GFPS School Board Meeting (February 9th, 2026)

001Mhm. >> Mhm. >> We'll call to order the regular meeting of the school board for Monday, February 9th, 2026. Excuse me. Excuse me. We'll call to order the regular meeting of the school board for Monday, February 9th, 2026. Just one reminder, this is not a public meeting. This is a regular meeting of the school board held in public. While there will be time for public comments, that time is not yet. First item on the agenda is the reci- recitation recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance. I invite you to stand as you're Thank you. 1A, the reading of our school board meeting norms, Mr. Manley. The school board meeting norms are: Be prepared, be on time, value and respect each other, exercise thoughtful deliberation and conversation, be professional at the board table and when visiting with

002the general public, speak up when the norms are not being followed, and advocate on behalf of students and keep the community in mind. Thank you. Item two, the approval of our agenda. I would seek a motion to approve tonight's agenda as outlined in your board packet. It's been moved by Mr. Palmisano. Is there a second? Second by Mr. Manley. Any additions or corrections? Take a roll call vote. Flynn. Yes. Klevin. Yes. Anderson. >> Yes. Hodek. Yes. Palmisano. >> Yes. Lunn. Yes. Manley. Yes. Larson. Yes. Burger. >> Yes. Nine yes, zero no, zero absent. Motion passes. Under recommendations for discussion, 3A school board election process timeline. Mr. Bombak. Thank you, President Burger, members of the board. Um inside tonight's board package is articulates the step uh the process that we'll follow here in anticipation of the

003June election. So in the board memo, it just overcomes this. This year there's a term of five board members who are up for election. That includes those seated by Dave Burger, Josh Anderson, Dr. Sherry Hodek, Joel Larson, and Bill Palmisano. Pursuant to century code, an individual seeking election to the board of a school district must prepare and sign documentation stating the individual's name and the position for which the individual is a candidate. In addition, there's two two additional documentations that need to be submitted, statement of interest and the campaign disclosure statement. All statements of interest must be filed with the school district business manager or mailed to the possession of the business manager no later than 4:00 p.m. the 64th day before the election. Um which um excuse me, I'm missing that date here. April.

004>> April 6th. Just want to point that out at the same time here. Um [clears throat] the election here for the school district, they operate a little bit differently around the state. We do ours in conjunction with Grand Forks County. So those are administered through um and we're in effect there leading up to the June 9th election date. So key dates just to articulate here, March 7th is 30 days before the deadline for candidate names to be printed on the ballot. The official notice of this deadline must be published in the official newspaper of the county or city or county. April 6th, deadline for candidate candidates to file election forms with the business manager. Completed forms must be received by the business manager no later than 4:00 p.m. There'll be a drawing for the ballot

005placement for the order they appear. And June 9th is the election date. These forms are available, so I encourage anybody who's interested to reach out to myself directly. You can reach me at my email that's printed in the memo or my phone number printed in the memo. Thank you. Reminder, this is uh recommendation for discussion only this evening. Any questions from board members for Mr. Bombak? Yes, Mr. Klevin. This is all statutory and governed by state law. Um yes, very precisely. Any other questions for Mr. Bombak? I'll just reiterate the key dates before we move on. You'll see a notice by March 7th. Uh candidacy uh filing paperwork is due on April 6th. Election, June 9th. Thank you, Mr. Bombak. Move on now to item four on our agenda. This is our public comment period.

006We're about to enter a public comment period. The purpose of the open meetings law in North Dakota Century Code is to provide members of the public with access to the meetings of a governing body of a public entity, allowing them to observe and monitor. By state law, every regular meeting of the board must include an opportunity for an individual to provide public comment. The law requires that an individual providing comment at a meeting provide to the governing body in writing their name and address. Public comments must be pertinent to the district, and they not interfere with the orderly conduct of the meeting, may not be defamatory, abusive, harassing, or unlawful, may may include confidential or exempt information and may not be directed at personnel. At this time I believe I have 11 public comment cards

007filled out. Uh Mr. Glaspy, we have at least one additional card. Two more? Which I believe brings us to 13. Uh if your comments are in regards to the budget realignment recommendation, please know that the school board will be taking action on that agenda item during tonight's meeting. Each individual is allotted up to 3 minutes to speak. As we've done throughout this process, I will be grouping these comments into themes so that we can gather feedback and information uh and in a sense wrestle with each concept one at a time. So, I'll give you the uh first uh speaker and the next so that we can be prepared. Uh we'll take We have several comments about music programs either specifically or in general. So, we'll take those first. Uh first up I have Eli Stevenson

008and Tyler York. You'll be next, Eli and Tyler. Hello everyone. I'm Eli Stevenson, a sophomore music therapy major at UND, and I'm here to ask you all once again to reconsider the proposed cuts to the music programs in the Grand Forks Public School District. You have undoubtedly heard the issues with the logistics, the workload, the enrollment numbers, and have even heard some personal stories from students in the past about why music matters to them, so I won't talk about that today. I want to talk about what I see in music because I do recognize that not everyone sees music and music education the same way. When I walk into a music rehearsal of any kind, I see people. Now, I know that sounds obvious, but oftentimes in schools students are reduced to their grades and

009test scores, but not once have I seen that in a music setting. I've never seen a student sitting in the back of music rehearsal crying to themselves because they don't understand like I have many times in a math class. I've never seen a student get bored and pull out their computer to do English homework like I like I have seen in a history class. For many students, these ensembles are the only part of their day where they don't have to fight through a class and do the homework just for the grade. Music is collaboration. Music is understanding. Music is passion and love and communication and community and it is not fair to take that away from anyone. All of these things, collaboration, understanding, passion, love, communication, and community are just as important if not more

010important than the number someone receives on a test or the series of numbers that make up their transcript. When asked about accomplishments on a job or scholarship application, I don't know of anyone that would put, "Oh, yeah, I passed algebra with an A+ in high school." But I do happen to know an awful lot of people who mention leadership and communication and collaborative skills that were developed through music. This is all to say that music is not some extra privilege that is thrown on top of an education, but rather a core part of a well-rounded education that should be available to all students. We all here today are showing you that music in our schools matters to us and I think it would be foolish of you all to turn a blind eye to the

011unwavering support that the community has shown. Thank you, Eli. Next up, as I said, >> [applause] >> next up we have Tyler York and then Samantha Stordalen. So, Tyler and then Samantha. Members of the board, I am Tyler York and just to cut to the chase, I'm here to ask the board to vote no on the budget realignment as it stands. Yours is not an easy task. However, the proposed the budget realignment assumes that the only path forward is to include deep cuts to our music program that is exceptional. I believe there is another course. The responsibility to keep the ship on the right course belongs to this board. And you are defining that course tonight. One path accepts the administration's conclusion that cuts to the music are unavoidable. They want a broad discretion that

012allows them to do what they deem necessary. That path ensures that every time a budget shortfall arises, music is cut again, slowly dismantling a program that will take decades to rebuild. The other path recognizes what this community has said time and again in this very room, an exceptional music program is not optional. And an excellent education includes it. That path requires clear language in the budget realignment protecting music from cuts. This is not micromanagement. This is the board setting guidelines for the administration to follow. We all want a first-class education for our students. When administrators say, "From a budgetary standpoint, our music programs are exceptional, but what makes them exceptional comes at a hefty price tag." We say that this is exactly how we want our tax dollars spent. When they ask, "What is required

013and what are the things that are really lovely, but are things that might be considered extras?" Our answer is clear. An exceptional music program is not an extra. It is not a luxury. It is a responsibility. Tonight, your vote sets the values that will guide how the budget shortfall is addressed. We ask that you vote no until clear direction is given that protects the music program. This is your opportunity to affirm that a first-class education, including an exceptional music program, is a responsibility you are willing to uphold. Thank you. Next we have Samantha Stordalen, and after that we will have Jack Berry. Samantha and then Jack, please. Good evening. My name is Samantha Stordalen. I am a current junior music education student at the University of North Dakota. I'm speaking today on behalf of the

014university's chapter of the National Association for Music Education. In 2010, I started my education in the Grand Forks Public School system. I started my music education here. My mother and my father both taught in this public school system. My mom at Century Elementary for 15 years. My dad at Schroeder Middle School for 11 years. My grandmother Emily Stordalen also was a prominent music educator in North Dakota for over 40 years. So, this cuts deep for me. As I and my brother are also studying to be music educators with the promise to stay in North Dakota because this is what we care about. As president of our chapter of NAfME at UND, I feel it is my voice that needs to be heard. Music does not compete with other core subjects. It only supports them. Taking

015away this foundation of music for students affects them from the beginning. Just this past Friday, I had the opportunity to watch Red River High School's concert choir perform as they were selected as one of the three ensembles across the state to perform at the North Dakota American Choral Directors Association convention, which was held at Red River. Those programs are not built overnight. They take years of education and years of support and years of effort to get to that level of accomplishment. A child's music education does not happen overnight. It starts from the beginning, from kindergarten or even before. However, making these cuts does affect students overnight. It affects them mentally, physically, and in across their whole school. It is our responsibility to support these students from the very beginning. And I strongly encourage you to

016rethink before voting on these budget cuts. Thank you, Samantha. >> [applause] >> Next up, we have Jack Berry and then Whitney Berry. Jack and Whitney. Hi. I'm Jack Berry. I'm Whitney Berry. Jack Berry is my son. He's currently at rehearsal at Central. He really wants to speak. I'm wondering if he could be shuffled to the bottom of the pile. Is that a possibility? We can move him to the end of the music pile if that would help. >> Great. >> ahead, Whitney, and then we will have um Eileen Clark. So, Whitney and Eileen. Good evening. My name is Whitney Berry and I'd like to speak to you tonight about the proposed cuts to music in the Grand Forks Public Schools. I'm a music prep professor at UND, a parent of three public schools, former and

017current music students, a church and community choir director, and a board member of North Dakota Music Educators Association. I've participated in, taught, and observed music education in many many settings and across many ages. I could speak for hours about the benefits of music education and quote much of the research on this topic by heart. I'm not here to do that. I'm here as a member of the music community to talk about money and values. You can tell a lot about what an individual or an organization values by how they spend their money. Here are some examples from our current budget discussion. Music stands to lose 6.5 positions. These are teachers in close contact with large groups of students, many traveling between schools to teach. The justification is that these positions are not mandated by the

018state and therefore extra. Meanwhile, the district employs 11 instructional coaches at the elementary level, one housed at each school, no traveling, minimal if any student contact. The state mandates 5.75. Filing music teachers but not coaches shows what you value. Coda contracts provide after-school choir and grade level program concerts for elementary students. The total cost for these in the district is $37,000 a year. These programs directly impact hundreds of students and families, are an extreme good value for the money. In fact, I figured it out and the approximate cost for a year of choir of one for one kid is $20 total per year. What activity can you do for your kids for $20 a year? Spoiler, nothing. Meanwhile, the board recently approved 5% raises for the superintendent in the past 2 years, totaling $21,000, raises

019for >> your comments to personnel specifically. Thank you. position I I'm just talking about position. Is that fine? Let's tread carefully. Yes. Okay. And raises for assistant and associate superintendents and retention bonuses for seven directors totaling $10,000. The board also approved raises for other high-level positions while knowing they were over budget on salaries and benefits. Choosing competitive wages and bonuses is fine, but you [snorts] are prioritizing that and valuing that over choir for 10-year-olds. Music has been unfairly singled out and targeted for cuts too many times in recent years. In the current proposal, music is taking 27% of the cuts. We've already lost excellent teachers due to job uncertainty and we'll soon lose more. The current cuts target the source of our middle and high school programs. They're going to reduce participation in orchestra, band,

020and choir, and thus make it easier to justify further cuts down the road due to low enrollment. They represent a thread that when pulled will unravel the excellence of the Grand Forks Public Schools music program as we know it, a nationally recognized program built up systematically and with the utmost care over time by the best of the best music educators. This board is made up of people who have personally benefited from our excellent music programs. Even if you did not participate as a student like our president and vice president, if you've lived in this city for any length of time, you've benefited from the robust music and arts community that exists because of these programs. Many of you ran for the school board saying that you were an advocate for the arts, but yet after

021five school board retreats, music is still on the chopping block. I'd like to remind you that you the administration works for you and you work for us. Please vote no on the cuts as proposed. Thank you. >> Thank you. Next we have Eileen Clark. >> [applause] >> After Eileen, we'll have Nick Thompson. >> [applause] >> Eileen followed by Nick, please. Eileen Clark, are you present? >> Yes, I am. Sorry. Okay. No, no worries. Eileen and then Nick Thompson, please. Okay, great. Hi, I'm Eileen Clark. Um I'm an instructor of voice and piano lessons privately here in town, and I manage Schmitt Music. Um at Schmitt's, we're responsible for about 30% of the violins, violas, and cellos that are rented by our school kids. And I'm proud about that. Um Now, in 1964 I started taking

022piano lessons from the famous Miss Roulin on Fenton Avenue. And I never looked back. By 1966 I was studying viola at Wilder School under Barb Preston and was in the Wilder chorus. Now, as you can tell, I'm trying to give you my personal history of growing up in the Grand Forks Public Schools and how that schooling gave me wings. At Valley Junior I continued with orchestra, choir under James Preston, and played piano in jazz band under Hartley Brown. At both Wilder and Valley we had daily general music classes. Daily, every day we had a general music class, even at Wilder. Um and my teachers at Valley gave me private voice lessons after school just cuz they knew I was interested. On to Central. >> [laughter] >> I played in orchestra, sang in all the choirs

023under Al Gratz, and he also gave me voice lessons after school and created an independent study harmony class for me because he knew I was serious about my future in music. I also played piano in the summer school jazz band which was directed by Ken Larson back in the day. I went on to UND for vocal performance and education, but while I was there I tested out of my first two years of music theory and I tested out of my piano classes because I had the good fortune of having um hav- having grown up at Wilder, Valley, and Central. They gave me the foundations to start college as a junior in my major. Went on to grad school on the East Coast and finally settled in to a full-time career in opera and concert work

024in New York City and traveling. I've been doing that for 40 years. I'm not done yet. And I'm a member of the unions AGMA and SAG-AFTRA. I've toured with Yo-Yo Ma. I've toured with Mikhail Baryshnikov. I've worked with Joshua Joshua Bell, Placido Domingo, Judy Collins, Angela Lansbury, Bette Midler, and others. Now, sorry for this endless bragging, but I wanted to paint a picture for you of how my being a kid in Grand Forks public schools delivered to me on a silver platter my career in the performing arts. But, that's nothing in comparison to this. I now teach private lessons in Grand Forks, New York City, and internationally on Zoom. I had a couple students with clinical depression, others with reading challenges, a few just had trouble fitting in. Here's how the Grand Forks schools helped

025them. A talented 11-year-old arrived at lessons in near tears week after week saying they didn't fit in at school and their parents alerted me about clinical depression. Our lessons did provide a bit of cheer. But, as this student became more involved in school choir they became self-confident. I saw them become a happy person. >> Pardon me? Please finish up the thought that you're on. >> Yes. Okay. Okay. Um now, I'm not [clears throat] going to say what year that was or whether that was Red River or Central, but their enrollment in choir gave them their wings to become happier people. Um and that that student is now um studying at a leading music conservatory and is on a career-bound path. Thank you. Another student had similar um challenges from a brain uh a a brain

026injury. And again, their enrollment in choir, orchestra, and band helped them excel and be um helped them overcome their reading challenges. >> Thank you. Uh we have Nick, and then next up I'll have Logan Hartzie, [applause] Nick, and then Logan, please. Hello. I am Nick Thompson. I am a current freshman in music education at the University of North Dakota. I would like to speak so then you guys could please vote no on the cuts to the music program. I will be speaking on the behalf of music educators. It takes around above 100 credits uh to become a music educator. 163 if you come to college with absolutely no credits transferred, and you need to finish all your general studies. If you combine all the credits into a four-year college plan, you are looking at around

02720 credits per semester if you are not taking any summer courses. And all these classes that relate to music education are in music theory, oral skills, piano proficiency, methods for each grouping of instruments, teaching courses, lessons for primary instruments, and maybe even secondary instruments, performing in ensembles, music technology, music history, music culture, music literature, theory, and even student teaching for a whole semester uh for a full-time job with no pay. If that sounds hectic or insane, then you'd be correct. But it's exactly what music educators do so then they could come into a classroom full of children that smile when they get to play music uh for themselves and for a large group. 6.5. That is the number of positions held by music educators here in Grand Forks that you are considering to be cut.

028These are educators who put their heart and soul into their work, wanting to teach the students of Grand Forks everything there is to music so then they can find love and appreciation for the craft of music. If I have learned anything by being in the music education major so far at the University of North Dakota, it's that music educators don't do it for the money. They do it because they love music, and they want to share that love for music with their students. They go through the chaos of college, managing all of the credits it takes to become a music educator, and all for that, so they have to fight for their jobs. It's unfair to the teachers, and it's unfair to the students who have a love for music, wanting to learn more about

029music in Grand Forks. So, I encourage everyone who has a love for music, to the music educators who do do it all for their students, to the students who put mundane amounts of practice into their instruments that they love, to the parents and grandparents who support their children and grandchildren by watching the concerts, and to any and all community members who have an appreciation for the arts, let's keep fighting to keep music in the great city of Grand Forks. Thank you very much. >> [applause] >> Logan Hartzie, and then we'll circle back to see if Jack Berry is here. Logan Hartzie. Hello. I am Logan Hartzie. I am a junior at Red River High School, and I am here to talk about music. I have been in the the the high school music department for

0303 years so far, and it has been the most beneficial portion of my entire school experience. Not only that, but I would not be part of this group without elementary and middle school music programs. Everybody around me has grown tremendously, and these experiences are provided by our teachers and our classes. The main point that I'd like to say brings about extreme recency. As of this weekend, the North Dakota American Choral Directors Association was brought together at Red River High School. As a part of the men's choir there, I spent much time talking to the men in the choir that were not from Grand Forks. >> [snorts] >> Before they found out that budget cuts towards music were possibly happening, they all talked about how Grand Forks has such amazing music programs. From choir to band

031to orchestra, all around. Not only that, but nearly all of their teachers have come from our own Grand Forks district. The future of North Dakota music education and musical growth relies on our program here. When those guys found out that there were budget cuts to our program, they stood in awe. Exceptional students all wondering why the district, known to clearly lead music education in the entirety of North Dakota, would even consider cutting up to two high school music teachers and programs like fourth grade orchestra. Therefore, I ask the Grand Forks School Board to reconsider this measure and vote no on the proposed measures. Thank you. Next we have Did someone say Jack was here? I'm looking for a >> [applause] >> Is Jack here or not here yet? Maybe somebody could Sorry. Not yet? Well,

032I do have a few that that are fairly general in nature, so we'll go to those and then we'll circle back again. So, these just talk generally, or or at least what I have on the forms, about the budget realignment or budget cuts. So, we'll take Michael Kelly and then Vedant uh and I am so sorry. Srivastava? Vedant? Sure. So, Michael and then Vedant and I would I would love for you to teach me when you're when you're up here. Uh Michael first, please. >> You said Michael Kelly first. Yes, Michael Kelly. Hello. It has recently come to my attention that the city of Grand Forks is considering broad budget cuts to schools. Tonight, many of my peers at UND have addressed their personal experiences and while they are all valid viewpoints and are all

033true, I would like to bring studies and facts to the table. I did some research when I heard about these budget cuts last week and I found a independent study that ranked Grand Forks pub- public schools, K through 12, 40th in the nation. Let us be clear about what is happening. That is the bottom 20%. And now it is asking you, the parents, to be okay with budget cuts to the school system at large. I have heard about cuts to PE programs. I looked up a study from the National Institute of Health that have said that student athletes, compared to non-athletes, have broadly increased academic performances across the board. It seems absurd to me that we would allow the system to take away those resources. You have heard quite a bit about the music programs

034tonight and I would also like to point to a study by the National Institute of Health that says that student musicians also have increased academic performances across the board and specifically increased memory, um recollection of facts, motor skills, and any subject except for physical abilities, they increase they increase their abilities. It seems absurd to me and to most parents in this room that we would even hear budget cuts proposed when the government wants money to go somewhere, it usually finds a place from to take it from. In this case, it is music, physi- physical education, and education broadly. When everything is all accounted for, every single program exists for a reason, every single club exists for a reason, every single opportunity exists for a reason, and that reason is to further all aspects of your

035students' educations, not just the immediate subject matter. I would like to ask the board to vote no on every budget cut. Thank you. Thank you. Next, we have Vedant. >> [applause] >> Hel- hello. I am Vedant Srivastava, and I'm a junior at Red River. I've been closely involved with GF PS music since elementary school, and I hope to pursue music professionally. My experience studying music at G- GF PS has greatly impacted me and continues to impact me. I would not be pursuing music if it weren't for this program and the community supporting this program. The many mentors I've had, many of which are here tonight, have had a profound effect on my growth, not only as a musician, but as a person. I uh and to restate, I would not be pursuing music if it

036weren't for those people if it weren't for the individualized attention that this um that this district's music department has provided me. My fear and many other people's fear is that um these opportunities and these experiences which I've had may not um may not be passed on to younger generations. We we've had a great number of successful musicians um uh including uh Ryan Christensen, Sarah Pugh, Chris Loffler, Brady Ritland, and the list goes on. Um without the support of the Grand Forks Public Schools uh music department I I I feel like none of these none of these great musicians would be where they're at, and I wouldn't be where I'm at without this program with without this program. So, I encourage you to vote no um uh not only in music, but on everything else. I'm

037also a 30-year German student. Uh uh thank you for your time. Thank you. >> [applause] >> Mary Caponen, and then we'll hope for Jack Berry. Mary and then Jack, please. >> [clears throat] >> Both. Jack, we'll let you breathe for a minute while Mary's at the microphone. It's all is well. I have my little timer here. My name is Mary Caponen. I live in Grand Forks, and I'm here to talk about the general budget shortfall. I would like to see this board be more fiscally responsible. I think some of the problems started a few years ago when the person whom this building is named for retired. Um different priorities were put in the budget and money went towards not towards maintenance and things like that. And all of a sudden, after a few years of

038putting off maintenance, we had to do major major maintenance on practically every school. I would like to see more responsible budgeting like that. And then one other thing I want to touch on, the budget shortfall is in um some part because of all these pilots that keep getting passed by you and the city. Whenever there's a longer than 5-year pilot, it comes before the school board for an approval vote. And um for the benefit of the people here, I will say the most recent pilot, Brookstone, that you guys passed was um for several apartments. The pilot purpose of a pilot is to attract primary businesses to Grand Forks, like a grist mill. But this is for solely for apartments, medium income. Um the base tax is $170. They got a 90% tax rate on the

039improvements after they're built. So, their taxes would have gone up to over 600,000 a year, but they got a 90% cut but from everybody, you and the city council and the county commission. Um so, they're only paying 63,000 a year plus than what essentially is the 170 base tax that was for a agricultural field. Um >> [clears throat] >> when we have nine pilots already passed and most of them are over 5 years, a few of them are under. I know you have no say in the ones under five, but it doesn't make sense when most of our property taxes goes to the school system that you are having to cut the budgets and yet you keep approving these pilots coming up. I know that there's probably two more that are going to come up

040in the next few weeks and um we can't afford to keep going at this rate, so I just hope you are more fiscally responsible in taking care of the maintenance and all these other deferred expenses and can avoid these types of cuts to the music. I happen to think music is important. And that more people contact you and the other entities that are approving these pilots. Pilots are for business development, not apartments. Thank you. >> [applause] >> We have Jack Berry and then we have a late arriving comment card that I will accept, but we we have um we do have to um um limit these to 3 minutes each, so we make sure we hear from everyone. So, Jack and then Joshua Fisher. Jack, go ahead, please. Good evening, members of the school board.

041My name is Jack Berry, a senior at Grand Forks Central. And I'm here tonight to speak against the proposed budget cuts to the music departments in our district. I've been involved with music my whole life starting at Wilder, continuing at Valley, and finally at Central. Music has been one of the things that has stayed with me throughout my entire time in the Grand Forks Public School District. Music has given me confidence, discipline, and most importantly a place where I felt like I could be myself. Music is something that I could succeed in and always improve at and that has carried into every other aspect of my life at school. For many students, especially at the elementary level, school music programs are their only access to being part of an ensemble. Not every family member can

042afford private lessons, instruments, or other outside programs. And when music is cut at that level, students miss out on their first and sometimes only chance to discover something that they love. Students are also far less likely to join music later in their school careers if they aren't exposed early. Elementary programs are where most of the foundational skills are built. If those programs are weakened or removed, middle and high school ensembles don't just shrink, but they may struggle to exist at all. Cuts like these make future cuts easier. What Once programs are reduced at the elementary level, it becomes easier to justify more music cuts down the line. I ask you to reconsider these proposed cuts and protect the music programs that have shaped students like me and continue to serve as the starting point for

043many others. Thank you for your time. Thank you. >> [applause] >> Take Joshua Fischer and then Yvonne Kalca. Joshua Fischer and then Yvonne. All right, thank you all for allowing me to make a comment even though I was a bit late. Um Ms. Whitney Berry um was sharing information that is public record when she was told to quote tread carefully. So, I have just one statement to make. I think the school board should tread carefully when they vote on these cuts. Because if it's not obvious to you yet, music students are the best and the brightest, and we are not easily pushed aside. We are strong, we are motivated, and I will do everything in my power to make sure you lose your job if you vote for these cuts. Thank you. >> [applause] >>

044I just want to reiterate comments may not be defamatory, abusive, harassing, or unlawful. Next, we have Yvonne and then Andrew Krausnick. My name is Yvonne Kelke and I teach speech and English at GFC. In fact, I've taught many people in this room. You probably don't have to guess what I'm here to talk to you about today, and that is that I think we should not discontinue our half credit of speech in as part of our language arts um curriculum requirement. I've been teaching and coaching speech and debate for 39 years and I know I'm only 38. I don't know how that happened. I can tell you that our district has been a long time the envy of our state because we have the insight to require a class for one semester. We've always had this

045class because it enhances the speaking and listening standards used in language arts and it gives our students a safe place to practice those skills. We don't teach public speaking. We teach communications, which, as you all know, we need. In this day and age, it's important more than ever to ensure that our student understand and practice such things as digital responsibility, efficacy, listening skills, responsible research, verbal integrity, and the list goes on. Also, being an English teacher, I'll tell you that those English classes aren't going to be able to suck up the speech time. It just won't happen. Because we're testing, we're taking on additional surveys, and doing many things that just doesn't allow us to do more than that. The knowledge and time that it takes to pay due diligence to the speech classes, it

046would be impossible for every English teacher to do that. I'm fully aware that most people don't like to speak in public. I do, however, tell you that I adapt to what students are capable of doing. Sometimes they come in and talk just for me. Sometimes we add a person or two. We give them confidence, we give them a voice, and we tell them that they can do it. I want to end by sharing a letter with you that I received at the end of the last semester from a student who was pretty reluctant reluctant when she first came in. Dear Mrs. Kelke, I never really got a chance to thank you correctly. So, here you go. You gave me the confidence to speak. I don't mean in front of the class. I mean even just

047to speak. I didn't ever like to talk to people because I was afraid that nobody wanted to hear what I had to say. I'm still a wreck when it comes to speaking, but you let me have a voice, even if it was just for you. I can finally speak when I need to in class. And I have never felt so happy to be able to speak to others at lunch. I now have confidence, and I can say that that's because of you. Thank you, and stay strong. Thank you. Thank you. Next we have Andrew Krosnick. >> [applause] [applause] >> Andrew, go ahead, please. Thanks, Mr. Burger. Uh my name is Andrew Krosnick, Grand Forks resident and business owner. Um these are requests and questions for public on-the-record answers. All very on topic with the deficit

048and budget realignment. Will the board adopt a clear and tax incentive policy stating you will only consider primary sector businesses for any tax incentive consideration moving forward? Non-competing primary sector additions that create real new jobs and wealth, not apartments or retail that compete with existing businesses and put a strain on the school district. Will board members publicly state your stance on tax incentives for non-primary sector businesses? Voters need to know. This is a major issue issue now across our city and the state. The [snorts] intent of these incentives is is not being followed and the entire state is taking notice. What legal guidance, if any, has the board received from legal counsel regarding the application and approval of pilots? Both as to the intent of the pilot program and also how you should assess detriment

049to existing businesses. Legal action may be coming soon if needed by us taxpayers. It's important we know what guidance you've been given. Pilot tax incentives already have impacted and will continue to impact the ongoing deficit, program cuts and classroom resources. Every dollar exempted hurts schools and hurts students. Will the board publicly acknowledge this reality and join the fight against non-primary sector incentives that drain local revenue opportunity for the school district? $50 million have been approved for exemption in the last few years. Memorial Village, Hyslop infield house, Franklin on 4th, Brookstone, Olive Ann Hotel, The Reserve. All for just a small group of development teams. Another 50 million or more coming soon if you continue incentives for apartments and retail. You recently approved a 20-year 90% pilot for a moderate income-based housing development. Your goal is

050major revenue after year 20. If the owner sells to Grand Forks Housing Authority at year 21, it will be tax exempt and you will see no revenue. Same goes for when the the board approved Memorial Village 1 and 2. 20 years 90 and 90 for 95% pilots. If the owner of that sells to UND at year 21, it's also tax exempt. No future revenue. >> [clears throat] >> You're taking major risks with our tax dollars and the future of primary education in our community. A clawback clause or stipulation that was or may be added in future pilots will not help. All of these developments are formed as separate LLCs to shield the developer from liability. They sell at year 21, their LLC is dissolved, they have no liability, no skin in the game. We look

051forward to answers on the record from the board that serves our students and taxpayers. Thank you very much for your time. I have to get back to work, but I'll tune in online to the meeting. Thank you. Thank you. >> [applause] [applause] >> Well, now I'll move on to item five on the agenda. These are Yes, Mr. Cleven? Is Is there a chance to make a comment here, or should I wait? Uh we'll be into our action items. Uh if it doesn't fall into one of 5A, B, or C, um we'll we'll follow up in 6A or B. Yep. Uh 5A, this is our consent agenda. I would seek a motion to approve the consent agenda in your board packet this evening. Move by Mr. Manley and a second by Dr. Lun. We'll take a

052roll call vote. Kamasino? Yes. Manley? Yes. Lun? Yes. >> [clears throat] >> Larson? Yes. Cleven? Yes. Hordyk? Yes. Flynn? Yes. Anderson? Yes. Burger? Yes. Nine yes, zero no, zero absent. Motion passes. Uh 5B, this is the consideration of 2026-2027 joint powers agreement between GFAB District 140 and Grand Forks District number one for educational services. Dr. Brenner? Thank you, Mr. President. Uh you have a memo in front of you. Uh the committee met. Uh the committee was uh Michelle Sheppard, president for uh District 140, and also vice president Terry Snyder was present, and Josh Anderson, Vice President for the City Board, and Dave Berger was unable to attend. Uh so, what you have in front of you are grammatical changes and date changes. With the probably the the biggest change that we made in the agreement

053is to match it up with our fiscal year. So, it'll run from July 1 to June 30th, rather than from August into into the subsequent months. So, those are the big changes. I would be able to respond any questions that you might have. Otherwise, date changes and the length of the joint powers agreement is July 1 through June 30th, 2026 to 2027. Any questions from All right, sorry. Uh first of all, comments from base board members or Vice President Anderson, anything to add to that discussion? Questions from board members? Yes, Mr. Clevin. Just procedurally, without a quorum of District 1 at that meeting, are we required to have a committee referral, or can we take this up as a board without having that referral? You can take it up as a board tonight. That would

054be your action item. Thank you. Thank you. That's the way I understood it, too, Mr. Clevin. Other questions, comments from board members? Okay. As you can see, most of these are are date changes. The base board also is moving a recommendation forward at their next meeting. So, I would seek a motion to approve the 2026-2027 joint powers agreement as outlined. It's been moved by Mr. Clevin. Is there a second? Second. Seconded by Mr. Larson. Any further discussion? We'll take a roll call vote. Clevin. Yes. Manley. Yes. Hodak. Yes. Anderson. Yes. Flynn. Yes. Larson? Yes. Lund? Yes. Palmisano? Yes. Burger? Yes. Nine yes, zero no, zero absent. Motion passes. 5C, consideration of $4.4 million budget realignment recommendation, Dr. Brenner. Thank you, Mr. President. You have a memo in front of you and I'm going to go

055through it just so there's uh context and clarity uh for all board members and for audience members as well. Uh so, the purpose of this mem- memorandum is to provide context, clarity, and rationale as the school board is asked tonight to take action on the $4.4 million budget realignment for the '26-'27 school year. Importantly, the action before the board is approval of the total budget reduction amount, not approval or rejection of the individual concepts that comprise the reduction. The district's budget realignment work formally commenced with the school board retreat on August 14th, 2025. That retreat established the foundational framework for this work, including the identification of guiding concepts and impact lenses to ensure decisions were examined thoughtfully and consistently. And since that time, the process has included four additional school board retreats, each intentionally designed

056to deepen understanding and refine thinking. Extensive administrative engagement, including multiple meetings involving principals, associate principals, directors, and district level leadership. Cross-district collaboration, ensuring pre-K through 12 representation and a comprehensive view of instructional, operational, and financial impacts. And a structured forced choice comparisons, requiring leaders to weigh in one concept against another in order to arrive at the total reduction of $4.4 million. This process has been deliberate, transparent, and inclusive, and it reflects months of sustained effort by the school board members and all pre-K through 12 building level and district level administration. So, clarifying the action before the board tonight, the board's being asked to approve the $4.4 million budget reduction, not the 52 individual concepts that were analyzed and discussed throughout the process. Those Those concepts represent the components used to reach the required reduction amount,

057but the vote itself is on the aggregate budget realignment necessary to move the district forward responsibly in the 26-27 school year. Want to acknowledge the human impact. It's essential to acknowledge the emotional toll this process has taken on many, particularly on the content area teachers and support staff whose work and roles are deeply personal and mission-driven. Every position matters. Every course matters and every program matters. All our priorities within the Grand Forks Public School District. However, achieving a $4.4 million budget reduction did require forced choices, meaning that concepts had to be compared against one another despite their individual merit and value. No one involved in this process entered it with a desire to reduce programs or positions. On the contrary, the shared preference across the board and administration would have been to preserve everything. Unfortunately,

058budget reality necessitated difficult decisions, and this process was designed to make those decisions as responsibly and transparently as possible. One important clarification regarding virtual high school, that's one of the 52 concepts. Virtual high school is recognized by the North Dakota Department of Public Instruction as a separate plant, otherwise known as a standalone high school. It was previously approved by this school board as an actionable item. So and as such, any action to take the virtual high school offline would require separate school board approval at a future meeting and is not encompassed within tonight's action on the overall budget reduction. The administrative recommendation representing the collective work and professional judgment of principals, associate principals, directors, and district level leadership, and the school board approve the $4.4 million budget reduction in order to responsibly position the district

059for the 26-27 school year. This recommendation reflects both fiscal necessity and a deep respect for the people and programs that make Grand Forks Public Schools strong. Thank you. Questions from board members? Otherwise, uh you see the administrative recommendation is outlined in your packet. Uh I would seek a motion to um to that paragraph. Yes, Mr. Palmisano? >> Yeah, I'd like to make a motion that we approve the $4.4 million budget reduction in order to set up the district for the future for the 2022-26 and 27 school year. And it is on. And in the future, you know, but I receive a second and I would speak. So, there's a motion on the floor to approve the $4.4 million budget reduction. Motion by Mr. Palmisano. Is there a second? Second. A second by Mr. Anderson. Is

060there any discussion from board members? Mr. Palmisano? I guess the reason why I am approving this is I said at the last board meeting, we have two things that we are aware of for next year and one of those is a is a two two and a half percent increase by the state on our per pupil payment going forward as well as uh employees contracts that are in place. But, when you look to the future of the 27-29 budget cycle, if you read the article that was in the newspaper here this last week and a half ago, the state of North Dakota is already starting to ask people to take early retirement if they're interested. They're looking at a $130 million less in their budget because of the passage of the one the the one

061big beautiful bill act that was passed. The same thing that shortchanged us this year of about $300,000 close on our title programs. And their projections at the end of 2025, they had $1.3 billion that they could work from and they cut K through 12 funding from 4% to 2 and 1/2. They are looking at the end of 2027 into the future $300 million. So, so, they will be looking I would suspect cuts across the table. So, I think we need to be ready for those cuts and be fiscal responsible to be able to move forward with our school district. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Palmisano. Other comments, discussion from board members? Mr. Clevin. So, the motion is to approve a dollar figure, correct? The motion as I understand it and I'll look to Mr. Palmisano

062is to approve the $4.4 million budget reduction. Is that correct, Mr. Palmisano? And I I would also like to speak in support of those 52 concepts because and and I don't think this is an exaggeration, we're talking thousands of hours of of very detailed discussions, decision-making, conversations amongst professionals amongst people in the board board members to community members. All of that is going into those concepts and I think they're worthy of support. Uh even though the motion itself doesn't seem to explicitly list those as part of the motion. Um I in many, many private conversations, I've said things like, "This isn't fun. No one wants to do any of this. Everybody recognizes the value of the items that are subject to to cuts or reductions, whatever word we want to use with it. Nonetheless, those

06352 items are good work product. Uh and I I think they're worthy of support uh is even if it gives us a little bit of unease in doing so. Um and I I hope we all can support them as an as an effort going forward. Thank you, Mr. Klevan. Other comments from board members? I think I saw No, nothing from Dr. Lund. Okay. >> to but what you You preempted me. I'm sorry, Dr. Lund. Thank you. I I just wanted to comment. I Over the last few weeks, I've talked to some colleagues uh around the state and and I have three takeaways from from those conversations I've had. One is is we aren't the only school district that's suffering right now and and you don't have to look farther than the federal government and the

064state government not not not endorsing educating our youth. We have We have mandates that are underfunded or not funded and and so if if we all want to be upset about all this, we need to look at our governments helping educate our kids the way they should. So, that's one thing I I I take away. The other The other takeaway is this process that the district has gone through since last August has been a very inclusive process. Not everybody, not thousands of people, but it has been very inclusive. Hundreds of of district employees and and school board members have spent and Jay is correct. It's thousands of people hours looking at this and these are and I don't count the nine of us. At least eight of us. Dr. Hodac I would count as an

065educational expert, but these are all educational experts and so I I think the process has has been a good process and I I really support the process. Thank you Dr. Lund. Others board members wish to speak on this motion? Ms. Flynn or Mr. Larson? They're They're deciding. Mr. Larson. >> I guess Mr. Larson will go. Um I think it's important. Um I have a few trailing thoughts after some of the public comments, but what Bill just said is is is important for everyone to think about. In your advocacy to the kids out there, keep it up cuz it's important and other areas of government were funded much more than the schools were. And it's disappointing as part of my daily part of my daily job is to do that same stuff. And I don't like

066to see it that we only get 2 and 1/2% increase. But it's because the advocacy wasn't perhaps there. So keep it up. Call your legislators. If you don't like them, vote for different ones, but it's your voice and your votes that's going to do something about this and then we don't have to sit around the table for months and thousands of hours trying to figure out how to make cuts because we don't have enough money to go around. But unfortunately it's where we are. So, as I think every one of us have said at some point in time throughout this this process, we don't like it. I don't like very many of the 52 cuts. There are some that I dislike more than others. Um but I think I'm also in a position where I

067need to support this because we do have to get back to our budget. 2027 or to 29 is going to be tight in all industries. Um I talk about it in healthcare. I talk about it in other spaces. One of the things interesting cuz the Super Bowl was yesterday, but just last week I was in some conversations with thinkers more or less. Um and the idea or the quote from Lombardi was get brilliant at the basics. And in a lot of industries are going to have to do that including education. And I really liked the comment from someone. I wrote it down. Um Let me see. Oh shoot. I just closed my thing. Look at that. Boomer. Um there was a comment about excellence is the expectation or excellence in or exceptional education is the

068expectation. I really appreciate that. And it's probably where I'm at as well is that that basic isn't where we are. It's not what our community wants. It's not what our musicians in our community expect, but they do expect excellence and I do want to get back there. Um and I'm hopeful that with advocacy from the kids that were here and those around this table and in our district that we can get back there and get the funding right so that we can bring it back to excellence. Last comment. I know a lot of the music educators and they are excellent and they're going to continue to be excellent and I think every kid in the district is going to going to have excellent education and um so I'm convinced that we're still going to be

069there. Thank you, Mr. Larson. Ms. Flynn. I'm not a boomer, but I have to get my thing up here. Um [snorts] so certainly understand the need and support for budget realignment and um I think all of us can agree on in some capacity that um these conversations are difficult and unavoidable. Um my questions are less about uh whether we cut um and more about how we do so, um, without unintentionally dismantling some of the programs that are currently strong and well-sequenced. Um, I think, especially because we have people who have taken the opportunity to come to our meetings, it's important to ask questions so the answers are in public, um, and so I understand that we're not voting on the individual concepts, um, but there seems to be some lingering questions still above and beyond

070some of the conversations that we've had at our retreats and board meetings. So, if you'll allow me to, I have a couple questions on the specifics, um, that I'm hoping we could, um, have public responses to. Um, a couple of them are general, a couple of them are, um, through mu- for music. Um, I'll start with the music ones and then, um, I will move to just the general questions. Um, last, uh, year, as part of some other conversations from previous budget meetings, um, the high school had, or the secondary music programs, um, underwent an internal music study, um, that has now come to as a rationale for middle school music reductions as, uh, a reason or rationale for reducing middle school is that it aligns with the district model. I'm wondering about when a

071model was decided, um, and how that might contradict with, um, Dr. Brenner, your, uh, comments in one of the previous memos that the middle school level, um, has not necessarily reached consensus yet as a part of the secondary music study. So, question, we have a district model that used as a rationale for middle school, but there was a contradiction in the statement that we haven't really come to a uh consensus on that yet. Okay, okay, thank you. Thank you for the question. Um Yeah, that's that's accurate. Um music district coordinator, Jeff Seablom. Let me Let me just clarify because I think some people think that Jeff has full day to be our music coordinator. He doesn't. He teaches all day and then he does the coordination on top of it. Um we we had the

072the high school music self-study came to a consensus on what the model would look like, uh the instructional model starting the 2026-2027 school year. And that would be three and a half periods uh in front of a full class, one and a half periods for lessons, whether that was individual or small group. Uh we met again this fall. I met just with middle school, uh the middle school subcommittee of that entire group, and that would have included Jeff Seablom and some teachers. And it was clear to me in the first meeting that um that I don't know how to develop their schedule. So, I commissioned them uh to go back and put together a model and bring it forward again as as a concept. Uh at the same time, middle school principals put together a

073plan for what middle school music could look like. Um and and there's uh there's a difference, uh a difference of opinion about what that could look like between um the middle school principals' uh notion that we could reduce two and a half positions. Uh middle school self-study committee said we could do one and a half. Um so, they're we're separated by a bit uh at this point. So, that's kind of that's where we're at. In the plan in the overall plan, it's still part of one of the concepts. Um but again, we're we're requesting a $4.4 million dollar reduction tonight. Thank you. And so maybe just to clarify, is there more work that could be done? Yeah, there's more work that can be done. Okay. Um so with that, how will the shift in middle

074school to reduce FTEs ensure that class sizes, rehearsal time, and travel between buildings remain educationally sound? Dr. Glatch, did you have something? Yeah, I can respond to that. So, the the middle school principals worked up a schedule. Um all of the logistics we haven't gotten to yet because we wanted to make sure that we weren't getting too far, you know, cart ahead of the horse, if you will. Um but within the course of the day when they look examined the the teacher schedules as they are, looked at the number of sections that they have to teach for general music, vocal music, instrumental music, um they were confident that we could make it work with the recommended reductions. And so, I think there's a misnomer out there that general music is being eliminated or cut. That's

075that's incorrect. Um general music will still be um part of the sixth grade learning experience across all of our campuses. So, I don't know if I satisfied your your answers um or satisfied your question um Amber, but that's You you did. I think um part of the I think confusion that remains um specifically to the middle school is um are we reducing positions or are we redistributing workload? And um would that in the future create a program that's unsustainable? And I think the the the confusion that I've received as feedback um and and the difference of opinion is that we have music teachers who offer us a specialized instruction program and the music coordinator whose position is in place to be the lead resource for programs and operations for music. And then we have the

076principals who are deciding that we can further reduce. And so part of the confusion there when it comes to the board who uh I'm not formally trained in music or music education um have to try to determine who's more right. And so for me when I look at some of these cuts overall, I'm specifically pointing out this one, but as we look at realignment, if we're getting feedback specifically from a couple different ones that there's sort of a confusion. It's it's hard and I think it adds to the tension between how do educators wait by while while others are supposed to just figure it out without feeling like there's input there on the expertise of how they deliver the program. Dr. Glatch. Yeah, so to answer your question, there will be workload redistribution, that is

077true. We are um bound by the requirements to make sure that anybody who's teaching any given classes considered highly qualified for that. And so then we would default to teacher licensures. I completely acknowledge that um somebody could have on their licensure a certain course and not have taught that course for 15 years. So does it feel like they're highly skilled in that area? Um that would be something that we'll have to take under consideration as we look to place people in positions that will allow them to do the excellent work that they do. Um but again, those are logistics that we are are not um we haven't fully worked through them because it would have been premature to do so at this time. So are we expecting non-music professionals to teach or like don't just

078get a certification in music or No. Okay. No, that yeah, we have highly qualified individuals um many of them again here tonight that are within our our ranks that we would um hope to just rearrange some assignments around. Um my next question is um Uh I think I've been pretty vocal about uh fourth grade orchestra. Um I agree I can get behind and approve 90 95% of what's on this list and I know we're not approving every single item line by line. We're approving a budget. But the ask here with the assumption of approving the budget or the school board is that we then uh trust the work to be done um despite maybe some pains that others feel um I want to clarify two things with elementary. Um CODA has uh been brought up

079uh as as one of the items for a reduction. And I've heard the term from administrators um the public uh teachers um that uses the phrase CODA contracts and I think it's important to educate the public and have a open conversation about um CODA so that we can just be transparent about about that. Um It's my understanding that there are no contracts for Coda. That the Coda contracts, as it is referred to, is not actually a contract. And so, I think words matter when we talk about these things in public. Um on the negotiated agreement, there's a asterisk by Coda. And it determines the rate of pay. But Coda is actually requested, and please correct me if I'm wrong. Um Coda's requested as an activity proposal. Similar to any other activity proposal that we have.

080And so, um my uh hesitant hesitancy with Coda in um some of our conversations is that if we're talking about it as a extracurricular contract, and if we're using that verbage, um and we're just taking a part one, but asking individuals to do another, that it leads into um uh a potential breach of you know, the extracurricular contracts. Um I've learned that that to not be the case, that it's not an extracurricular contract, but I think we need to talk about that and state that for the the general public to understand. Um and so, it's my understanding also, as emails that have been recently received, that that group has had the opportunity, those individuals affected by Coda or who currently are in Coda, and are are sort of in agreement on it needs to be

081restructured, and can have some of those conversations, but it is not a contract. Mr. Bakke, do you want to take that? That is correct. Okay. Um my other question as it relates to fourth grade orchestra um this gives me the biggest pain point out of all of the 52 items. Um I've asked a couple different times as we look at other models of how other elementary schools deliver orchestra there are a wide variety across the state. Some who have it in fourth grade, some who start in fifth grade in what someone termed competition with band, some who have a fifth grade orchestra start, and some who have a sixth grade orchestra start. I've asked for um any models or data that uh indicate what a transition period looked like for schools that have transitioned their

082orchestra programs from fourth to either a competition in fifth with band or a fifth sixth staggered start um to understand if the viability of the program changed, if there were any unattended negative impacts, if there were positive impacts, um and how it impacted um the trajectory of a student's uh string instrument usage down the road or participation in music. I have not received anything um from any of those asks. Um if someone has any data, happy to entertain it now, but um my concern as I bring that up is we don't have any evidence that relates to a rationale of uh the transition or delaying orchestra um that would potentially lead to proficiency loss or proficiency gain or participation. And so, certainly we do things that we may not understand the impacts and we have

083to make decisions. But that one brings me the most pain because there's really no comparable model. And we could certainly do it, but as it relates to information in the MOU that you read, Dr. Brenner, um we have consistency and equity in how we make decisions. Last year, as a result of these conversations 2 years ago, secondary was able to have a self-music study. And elementary school was not able to have an elementary music study. I don't want to kick elementary programs down the road, and I think administrators would probably have a headache or roll their eyes about, you know, we've we feel like we're beating a dead horse with this one. But it's not consistent and it's not equitable to expect fourth-grade orchestra teachers or even those ones that travel in between elementary and

084middle school to expect that we can have a plan put in place by May when we're in the midst of parent-teacher conferences and all this stuff. They don't work in the summer, and then they have to show up and deliver a completely new program in the fall. To me, that is uh not doable, and it puts a lot of pressure on those programs. Um I don't know if you know, this the people referenced recently that we had a all-city orchestra come and um part of the participation was those individuals in middle school being able to participate there and the stage was full. If there's a delayed start, are we going to be able to host something that brought in people from outside and benefited the community. It was a paid attendance, sold out with a

085waitlist. Are we going to be able to provide students that are academically ready if we have a delay in their orchestra learning? I don't I don't know that any of these questions can be answered because we haven't been able to look at that. Additionally, I would ask if we move uh CODA or orchestra, would there be schools that would be disproportionately affected? How are we measuring that? And how would changes for these specific programs for students impact them who solely rely on school-based music as their primary form of music education? So, I just don't think that we have had the time and it hasn't been consistent or equitable as it relates to high school and elementary in terms of studying music. It's a very specialized program. I had a uh one of the students up

086here talked about how long it takes to obtain a music education major. I was a residence hall director at the University of Mary and all of my RAs, a majority of them, were music education majors because that was the only job that they could hold. And some of them did three lessons a week and they couldn't count it as a three-credit class. It was a one-credit class. And so, he was right in saying that a lot of them were 20, 21 credits. I bring that up because I think it's so specialized that I want a trustee administration and the principals in their academic programs and how they're combing through all the data and research about what we need to cut in terms of a reduction. But, I think there's also really a lot of nuances

087that unless you're trained in how those programs are delivered and the viability, there's a lot more questions than there are answers. And I haven't got the answers, which means the public hasn't got the answers, which means those teachers haven't got the answers of not whether or not to cut, but how we get there specific to those programs. So, I'm just asking if there is an opportunity or if someone would say in this specific instance because there is not consistency, are we able to have a self-study before we make decisions on the music area in the elementary section. Does anyone want to respond? It's It's broad. So, Mr. Bakke, Dr. Glatt, Dr. Brenner. Uh Board Member Flynn, uh members of the board, what I would say is that this is a process as we've talked about.

088There's more work to come. Uh we're going to go through a process in which we gather input from um our music teachers, our orchestra teachers. Jeff Seabloom, as Dr. Brenner has indicated, has been involved in this process and will continue to do that. Um it will look different. Um more work is yet to be done. Um we're going to work alongside our administrators and our teachers to look at that process moving forward. I don't know. Dr. Brenner, do you have more to add? No. Dr. Brenner? Thank you for that, Mr. President. I I would just echo the Mr. Bakke's comments that there's still work to be done, still detail to be worked out. Um and our music teachers will be involved in particular, Mr. Seabloom, who really knows orchestra well. Do you have follow-up questions,

089Ms. Flynn? >> I do. Um With respect, I feel like that's a very vague answer and a a very standard political answer. Um I think that what I'm hearing is we'll work with our teachers and we'll utilize Mr. Seabloom's resource, but he suggested 1 and 1/2 and principal suggested 2 and 1/2. He suggested to keep orchestra and the district suggested to move forward without it. So, the answer for me is I'm approving a budget where we'll involve people, but the involvement is going to be this is what you're going to do and you're going to have to figure it out. Yep. There are there are pieces that there are pieces that we're working on behind the scenes. Um and it could have something to do with low enrollment courses, low enrollment courses at in the

090music department at the high school level that might free up somebody's schedule to assist at the elementary level, to assist at the middle school level. I just don't I don't want to get ahead of student registration and where our high school principals are at or where our middle school principals are at. Um and I don't want to unwind the work that's been done. Um and I'm not I'm certainly not asking you to trust us that we're going to work through this because we're going to work through it. My My conversation with Mr. Seebohm yesterday is we'll get there. We're going to work through this together. So with that if if we're asked to trust that these conversations are happening and that we're having continued conversations um how how are these reductions going to be evaluated

091in terms of um let's say we reduce something or we cut something and in 6 months or a year we find that the academic validity of a program is really suffering or we need to bring back something um how are how are the reductions being evaluated? And is is there an opportunity to adjust? And who makes those decisions for adjustments? Dr. Brenner. Mr. Pack, I I'm just looking at I'm not trying to defer, but I know you had a meeting with uh some elementary music teachers. I That might be helpful to discuss here and then I can take a swing at the other piece. That was more related to Coda. Um if you have specific questions on Coda, yeah, absolutely. What I would say as far as all of our programs, we always assess our

092programs um on a yearly basis. We look at social work numbers, we look at counselor numbers, we look at music numbers, we look at all of that on an annual basis. We look at classroom section numbers. What I would say is that's general work that is done every single year and we assess to make sure that we are providing the top-notch education as much as we can in our district. The what it boils down to at a point as we've indicated multiple times throughout this process is we're at a point where we have to cut $4.4 million or we may not make payroll. Um and these cuts are not fun. These are not cuts that we want to make as we've indicated multiple times throughout this process, but we know we need to do them.

093Um and so there are cuts on here that we all of us don't want to go forward with. Um but at the end of the day, there are cuts and situations that we need to make and as we continue to move forward in this process, we will continue to advocate as much as we can to keep as many programs as we can, but at the end of the day, if we want to get to a sustainable point in our budget, we have to look at all programs and assess those. So to answer your question, board member Flynn, we're going to continue to assess them when it comes to the data, the numbers, um the membership numbers, the um visiting with staff as far as how things are going um from a sustainability standpoint. We're going

094to continue to look at other districts and what they've seen successful. As I shared previously, we gathered data from the other four big districts as far as what they do with orchestra and band and I've shared that out a couple different times. Um one district in particular is going through a process in which they've just recently changed and so we can gather some of that data as we move forward. Um but again, we we can't we aren't at the point in the process where we can gather all of that and so we're continuing to gather that for you. Dr. Brenner, do you have something to add? Yeah, you know, one of one of the one of the things that we discussed and we agreed upon um with the music self-study at the high school level

095was uh when enrollments get to a certain point, uh then the instructor gets an assist or some support uh and we all agreed on that. And we are seeing numbers trending in an upward trajectory type of uh type of level, so that that's part of the evaluation. If if one of our band or orchestra teachers ends up with uh I'll just use some arbitrary numbers 120, 140, 160. They're going to get support. Um you know, in their program. So, and we have you know, Mr. Seabrook has shared numbers with me uh for a while our band numbers at one of our one of our high schools was going down. Uh but now that's going in a different direction again. Our orchestra numbers are large. Um so, that's that's information that we're going to use to

096make decisions as well. Um I I I'm not trying to spin it any other way other than these are really difficult and hard decisions. Um and I I don't want to I don't want to pull the thread of the sweater of all the work that's gone into making these recommendations. I understand that it's a work in progress. Um because of that will and this might be more appropriate for one of the last agenda items, but would the district then commit to giving us regular updates at our future meetings as it aligns with the budget reduction process how how the changes are implemented based on what is on this sheet can we ask questions and is there potential opportunity for us to say something feels off about the way this is going or you know, we

097continued support going through here. I think we owe it to the public to have conversations about how these things are being implemented, especially because it impacts their children's education. Yeah, it's a good question uh Ms. Flynn. We don't know yet how this vote will go or any future motion on this action item, but I I certainly as board leadership we intend uh to direct uh district leadership to come back and do some reporting on the scope of of how these concepts are are going to be implemented, uh how they would affect curriculum areas, uh if we would ever be looking at a potential reduction in force as opposed to uh managing these staffing levels through attrition, so to speak. Um I don't want to again get to that point because I I don't uh um

098uh I don't know how this this particular motion on the floor is going to go. Uh but I would um I would be very direct and I think uh Vice President Anderson, if you want to weigh in as well, about what those calendar touch points would be, so that, you know, we expect a a report on the the scope of how this is going to be implemented by this board meeting in February, by this board meeting in March. Um I don't have any of that outlined because I didn't intend to presume how tonight's board action would go. Do you want to weigh in, Mr. Anderson? I would certainly feel that's appropriate and and to understand how the scope of this affects our students' education. So, I I think that's absolutely appropriate to request and to

099bring back the you know, how how the implementation of this is is going. Could there be some continued conversations where you and I I think Dr. Bonner, I agree with you in that we can't put the cart before the horse with some of these things because people are waiting on us to make decisions, to if they're going to retire, if they want to look for a job somewhere, or how's the program going to be run, or I want to be a part of this, and um we felt that when the virtual high school was being implemented, there were some teachers who were like, I really want to do that. That's focus of mine. Um and so with that could there be an opportunity where some of these conversations are happening and there's a decision that's

100made that says based on our original recommendation, we just can't get there. It's not viable for staffing resources. It's not viable for uh we thought this would cost more, but or cost less, but maybe it's or cost more, but it's costing less. Uh you know, could there be potential where some of these things don't happen or where we do find a cost savings as we continue to talk about these things or someone hears it in public and says, "Actually, I have a solution that's maybe not been thought of." Is it possible for some of the items on here to sort of work themselves out? Um certainly, I'm not advocating for one comes off, so that means we don't reduce by that much more. We have a job to do, you know, but there's 4.9 on

101here and we're asking for 4.4. So, not that there's a ton of wiggle room. We also want to have a cushion, but could there be some continued conversations where it says, "Music can't only do one and a half. They can't get to two and a half. There's a rub there. How do we figure it out?" >> [snorts] >> If I may. So, so a few things that might help answer the question, Amber. So, one of the things that I don't want us to lose sight of is with a reduction of this size, we are not going to be able to do everything the same. We are going to have to do things differently. And I'm going to I'll just say it for all the music educators in the world. It would be, I think, um

102preposterous to say if we delay the start of a an orchestral students um trajectory by a year that they're going to perform the same in grade five if they had a grade four as foundation. That's not going to happen. Could they close that gap with the in uh enriching experiences that we have here? We believe so, but it but it's we can't continue to hold on to everything with a $4.4 million reduction. What we do every single year, um I think which aligns with what you're asking, is we evaluate our registration numbers, our enrollment numbers, our participation numbers, and we nuance that constantly, irrespective of whether or not it's a budget reduction time. So, for example, today on the concepts list is a reduction of German three and four at one of our campuses. If

103those numbers, if those enrollment numbers tick up, we would look to add perhaps a section back and make a reduction in a different low enrollment course. We do that anyway. So, when Dr. Brenner asked you to approve the concepts of low enrollment courses, the examples that are in front of you today do not need to be the examples in perpetuity. If music numbers go up, we will add section sizes to accommodate that student interest. And so, I think that thinking aligns with what you're asking. It might manifest itself a little bit differently at the different levels, but but that is a truism is is what you're asking for. And then it's our job to make sure that we are offering a comprehensive program that meets all student interests as widely as as possible in the

104arts, in the the forensics, and all the different opportunities that we try to offer on the daily to our kids. So, I think that is part of our strategic mission, and it's what we're committed to do. Do you have more, Ms. Flynn? Yeah, I just have the general questions now. As it relates to that, Dr. Gulledge, I appreciate you I mean, I know we can't do everything, and certainly things will look different, and sometimes different is better. And I think these conversations have sort of also opened up opportunities to look at efficiencies and how we maybe are inefficient in some areas. Um One thing that I um am struggling with is the oversight of some of the things you talked about when we get a list that there may be some low enrollment courses, some

105of the data that was provided was historically low enrollment courses. So, the practice of some of those low enrollment courses has been allowed to happen either either at the building level or the district level. And so, I think these conversations are good because we can put in internally a process of do we manage deadlines for enrollment? Do we allow drop deadlines for enrollment? Um but additionally, one of the things that was on the board's list that was in one of the PowerPoints when we had our first choice exercise the second thing that was agreed upon by this board was that we would be more in support before even a reduction of elective courses of closing and consolidating buildings. And as I asked a general question of what other options were considered? My question largely is

106going to relate to there are buildings that operate under what we receive as a per pupil allotment. Those are very efficient buildings. And then there are buildings that we operate that are almost double our allotment. Certainly, there's some impacts that go into all those buildings. But if the board supports closing and consolidating of buildings, which also could include the building that we're sitting in has that been talked about? Is there a process of which there will be annual oversight of building dollar efficiencies based on the administrator in those buildings or administrators. And where are we at with that because there's a zero dollar reduction in that line that this board collectively said was more important than elective courses. Mr. Buckey. >> Yeah. Board member Flynn, members of the board, what I can speak to is

107the elementary perspective in which we were asked to look at the consolidation and and looking at a grade span in a different way in which we would combine, you know, various under I would say smaller school buildings across our district and look at the grade span of like a K12345 and I know you heard from one of our principals and a few of our administrators relative to that on whether that would a savings as well as what would be some of the impacts academically as well as transportation and how would that impact the overall cost efficiency. I think you heard it from the administrative group that overall they were not in favor of that when it came to specifically four buildings in which we are looking at and combining them into a K12 in one

108building and a 345 in another building. The administrative group did not favor that as an option to look at at this point and said that we would further study that moving forward. Did you have a related question about MS EC, Ms. Flynn? Was that a part of your last comment? I just this board is a part of the process of moving these initiatives forward and that one was a largely agreed upon solution or reduction or forced choice that has a zero. And you know, there hasn't been any sort of like do we rent out a portion of MSCEC? Do we move Community High School into MSCEC? Do we I mean so we give up our lease. You know, there's a lot of different options related to closing and consolidating buildings that had a zero amount

109and that was the second highest choice of this board. So if if that was a collective decision by this board and now board members are saying we're fine with the list while that still has a zero allotment. I just want to make sure that we're continuing to leave no stone unturned as this board collectively decided that was their number two option in a forced choice exercise. Yeah. Dr. Glatch. Yeah, I I don't think that conversation has been lost. Um, Board Member Flynn, and I hope I'm not speaking out of turn here, but when we have discussed the fallouts of what we're undertaking right now, there is a firm desire from I think everybody sitting in this room today, if not the entire community, for us to try to break the cycle that it feels like

110we're in. That every couple of years we're back here taking a look at um making reductions to programs that we love and believe in and they're in place for a purpose. Somebody said it earlier tonight, everything that we offer is offered for a reason and it it creates a high degree of wear and tear. Um, we have to figure out a way to control that which we control. And what we don't control is what Dr. Lund mentioned and I think um Mr. Larson mentioned as far as the the funding that is passed on to us um predictably from the federal level, from the state level, etc., but we have enough warning signs right now that we need to prepare for that as Director Palmisano said. And so it's imperative that we take a look at

111our systems that are in place right now and what we might be able to shift and nuance and modify and change, which is exactly in alignment with what you're speaking to. That was something that Mike Wilbur actually elevated in one of our previous administrative meetings. And so I think that includes taking a look at our school plans. Our our community has spoken loudly about don't shut down our neighborhood schools. We know that. We've been down that track before. So is there a way to look at different efficiencies without doing that? Or is it time that we have that really hard conversation? Those are I think are the conversations that we need to have alongside of you all moving into the future. But just like I said before, we can't continue to do the same thing

112with a reduction like this. We can't continue to go through the same cycle every other year. It's it's not good for anybody, especially our students. Ms. Flint has just I think she's got one more and then we'll go to Mr. Cleven. My last question just as far as general reductions is um you know, I talked about fourth grade orchestras potentially being a phased implementation, whether that's after a study or you know, how that ends up working. If the math doesn't work itself out or it's it's not efficient or impossible to do, you know, what do we do? It Some some of these decisions feel like we're trying to fit a a square into a round hole and like we're asking people to get there when maybe, you know, again, I I can support 90-95% of

113these reductions, but I just want to ask were there any alternative cost-saving models explored such as phased implementation of program reductions, shared staffing across buildings, including sharing principals or assistant principals, or superintendents, were there staffing reductions such as secretary support that were looked at? Were any other reductions that were not talked about that as the board prioritized keep it as far away from curriculum and elective choices as possible. Does one of you want to recall those conversations, Dr. Brenner? Well, just through the retreats, um everything that we discussed during the retreats would have been concepts. And if they weren't brought forward, um then they then they weren't discussed. Uh we did discuss one of the assistant superintendent associate superintendent roles, um you know, whether that would become vacant or not, whether that would be on

114the list. I think you heard from our principals and associate principals the value that they see in the support that they get. Um but nonetheless, with every resignation is going to come a study of whether we can move forward without those positions or not. And we've we've actually it probably what the public doesn't know is what we've been doing every week um because we have frequent resignations, particularly with paraprofessionals who are UND students. And sometimes we'll have two, three, and four UND students who might fill one FTE of a paraprofessional. Then semester changes, and principals ask, "Can we hire?" Because we're in a hiring freeze. And so executive cabinet goes through those lists every single week, and we say, "Yes, you can. It was in the budget." Or no, or can you do with a

115half rather than a full? So, we have those conversations every week. We're trying to get a head start on not filling positions um moving to the next school year. Jonathan Elwine, B&G director, there's a perfect example of a high-salary position that we haven't filled. And Brandon Bombach has taken on more of a leadership role with B&G. Daily Wilkinson has taken on more of a role. Eric Holm is that sustainable moving into the future. We'll we'll assess that. You know, time time will tell. So, but if there's you know, if there's something specific, Board Member Flynn, that you want us to take a look at that's not on the 52 concepts that you feel like we didn't do our due diligence, we can go back and we can look at those those concepts as well. The

116other The other thing I want to say, I just want to circle back to um uh fourth-grade orchestra, just so I don't lose this thought. One of One of the concepts that elementary principals talked about was their master schedule is developed over the summer, and it's all prepared for the next school year. You've heard a lot about Wit & Wisdom, uh how tight we want that to be from a fidelity uh delivery perspective, how students are performing as a result of that. Math, the same thing, the science of math is becoming a big part of our conversation and delivery at the elementary level. So, there are our blocks of time that are that are reserved at the elementary level. And so, then when Mr. Seeblum comes in early in the fall and tries to figure

117out where all these pieces are going to fit for orchestra, that's a challenge. That's a challenge to find time to pull kids um out of certain certain class periods or certain content periods where teachers and principals don't want students leaving Wit & Wisdom ELA or math. So, one of the outgrowths of that conversation, from what I understand, is there's going to be some planning that's done this spring with principals and with our musicians, orchestra, band, to see how they can be integrated into the master schedule. So, that'll be done before the before the summer happens. Um so, time will tell how that works. Um but, I'm optimistic that it's going to it's going to play well for everybody who's involved. Mr. Clevin, we'll come back to Ms. Flynn. Did you have a follow-up, Ms. Flynn?

118I'm sorry. If did you have a No, I'm okay. Okay. Mr. Clevin. The the use of this building was brought up and it was discussed. And it was a brief conversation. And my recollection of it was we talked about it, we realized it didn't make any sense. We're not going to pursue it. I would like to point out the very effective use of our bond referendum facility dollars to build central kitchen out here that has by all reports a demonstrable operating cost savings every year because of that smart and prudent financial decision. So, I hope we can not talk about closing the Mark Sanford Ed Center cuz we need this building. It has very important functions and we've made very smart choices to invest in it. Uh that's my recollection of those conversations. Thank you.

119Ms. Flynn, did you have something? Go to this side of the room, Dr. Hodak. Thank you. I'm going to start first of all. I planned this out because I did not want to sit here and ramble through all of my comments. Um I want to thank the administrators. I think every one of them know me well enough and have had me in classes, including board member Amber Flynn. Um how I feel about education and what I have done in education. But I want to thank you first of all and to recognize that there will be times where there is disagreement. And that is only to get better. If we don't disagree, we will not improve. So, I want the public to also understand where I am coming from. I am coming from a background 40

120plus years in education. My background started with 10 years. I graduated with a four majors, speech, drama, theater, English, communication, all of those. So, I know exactly what we're talking about when we start talking about the arts. I have competed and directed at the local, regional, state, and national level one-act plays, debate, musicals, and so forth. Not to mention doing student council, honor society, and all of those things that I can honestly say never got paid what I for the time that I put into it. I've been a classroom teacher. I've been a middle school principal. I've been a high school principal. I know how struggles how we struggle to make those schedules and to make those students get the opportunities that they know. Now, I move on to I've also been a professor of

121educational leadership. And in that 15-20 years, I have done nothing but research and teach educational leadership, the superintendency, and the principalship at the master's, specialist, and doctoral level. I have focused on school finance and focused on school law. As I said, I've been an educational leader in the state of North Dakota since 1980. I was the North Dakota director of schools for the state department. I've worked in reservation schools. I have worked in the career and tech centers at Grafton. I have worked in both public and private and parochial schools. I have served many, many positions. Cutting a budget is very, very hard. That said, I do need and I do not believe, with all due respect to everyone that is sitting here, that I am seeking to micromanage what is happening within the schools.

122I am seeking to understand for my understanding, if I'm not understanding with my background, I cannot imagine what the teachers and what the community don't quite grasp as well, too. And I want to respectfully remind you the norms that we say every time we meet. We talk about that my role is to be an advocate for students and to keep the community in mind. And so with what I'm saying tonight, that is what I'm saying and why. First of all, I want everyone to understand and I'm looking at principals because this is what you will be doing from this document that we have had only since January 5th, which I wish we would have had a lot sooner. We will be cutting non-renewing 24 teaching positions. Now, put that out there for you to think

123about. If we are advocating for students, also when you look at it, 33.15 classified employees will be gone. I understand that we'll get possible retirements, that people will leave and that we're going to be doing this realignment. I know that, but I want to make sure that you have spoken to that and addressed it. I want to know how you are going to identify those positions that we are cutting 24 teachers at the elementary and high school. I want to know how those people will be identified. I recognize that we are at this point in time due to the fact that we have non-renewal. State North Dakota Century Code tells us when we have to identify and have those. With the exception of 3.5 and 2.0, what positions are these? When we talk about classes

124lower than 15, and I agree with with Amber that we have had classes and those classes should never have happened. This is a fluid um transaction that has to be going constantly, not just every 2 years when we are at this point. Those 15 classes that we're going to lower in the high school, I look at those because I have the documents that you have given to me on student enrollment and right here Red River's enrollment classes that are below 15, and I appreciate the data and the information. But there are five disciplines that are going to be impacted by that, but you are saying 3.5 of those positions. How are you going to identify those? So, it is more for me needing to be reassured of how those disciplines will be done. I understand

125explaining um curriculum reductions. The literacy, okay, but we've had many teachers speak for it. If we go to a new literacy program, that means we have to train teachers. We have to purchase that. We have to make sure that there is time to make sure that those things happen. Again, I know what you will answer me. You will say, "We will be trained. We will use professional development and such." But, I want that I need to make sure that this has been covered. Putting off that math curriculum, I do not accept because it's only foregoing what we need to do to keep our students um academically um sound. The reduction in the classified staff, 33.5 from 2018-19, we have increased our students current by 314 students. However, we have also increased our employees by 223.

126Those are the data, those are the facts that have been handed out to us. Our special education costs continue to increase, but our funding is not increasing. Our funding at the state level and at the federal level is horrible. Our funding with our taxpayers and our property taxes from our city is horrible. We have a multi-ed or multilingual education where we are reducing 2.5 ML teachers and 8 ML paras. What is that going to do to those students that struggle? I know that we have a drop in those years of 34 refugees. However, we've also had an increase of 21 immigrants. We have had a total of 122 students increased in the multilingual students. If we're going to eliminate 7.5 classroom specialists who service substitutes for $75,000, that sounds great. However, if you go and

127you look that we had in the 24-25 school year 13,279 teacher absences. Okay? And you multiply that by 125 or whatever we're going to do by removing this. Again, we need to make sure that we understand all the consequences that we are handing out if this budget is approved. Positions being cut, I will tell you flat out, I'm concerned about where those job responsibilities are going to go. I'm very concerned about nursing. I do not believe we should be cutting that position. I'm very concerned about transportation. I do not believe that we should be cutting that position. I'm very concerned that we are cutting the supervisor for custodials and nine positions. What is that going to do to our buildings? Who is prepared to take over those duties and those responsibilities? I believe we have

128soft dollars built into how this is going to help this budget. When we say reducing overtime, sorry folks, I've been that superintendent. I know what it's like to try to reduce overtime and when you absolutely have to go, well, I guess we have to have it. When we talk about increasing the fees, increasing the fees looks good on paper, but it doesn't necessarily equate to the student that no longer says, I can't afford it. And I know we have programs to make sure that every student does is able to participate. Our rental charges that we're talking about, yes, that's a good idea, but that also might change people from using our um building. For the record, I am against voting on the budget realignment as a whole. I have said that and stated that at

129every retreat. I am against orchestra being moved to fifth grade as I do not understand at fifth grade they're going to need a teachers there as well. I need somebody to tell me that this is how we're going to be doing it. I don't see the financial financial savings. I'm against reducing the nursing. I am against reducing the curriculum adjustments. I'm very concerned that our struggling students are losing support systems that have been in place. I do believe that we should have had all administrative positions descriptions reviewed for redundancy, efficiency, adjustments. I believe that we do have administrators that in their positions are not fully utilized in comparison to other similar positions. I recently talked to a to a principal of an elementary and when I heard about a fifth grade classroom that started out

130at 24 but ended up at 28 with 11 students that are either on an IEP or 504 plus two autistic children in there. Education has changed. Our behavioral problems that we have to deal with. All of those things. But when I think that we only have one fifth grade teacher handling those 28 students with an instructional coach that might come in there with a classroom specialist that might be able to help. But we are looking at cutting that as well. We need to be looking and focusing on solutions. Our practices with developing our budget and maintaining a sustainable budget needs to be reviewed and looked at. We have said that there is no more hiring for 2 years. Thus, there is no more hiring for 2 years. Including Dr. Gulledge's position. Because if you take

131a look at that position, $200,000 plus with her benefits and such. I'm not saying she doesn't deserve it or that she hasn't worked for it. But, when you are looking at 212,000 for either the middle school teachers or the orchestra and then 183, that would save those positions. We need to do much more grant writing and we need to explore more of the hidden funding through the state department, through the federal government that we have not tied into. And that came up when we came up with, "Oh, we can increase our Medicaid." We must re-examine job descriptions, especially school administrators. I specifically asked for and I will use it. When I am hearing from current high school principals that they have students that are on waiting lists to get to the cell program, to get

132into community, to get someplace, that tells me that there are caps. Including our virtual high school, there's caps on that. What are we doing wrong if we are capping, but yet virtual high school was supposed to be cost neutral? $70,000, .50, .50, okay? So, that's what I'm saying. We have not been following our good stewardships as well as we should be. I think by examining school administrators, principals, associate principals, the dean of students, all of the directors, which are top-down, and that's the most difficult part as I've taught every one of you to be looking at things top-down. We need to have the teachers, we need to have the custodians, we need to have the technology people, we need to have them at the table telling us, "Okay, this is how we can do with

133less. This is how we will cut the budget for you." We need to be combining positions for efficiencies. We need to be defining more detailed job responsibilities instead of delegating or hiring. I've consistently asked, "Who's going to be doing this total of 24 teachers reduction?" And 33.15 classified personnel reductions. Who's doing that work? We must have a fluid and transparent budget throughout the years. We need and we should have had on our our retreats at least one teacher that is not tied to any of us. We need to have had a parent on those at those retreats. Even though I know many of you can say, "I'm a parent as well." We need to change our practices. We should have had a legislator or at least legislators invited to our retreats so they could hear

134what they are doing to our public schools. We've talked about a $4.9 million cut and now we're talking about a 4.4. I would have expected us to be dealing with that last year when I came on the board with the negotiations because had we been made aware of that that were really going to be deficit spending, I can honestly tell you I would have said no to negotiations, to salary increases as such. We must engage our state legislators. We must invite them. We must include parents and we need representation from city government because I don't believe city government has any understanding of what our tax dollars, our property tax dollars are doing and going, especially when the legislators have put a cap on us. And now we're giving away dollars for those pilot incentives and

135I have been looking into those and as I think it was Andrew who said tonight that 20 years and everything else, we could possibly never ever see that money anyway. Those are my comments. I am passionate. I am com- I am dedicated to education. I do not believe that we have turned every stone to see if we should be doing what we are going to be doing. Thank you. >> [applause] >> Please. Please. But please. >> [applause] >> Once Once again Once again >> [applause] >> I have never in four years touched this gavel. Please. Please. >> [applause] >> Please. Thank you. Other board members. Dr. Lund. I I just have a thought for the school board to think about in July and I would strongly urge the school board to consider eliminating salaries for

136the school board members in the 26-27 school year. That's just for the future. Thank you, Dr. Lun. Other comments from board members? Other questions from board members? I have a few thoughts. >> [clears throat] >> I'm a product of these schools. Our children products of these schools. Our grandson Leo just moved back into Grand Forks and um will go to Phoenix in just a few short years. I care deeply about these programs, these students, these educators. Um I struggle deeply with many of the concepts in in this package as laid out. Um >> [clears throat] >> And yet I understand the situation we're in. We can't continue down the same road. And so um >> [clears throat] >> knowing the motion that's on the floor um to reduce this amount knowing that there's work yet

137to be done knowing that we'll be asking for reports back on uh what this means in terms of a possible reduction in force um recognizing the collective work and the collective pain um this is not a situation that any of us wants to be in. And my last um my last comment is that I'm so thankful for all of the collective advocacy, all of the conversations we've been able to have. I think Mr. Larson uh spoke about continuing this level of speaking up for public education, for speaking up uh to the point that um our schools matter. And we we're in this work together um in a place we don't want to be, and yet I've watched this process from August until tonight, and we have a lot of valid perspectives and viewpoints. Uh we're

138not always going to agree. Uh in fact, even among district leaders, building level administrators, we don't agree. Um it became apparent early on that we weren't going to have necessarily an ordering of concepts, but in order to get to this number, there are a lot of things that we don't want to do. Um so I'll leave it there. The motion on the floor is to approve a $4.4 million budget realignment. Any closing comments from other board members? Ms. Flynn? If he'll allow me, I'd like to defer my time or comments uh to Mr. Olson, who's our GFEA rep. Um they sit at this table for a reason, and while they're not a voting member, I think it's important that we engage them in their perspective. Thank you, Mr. Olson. Uh thank you, board member member

139Flynn. Um it it's been a difficult long stretch now. It seems to just be longer and longer where many teachers have uh been uncertain as to what is going to happen. Um There have been There has been a a lot of frustration on our part because we have voiced concern. We have uh We have brought up issues. Um those sorts of things. And And while the the the words we say have been heard, um doesn't always feel like they've been listened to. Um we have uh felt at times like we've been reduced s- some some of the positions have been reduced to looking at a spreadsheet with a line drawn through it. And the reason we feel that way is because there's been no There's no discussion prior to that. Um prior to to being

140informed that your position may be eliminated. Um In some cases, there was no uh l- any indication that some some uh programs were going to be cut until they were informed that they were going to be cut. So, although there has been a lot of dissemination of information as far as communication goes, sometimes we feel like that was lacking um because communication, I believe, involves like both parties talking. So, we could look at what could a reduction look like versus just the uh uh complete elimination. Um it's a little bit confusing for us to understand that the the 52 concepts that had been talked about this entire time um now are I mean, they're still a part of the the discussion, but the board is not really voting on those 52 concepts. They're voting on

141a a a 4.4 million um reduction. So, many of us are left not knowing what what is going to happen next. And uh we understand that um that conversations are to be coming, but now we don't know what what what they might entail. Uh so, to go through this really long process, extended process in which um myself and and other members of our GFEA team attended the board retreats to to end up here is is a little bit confusing. And so, as far as clarity goes, it's it's not feeling very clear. Um I I really appreciate the questions that have been asked by board member um Hodulik and um and board member Flynn because we have been wanting to ask those questions ourselves. Um and and just have really not been able to do so.

142We've asked some in private, but um to hear them asked out loud, um we appreciate all the the community who have come out in in support of these things because we feel like um you know, this is the Grand Forks Public Schools, and we hope that it reflects the Grand Forks communities um priorities and what they want to see in their schools. So, um we'll we're we'll we'll continue to want to be a part of discussions and knowing what's going on, but as far as how we feel right now, it's hard to say because it is just it it it's it's a little bit confusing now. And I I really do hope that um we get some of the answers to um Dr. Hodak's questions because cuz those are questions we have wondered ourselves. So,

143um thank you. Thank you, Mr. Olson. Other comments from board members? Ms. Flynn? I just have one because I know when we vote, it's a yay or a nay. Um I >> [clears throat] >> I want to support the budget cuts. I've been on teacher negotiations for four cycles. Through that process, we've learned a lot about what a teacher deals with every day in the classroom. I have a master's degree in higher education where I was also taught by Dr. Hodak. >> [snorts] >> In one of my first classes as an ethics class, we had to struggle with a lot of difficult concepts of what we would do ethically. And I thought I had an understanding, having a degree in higher education of what K through 12 was really like. And I was very wrong.

144I always thought as an academic advisor, you know, some of these students feel really lost and what's what's going on in the K through 12 system, you know, >> [snorts] >> how come they're not as prepared? And I think one of the things we haven't talked about is behavioral health and wellness. A couple years ago we cut the alcohol and other drug counseling position. And I didn't want to approve the budget then. I had some really uh I had a really hard time with cutting into >> [snorts] >> things that that are preventative health measures in my opinion. I think some of the things on this list are preventative health measures for our students' health and wellness. >> [snorts] >> Including things like portions of physical education, music. >> [snorts] >> I don't necessarily agree

145that we should keep all of the music in place how it is. I I agree and support some of the recommendations. But my fear is that when we get rid of things that affect behavioral health and wellness for our students, when I worked in higher education, I worked in sexual health prevention. And so, I am very aware of behavioral health and wellness change. And as that is increasing and putting more pressures on our administrators and our teachers, >> [snorts] >> it seems counterintuitive to some of the things that we're are doing. I am a minority on this board as a mom to a middle schooler, an elementary schooler, and a preschooler. And most of the parents on this board can say that they have experienced their children going through or they have grandkids or things

146like that. So, I'm not taking away from that. But being a mom at three different levels, I am very in tune to the issues and concerns of those kids today. So are all the professionals here. >> [snorts] >> But when my kids come home and I go to things like honor choir for my daughter this weekend who is if not one of the only seventh graders selected, and I look [snorts] in the audience and I see the profound impact that it's having on those music educators who are just overcome with emotion watching this. It's not a selfish thing that they did it or that they taught or it's that they're seeing the product of those students and the impact that it's having on them. I just can't get there yet and I really wanted to.

147I wanted to support the reduction because I think it's important. >> [snorts] >> But I think we're missing a serious component of some of the options. Will it be painful to reduce a secretary position? Will it be painful to not fill Dr. Gluck's position? I think she has done an amazing job here. Yes. But what I want to hear is Dr. Brenner, you say, "I'll make a commitment to not hire her position for a year." I want to hear that. I want to hear that we can take a look at some support staff that are further away from the classroom and that we're making cuts that aren't affecting behavioral health and wellness. I can't get there unless I hear that. And the rest of the board might support it. I might be outnumbered and that's

148okay. We can disagree. But it it pains me to know that some of the options here >> [snorts] >> are ones that could have lasting impacts and it's harder for behavior change to happen in a positive way if we're taking that if we're taking away from it. So I just we haven't talked about that and I want to keep that in mind because that is one of the four strategic areas in front of each of our seats that we haven't discussed. And if the vote is no now, it doesn't mean that it can't come back at the next meeting. I know we're on a timeline. I know we have schedules. I know we've backdated things. But I just hope that maybe we can consider some additional options as part of our continued conversation. That's all

149I have. Other comments from board members? Mr. Clevin. These are great and passionate thoughts. I wish we would have had them 2 months ago when we're all sitting in a room where we would have had a legitimate time to work through these. So, I'm going to I'm going to hold myself accountable on that cuz I wasn't asking each of you specifically to bring out your thoughts. And I apologize for that. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Clevin. Other thoughts, questions from board members? Dr. Hodak. Um when we are acting on the motion for this these cuts, in there they it was included the virtual high school um to eliminate that. And if I was understanding Dr. Brenner, that we cannot um do that. So, I want to understand if that's going to be in this vote

150or if it's off the table. It's still a $4.4 million request to reduce the budget, but we do have to come back at a at a another board meeting to close the the plant, the facility. So So then that means the the virtual high school is not included in the vote tonight. >> That's correct. Thank you. Thank you for that clarification, Dr. Hodek. Other thoughts, comments, questions from board members? Dr. Glatch, do you have something to add? Yeah, if I I just wanted to thank the board for the dialogue and the discussion tonight. Um I think everything that came forward, um you know, packed by passion is due to the fact that everything that we have is in place for a reason. We continue to say that. And I do want you to know that

151when the discussions were going on of what even to be brought forward in the first place, we had our strategic plan in front of us. We had our state requirements in front of us. We had our data, the spreadsheets in front of us. We have an ongoing commitment to serve an ethical commitment, to use your words, to serve the needs of all children in the best manner that we can. And Dr. Hodek, you mentioned things like cap some programs and why has our staffing increased this much over time? It's because of some of the exact students and situations that you're describing tonight. It's because we are morally obligated to serve all children. And with that comes complexity, which requires more resources because our classroom teachers, which you mentioned, in the classroom of 28 with all

152of those needs, need those resources in there, as well as the administrators who are there to help when things go out of line and to set up the structures in place. Education and our educational programming is highly complex. And so, we've had most of the discussions that you've had. Is there a stone left unturned? I'm sure there is. And we want to continue having those discussions. We didn't feel it was healthy to bring forward every item that was looked at three ways and sideways and left off of the recommendation because that would have caused and people can disagree with this but that would have caused additional stressor stressors across our system for people saying what do you mean you were looking at this position my position and unintentional consequences of creating emotion that was unnecessary.

153And so the hours that were represented at the board retreats that have been cited tonight were set up by many many many more hours of really grueling discussions with the people in this room who who made those recommendations to you. And so I just want to again applaud you for wanting to keep students at the center of what we're doing. I agree that we need to continue to examine everything but the things that weren't on the the table today weren't there for a reason. We'll go back and re-evaluate them and see if there's a ripple effect that is sustainable for us that to make a shift in the end. That is that is our commitment to you. Just felt compelled to to share those thoughts. Thank you Dr. Glatch. Mr. Clevin. Mr. Clevin then we'll

154come over to Mr. Manley. Thank you. Just couple things that that came up earlier. There was reference to the nursing position and the transportation coordinator position. This is information that had been shared previously but if Dr. Brenner or Mr. Bombach can address those two and give an update on those again reiterating information that's already been shared. Thank you. Dr. Brenner and then we'll come to Mr. Bombach. Yeah, we're we're just looking at uh we're exploring a partnership for our nursing program uh whether it's one position five positions all nine positions um to to ease our budget. So those are ongoing conversations right now and I think Mr. Bambenek can probably talk about the transportation piece and um how that can be swung differently. Yeah, President Burger, board member [clears throat] Clevin, all board members, so

155many moving variables all the time and one of those is when the list was put out there, not only did everybody who saw the list internal to Grand Forks Public Schools get a chance to react, but so did the outside partners. Such is the case as our transportation coordinator, we have an outside vendor providing service to us and they reached out with concern. We had another outside provider Triangle come to the microphone, you might recall, expressed concern for that and so the the conversation immediately began about how can we stick to the pri- sorry, stick to the commitment of the dollar amount reduction. So, we're going to continue on the path of the $4.4 million reduction. That component will stay, but the position itself could be retained. So, the conversation um is ongoing. Thank you.

156Okay. Go over to Mr. Manley. Um just to reset, we're voting on the dollar amount, not on the 52 bullet items and in fact some of those items can come off such as a virtual academy, maybe others. Um can other things be added on to that list then? Do you want to take that, Dr. Brenner? The answer is yes. Can be added on to it. Yes, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Manley. Other questions, comments? Miss Flynn? But can things be taken off? Did you hear that follow-up question? Could Could things be taken off? Was the question. I think we will continue to work through uh through our conversations with uh applicable folks. Um you know, I I I I can't say yes and I can't say no because there's too many variables uh and if

157I say something publicly uh one way or the other, I'm going to be held to that standard. But what I can commit to you is we're going to continue to explore all options. You have a follow-up, Ms. Flynn. Your microphone is still on, so Okay. Mr. Clevin. Thank you. Is it reasonable This is a question for Dr. Brenner. Is it reasonable to characterize that the administrative work that's ongoing and is yet to be finished would cause reinvestigation of of that list of 52 to use the vernacular. So, again, to rephrase it, the administrative process that is ongoing and will be finalized, that itself is the process that may lead to changes in the in the where budget is reduced. That is correct. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Clevin. Other questions? Comments from board members? Just want

158to do one more sweep of the room. Catch you all in the eye. Good. Good over here. As as I had hoped all along, um want to leave room for for all perspectives. Uh want to leave room for all comments, for all clarifying questions. Um I I do hope uh that for those here and for those listening, um while depending on uh the vote that's about to take place, um certainly we we may not agree. Um There has been a tremendous amount of time and and effort and interest in this process. It has not been easy. We have done the work because it's important. Um and the work is ongoing. Um As you as you have seen demonstrated through this through this conversation. So, um just before the moment passes, a thank you to everyone

159who's been involved, for everyone who's has and called and spoke um and uh and advocated. Uh we hope that that measure of engagement continues uh as it relates to this agency's work, this taxing agency's work, as well as uh the upcoming elections for those who will represent you and us in the state legislature and beyond. So, um we have invited the the conversation all along and we will continue to do so. Any final thoughts or comments from board members? The motion on the floor is to approve $4.4 million budget realignment. We'll take a roll call vote. Larson Yes. Pamasano Yes. Klevin Yes. Lunn Yes. Manley Yes. Anderson Yes. Hodak No. Flynn No. Burger Yes. Seven yes, two no, zero absent. Motion passes. Before we move on into six, uh as I alluded to earlier, just

160just one moment, Mr. Klevin. Uh a question that had come up earlier during the discussion, uh as board leadership, uh given this board action tonight, um we would direct you, Dr. Brenner, to determine the scope of a potential reduction in force, if any, uh limited to identifying affected curriculum content areas and/or programmatic areas in accordance with board policy and applicable legal requirements. Um we'll report back to the board as soon as we are able about the cadence of those reporting periods, so that we're aware of of how those may uh may play out Uh in accordance with our regular board meeting schedules and any special meetings if if required. Anything else on that, Mr. Clevin? Yeah, we've we've been talking about cuts. And but earlier there's a reference to $4.9 million, which included some revenue

161components. How do we handle those revenue things or is that another meeting would be perfectly fine? Mr. Bombach, do you want to touch on that? Did you hear board member Clevin's question? I did. Thank you, President Burger, board member Clevin. I didn't author the memo exactly or make the motion itself, but 4.4 would be what I would consider a reduction on the expenditure side and then the additional half million dollars identified for increased revenue. That's where you get to that $4.9 million. So at some Excuse me. At some point we'll see those in a board meeting setting. Is that correct? That's correct. >> Thank you. Okay, we'll move on to six. These are other items on the agenda. 6A, announcements. Are there any announcements for the good of the whole? From board members or admin?

162Mr. Clevin? Yes. Thank you once again for granting me the floor. There was some discussion about pilots and various tax incentives. At the last city council meeting I attended, there were a lot of agenda items that were of, you know, personal or professional interest to me. One of those was a five-year pilot that was requested from a development, bear with me, called the Latitude Phase Two. And I urge people to read the staff report. And those are people around this room and people who are critical of pilots cuz I'm going to read from it directly. Quote, "Based on feedback from the Grand Forks School Board and Grand Forks County Commission, the city administratively has advised private developers that market-based multi-family developments will need to stay within the city's tax incentive authority of 5 years unless

163the project is unique and a differentiator from Grand Forks." So, end of quote. But, I offer this as an announcement because our work here, and I'm going to credit Jeff Manley uh for this primarily. I think he's taken the most courageous uh stance on this, and there's others. So, if you're not being named by name, don't take offense. Uh and in conjunction with the County Commission, so, I think this is an important thing to state publicly because we are listening. We're hearing what what's happening in the community about this particular uh government policy, and we're doing our part. Our voices are being heard, uh and I think we should credit the city for them understanding what I think is an accurate reading of our collective thoughts on the topic. Thank you, Mr. Klave. Are there

164other announcements? 6B, board requests for future consideration. Yes, Ms. Flynn. I have three. Um one we already talked about, but I want to make sure that it's in this part of the agenda that um at our meetings moving forward, we have a budget realignment process update. Um perhaps a standing line item until we get to the approved dollar amount. Um I've asked this one specifically um at least two times, um, that we have a representative from the Education Foundation present to our board, um, with discussion on how, um, they develop their priorities and how we work together for, um, raising dollars at the Education Foundation. And then, um, I would, uh, appreciate a new, uh, item for future consideration, um, Bill has talked about before that in the past we used to get enrollment reports,

165um, we do get those in some capacity now, um, maybe not as public as we did before, um, so I would, one, like that to continue, hopefully in a public manner, um, but I also would like us to perhaps implement something different, um, in terms of building efficiency reports. I would be interested in what it looked like to have, um, a multi-year report on how efficient our buildings are, um, and perhaps even consider a metric on how we rate building efficiencies. Thank you, Ms. Flynn. Are there other board requests for future consideration? We're on to 6C, school board meeting norms. Mr. Manley, how did we do? We did very well with thoughtful and respectful respectful conversation. Okay. Thank you. We adjourned.