think we should have a vote that okay we're going to pursue a second location that is TBD based on um or maybe we don't have to have a vote. Maybe that's the direction we're going and we Okay, so it doesn't have to be. Okay, so we do that. >> I think the next move is is what Christian described. We just

151amend that vote that we took back in December, but that would at that point we have to be amending it with an actual location. >> Okay. So then we can talk about location and and >> I think we would just get a little bit of legal guidance on it. Christian is right. There's certain notifications regarding the budget that we have to put out and where the budget vote is going to take place. Whether that has to happen now um or not, I'm not sure. So I would like legal guidance just about adding the second location and the notification of it at this point. There will be certain notifications that we have to send out through the budget process that we do um through the through the traditional meth and and the capital project resolution. Correct.

152And I think it's probably the same date as those >> all all those dates will will line up. >> So at our next meeting, maybe we can just find out what legal said and we'll take it from there. >> Yeah. And then and then I think we have to explore what that location is. What what the best location is. >> Is that we good? Okay. All right. I just want to make sure I don't know who's Okay. Great. Thank you. Um All right. Now we are on to our uh second recognition of visitors. Public comments. You can step up to the microphone. The same the same guidelines exist as earlier. Um, let me just ask you to state your name and comment. >> My name is Greg Groby. Um, Mineral Springs Road. Uh, this is

153my first board meeting in 25 years. >> Welcome. >> I can tell you that nothing has changed. The aid is still 57% 58%. And I have a copy of what the Orange County Board of Election gave the district when it went from having a separate voter registration to using that. And interestingly enough, they screwed it up. So you ended up having a people who were not in the district being able to vote in the district because at least that first year was wrong. So this will go to what you were saying. I I think because of where you are, where you're talking about the uh cost versus story that the simpler you can keep it this year, the better you're going to be. I was the faciliter facilitator of the 21st century committee for the

154school district. This was the one that came up with a uh school aware by Nema. The community turned it down. we had about a 30 or 40% higher vote turnout, but we still went down by about a thousand people. Now, I don't think the community is the same one it was at that time, but um you have to control the narrative and say why the current facilities are not serving the educational needs of this district. The people who vote for the school district have ears for that and it will be co-opted become about money if you don't and it's not easy. We failed the the committee that I was and and we came to consensus 21 people and on that committee were people who had fought themselves in the in the Cornwall local letters to

155the editor to the ground. uh and we came together so the community can do it and it has changed so some of my knowledge is is old. The other thing I've heard and this is the facilities committee at the time of the 21st century committee part of it was looking at student population by grade level. This this school at that time housed a thousand elementary school students where the private school in the village at 350 and Willow I think was at 450 and the high school at 1,200. There are optimum sizes and I do not know if the board has considered how to move towards making this school smaller and if you're going to put eight more classes in it, you're doing exactly the wrong thing in terms of making this a studentfriendly environment. And

156I was shocked, but not shocked about the gun threat that was reported on by another person. Um, the middle school is too big. Kids get lost in it and we're stuck with the facilities we have. But um we should I think always look at ways of getting the ratio of students in a building to be optimum for the psychological development of the children. Um too late for this one unless the vote goes down and then you're back to the drawing table. But at the time that I ended my service in the second committee came up with what now was the high school campus. We could have closed Willow Avenue, Cornwall, and Hudson, and built a new elementary school at zero cost because the energy cost was enough to pay for the bond. Now, one last

157thing, as you're marketing this thing, the 9W site was 90 old 95%able to the best of my knowledge. and the middle and the uh West Cornwall site was 80%able when it finally all came out. If the community, and I'm willing to help because I was the facilitator, um if they could learn that being grumpy and voting no because they had the various private reasons cost them two high schools. because this goes into that aid thing. It's crazy, but it needs to be explained because we paid for two high schools because we were obstinate Cornwwellites and I don't know that that's changed. So, thank you for the time. Thank you for your service. Um, wonderful to hear the discussion and uh, as I said, I feel like I didn't miss anything. It was a repeat. Sir,

158could you repeat your name? >> Yes. Greg Groby. >> Groby. G R O B Y. >> Yeah. Oh. Oh. The other thing which I've talked with with your um interim superintendent and and and John, um there's stuff that you need to be aware of the town's doing and it could have serious impacts on our budget. I don't know where it is because of course it's all executive session kind of stuff. But if you're not in the loop and up on that uh oh that's the other thing because we're going to have the extra taxes for the next few years at the town level that's another headwind that's that the district's going to have you know this. So >> thank you. >> Any other public comments? Okay. Um so we have board closing comments but I'll

159remind everyone that um we have to go back into executive session. So uh but we'll start with uh Loftton. >> Good Jim >> pass. Um I'll be brief. um to quote um the Roman writer Senica and maybe this is a thought in relation to the capital project happiness consists of two things first having what's essential and number two knowing what is enough. Okay. Um I uh thank you everyone for your energy. We've been meeting since 5:30 today. So, I would need a motion to go into executive session to uh continue discussion about um uh personnel issues. Uh Brendan, thank you. May I have a second? Loftton, thank you. All in favor? For the sake of everyone here, we're going to come back and we have no more business to discuss. So, we'll just be coming

160back to close the meeting at that point. But thank you.