001Call to order the regular meeting of the school board for Monday, September 22nd, 2025. First item on our agenda is the pledge of allegiance. Would invite you to stand as you are able. 1 A the reading of our schoolboard meeting norms. Mr. Anderson. >> Our 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 the 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 tonight's agenda. I would seek a motion to approve the agenda as outlined in your board packet. It's >> been moved by Mr. Palmino, second by Mr. Larson. We'll take a roll
002call vote. >> Manley, >> yes. >> Lun, >> yes. >> Larson, >> yes. >> Palmino, >> yes. >> Hodak, >> yes. >> Cleven, >> yes. >> Flynn, >> yes. >> Anderson, >> yes. >> And Burger, >> yes. >> Nine, yes. Zero, no. Zero absent. >> Motion passes. Item three, our public comment period. I do not have any public comment cards filled out this evening. Is there any member of the general public who wishes to speak at tonight's meeting? We'll move on to item four. These are superintendent's recommendations for discussion. 4A, the finance committee report. Turn it over to Mr. Palmino and then perhaps Mr. Bombach. >> Okay. >> Thank you. Yeah, we we had a meeting on the uh it was change order number 16 for Valley Middle School for 54,275. We did okay it.
003It was for drinking fountains and fountains with water fillers. For some reason on the drawings they were put on the drawings backwards I believe and then this is to change and correct it. So, it's a change on that, but just for your information, uh it leaves us close to uh I'm doing my uh 1968 math here. Uh 600 and roughly 625,000 left in our contingency and and the uh builders has over a million dollars and there so we're in very good shape going forward with Valley. So, any questions if anybody would have? >> Sure. First, any other members of the finance committee wish to weigh in before we open this up to board members? Mr. Bombach, anything to add from that committee meeting? >> No, just a quick reminder that the board had delegated the
004authority to the finance committee to um move on any change orders that do not increase the guaranteed maximum price. So, that's what's in front of you today. It's just a presentation of that decision that was made with no decision of the board requested tonight. Thank you. Questions or clarifying comments from board members? Mr. Cleven. >> Thank you. Were there any costs related to demolition, removal or rework or is this all new work that was never executed at the start? >> No, it was demo in that. They had to because of the size and then some need uh generator. Are are they generators or u compressors within them for water water filler? So the ones they put in weren't quite wouldn't fit the original deal. So they had to do some changing of that. So there
005was some restructuring and reconstruction >> and those costs are included in the change order >> in that total change order. Yeah. >> Thanks. >> Other questions or comments from board members? Again, this is a under recommendations for discussion. No board action required. So, seeing no other discussion, we'll move on to 4B uh schoolboard self- assessment committee report. Turn this over to Mr. Cleven, who chaired that meeting, and then perhaps we'll hear from Mr. Manley or the board chair uh depending on uh other statements. We did meet for almost an hour and there was a lot of discussion but not a lot of actionable actions were taken. First off, we do recommend the self assessment tool uh as the tool going forward for next this next year. Uh what we did talk about was possibly doing
006this twice a year which would require a policy change and the recommend that committee is just talk about it as a group see if a twice a year self assessment is is worth the work which now of course is going to be a policy change as well. So, um, the other thing we talked about is when we get results of the self assessment, we do want kind of a look back report to kind of summarize results of years prior. It mostly as a comparison tool to the year at hand. Uh, and then lastly, we did recommend adding the meeting norms onto the first page of the assessment tool just as another reminder of what we remind ourselves at every meeting. So with that, the committee would uh recommend the assessment tool with the one change
007to add the meeting norms to the first page. >> Yeah, it's a great summary. Mr. Manley, anything to add from your point of view? >> Um, just that we're maybe looking for some input from everyone else whether uh increasing the frequency would be too much ask from everybody to to do that self assessment. um we hate to have burnout and have people not complete them because it's too much. So um I guess that's it. >> Yeah, that was well summarized by the other two committee members. So I'll I'll open it up at this point for questions, clarifying comments or remarks for discussion from other board members. um the first year hearing this of course, but if anyone wants to process in real time, we'd be looking for some feedback on those main points. >> Yes,
008Dr. L. >> I I understand the cons of doing it more than once a year. Tell me what the the the pros, what would be the what would be the positives coming out doing multiple evaluations in a year? I'm sure you guys must have talked about that. >> Yeah. Mr. Cleven, do you want to go first? we we did uh one just another another means of you know making sure we're on task, you know, checking ourselves. So there's a a virtue of just making sure again twice a year instead of once a year that we're on track and that we're we're doing the things we've asked ourselves to do. Secondly, there was a discussion about doing on the same cycle as the superintendent. Uh and personally, I feel that sort of cycle matches up well.
009uh it seems fair to kind of while there he's he's being in this case he Dr. Brener currently it feels fair to also be reviewing ourselves so I those are the two pros that got most uh discussed Mr. Manley anything else to add to that yeah that's that's well stated other questions comments or discussion from board members >> yes Dr. Dr. Hodc, >> my comment would be not necessarily for us to do it more than once, but it would be very important for us to do the look back so that we're comparing to see if we are improving or if we did improve in the area that we needed that was, you know, designated from the year before. That's where I would be um with that. But then I also will ask that uh if
010we have any policy um direction or what you want us to do to let us know that as well. >> Others other board members M Flynn >> um upon hearing the discussion I think I'm like neutral about a change or not a change. I think one of um the reasons why we added in the norms for our meetings was to kind of do a check-in at at every meeting too. And so, you know, certainly we've had some contentious meetings over the years and it's been like, "Oh, yep. The discussions in recycle." And um you know, it's it's not an in-depth check-in, but it is the purpose of it is to share thoughts on how we're doing. Um, and so maybe that feels to me why maybe a little bit more neutral on doing a separate
011check-in too. Um, I definitely think the look back would be helpful though, especially um, given the policy change about um, and we'll talk about it. Uh, but like when we are reviewing the school board's pay, I think that would be important for the school board to consider a look back. Um I think it would be important to look back and talk about any um you know certainly we go through a lot of changes here and there and so um I believe that our committees do the work um and so it's a little bit more difficult to um kind of add in on my perspective I think the speaking from the con just one more thing when we're kind of doing the work already and we check in at every meeting. So, I'm neutral about it.
012I don't have an opinion either way, I guess. But those are my thoughts. >> Thank you. Other board members who haven't had a chance to weigh in? >> I'll ask it this way. Um, members of the self- assessment committee, do you have enough information to go on as as we as we look at this? And and the 1A to that is policy review members. if there was something that went to policy, would you have enough information from board members to go on or or are you looking for for more than this discussion tonight? So, I'll open it up to to those committee members. Dr. Len. >> Well, I I would leave it up to self evaluation assessment committee and I think if they feel it's worth trying. I mean, you're not I assuming you're not
013going to write it and grant it. And if in two years it really doesn't seem to be serving a purpose, we can we can get rid of it from the I'm on the policy committee. If if they come with their recommendations, I'm not going to say no. I would I would I would say and and then instead of saying shall be done twice a year or annually, we should change it to at least annually. And then you can kind of do it without changing the policy. Yes. Do you have anything to add, Dr. Hodc? >> No, I would concur exactly with what Dr. Lund has said that that's what we would do once we were to receive it as a directive. >> Okay. Any final thoughts or questions? Mr. Cleven, first and then Mr. Manley.
014Yes, Mr. Cleven. >> I don't really hear a strong desire to do this twice a year. So we we were asking from a committee to talk about it to gain a sense of of what we wanted to do as a group. So hearing no strong consensus, I'd say we don't do it twice a year and continue on with the current once a year uh process and we don't change our uh policy. >> Mr. Manley, >> just to change it up just a hair, um Mr. Cleven was a meeting chairperson on this meeting and he did just such a wonderful job and clear and concise and I think we should get him on more committees and have him chair more and more. >> All right. All right. The chair has not entertained that motion, but I
015appreciate the comment, Mr. Manley. Um, again, this is another item for discussion. I feel like we've we've been able to share perspectives and and the the committee uh most in charge of this particular piece has what it needs. Uh and so um with no other hands in the air, I think we'll leave it there. Uh and we'll move on to 5A. Now these are now recommendations for action. 5A, consideration of building fund use for repair and improvement expenses. Mr. Bombach. Yes, Chairperson Burger, members of the board, I'm bringing forward to you a request to account for already incurred expenditures against the building fund rather than the general fund. We've done this maneuver before in works of of wrapping up last year's budget. Um, essentially have identified a few things listed on the cover memo here.
016A few different projects that would qualify under the building fund per century code as it relates to renovation, repair, or expansion of a school. Uh this would include the Dakota Mudjack Environmental Abatement Services, Johnson Controls and OP Construction Project, Red River Glazing, and Structures Incorporated, amounting to um just under $180,000. And this would be consistent with prior um priorities of of uh prioritizing the general fund for other uses and not construction projects. It would also keep us in line still with that ending fund balance guideline or guard rails we put on the building fund. it would not take us below that threshold. So the administrative recommendation would be to account for those expenses um against the building fund rather than the general fund. Questions from board members for Mr. Bombach. Dr. Lun, >> our ultimate
017goal is that these will come out of the building fund in the first place. We won't have to go do it afterwards. Um yeah, Jefferson Burgerer, um board member Lun, that that's the goal, but um it's very clear in century code that every single expenditure um out of the building fund needs to be approved by the board. So whether they're fully anticipated at the front of the year, like leases, we could do that, but it may be more regular or consistent if we wait near the end of the year when we get a full view of it and we bring one of those requests to the board. >> Other questions, Mr. Cleven? Uh probably be a couple of them in series here. Have all these invoices already been paid? >> Uh yes, they have. >>
018And are any of these are they all separate projects, not expenses kind of rigged up together from one larger project? They're all uniquely independent. >> They are uniquely dependent. Y >> Other questions from board members? There's been a motion on the floor to expense the 179,86419 in repair and improvement expenses incurred in fiscal year 2025 against the building fund. That it's been moved by Dr. Lun, second by Dr. Hodc. Is there any further discussion? >> Yes, Mr. CL. And this might be an unanswerable question right now, but generally what's the building fund balance look like after these expenses? You know, one or two significant digits kind of number. >> Yeah. Um, thanks for the question. I believe we're sitting about 1.8 million and I think in the facilities committee the whole we might see that
019number. >> All right. Thank you. Any other questions regarding the motion on the floor? >> We'll take a roll call vote. >> Pomacino. Yes. >> Anderson. >> Yes. >> Lun. >> Yes. >> Flynn. >> Yes. >> Larson. >> Yes. >> Manley. >> Yes. >> Cleven. >> Yes. >> Hodak. >> Yes. >> Burger. >> Yes. >> Nine. Yes. Zero. No. Zero. Absent. >> Motion passes. 5B is the consent agenda. I would seek a motion to approve the consent agenda as outlined in your packet. >> It's been moved by Mr. Palmino, second by Miss Flynn. We'll take a roll call vote. >> Larson. >> Yes. >> Palmino. >> Yes. Cleven, >> yes. >> Lun, >> yes. >> Manley, >> yes. >> Anderson, >> yes. >> Hodak, >> yes. >> Flynn, >> yes. >> And Burgerer, >> yes.
020>> Nine, yes. Zero, no. Zero absent. >> Motion passes. 5C. Contracted staff resignation and release from contract. Anna Angstrom. Dr. Brener. >> Thank you, President Burgerer. In front of you, you have a memo from me. per North Dakota Century Code 15.1-09-33 provides authority for the school board to act on employment contracts for school district personnel. Uh you'll find a letter attached resignation letter uh from Anna Angstrom, social worker at Grand Fork Central High School. Uh she is asking to be released from her contract and she is u fully aware and signed the document uh to pay the liquidated damages under policy DKBB. So, it is the administrative recommendation to grant Miss Angstrom release from her 2526 teaching contract effective September 30th, 2025 with the enforcement of liquidated damages. Thank you. Questions for Dr. Brener. seek
021a motion to grant Miss Angstrom release from her 2025206 teaching contract effective September 30, 2025 with the enforcement of liquidated damages under policy DKBB. It's been moved by Mr. Manley and a second by Mr. Larson. Any further discussion? We'll take a roll call vote. >> Hodak, >> yes. >> Larson, >> yes. >> Manley, >> yes. >> Cleven, >> yes. >> Anderson, >> yes. >> Flynn, >> yes. Pomacino, >> yes. >> Lun, >> yes. >> Burger, >> yes. >> Nine, yes. Zero, no, zero absent. >> Motion passes. 5D, consideration of proposals for district-wide snow removal. Mr. Bomb. >> Hey, President Burgerer, members of the board. Each and every year, we'll go out to bid for snow snow removal services uh across the school district. We take it a slightly different approach this time when we did
022request those responses. Um, before we would just ask for a quoted hourly rate and we would break it up for two zones. Um, and two zones just delineating between these sets of parking lots and these sets of parking lots, two of those. Um, so it's conceivable that we would have two different vendors. In recent years, we've really only had the one vendor take on both zones. Um, we did take a different approach this year with hopes that it would help even keep these bills a little bit lower by rather than just charging a straight hourly rate. We would we would ask for a quote for per snow event. So on the cover memo, you'll see this tiered system in the table in the center that we delineated that if there's a snowfall of 0 to
0232 in, there would be a rate quoted to clear each of those two zones and then 2 to 6 in, 6 to 12, and 12 plus. Um, we're happy with the results here. We've gotten two responses this year. One is from our incumbent, the folks who provided snow removal services last year, Fertilon, and the other is a new um respondent, PRO, Land and Snow. In that center table, you can see the rates and how they stack up for both of the zones. I would characterize those as significantly different between the two um biders. Um, what we're always looking for when we make a recommendation is a vendor vendor that's both responsible and lowest bids. I would characterize both vendors as as responsible. With any new vendor, which is the case for Proland and Snow, we
024follow up with additional um information about the types of equipment they're using and really try to understand um how they plan to tackle the amount of surface parking lot we have. and in particular our grounds director um our manager um Brandon Orloff followed up and had that conversation and inspected the equipment and he feels solid about that and so I would characterize both of those as responsible biders but this the difference comes in um at the lowest bid and you can see those are summarized here um where depending on the type of event but there's significant savings um with the the bidder proland and snow. So, it's with all that consideration that administration's recommending to approve Prolana Snow as the snow removal vendor for the 2526 school year. >> Questions from board members for Mr.
025Bombach? >> Miss Flynn, >> can you remind me, do we also get bids for lawn care in the spring summer or do we do that ourselves? >> Sure. Yeah. um members of the board, we do our our lawn cutting, lawn care, all of that ourselves. >> Okay. >> Um and then if there's too much snow and the snow needs to be removed from site, is that covered in here? >> Yeah, another great question that is incorporated, especially when you consider like a a downtown Phoenix lot, um that's a part of it. So, we get quotes on as they know full well they need to truck away from time to time. Other questions from board members for Mr. Bombach? Seeing none, I would seek a motion to approve uh Proland Snow as the snow removal vendor
026for the 2025 2026 school year. >> It's been moved by Mr. Cleven. Is there a second? >> Second by Mr. Anderson. Further discussion? We'll take a roll call vote. >> Cleven, >> yes. >> Manley, >> yes. >> Hodak, >> yes. >> Anderson, >> yes. >> Flynn, >> yes. >> Larson, >> yes. >> Lun, >> yes. >> Pomacino, Burger, >> yes. >> Nine, yes. Zero, no. Zero absent. >> Motion passes. 5e general fund financial statement. Mr. Bombach. >> Yes, Chairperson Burger. Members of the board, um, here's our financial statement presented to you for the first two months from July 1 to August 31st. You can see they're summarized in the revenues of just over $8 million and expenditures right about $6 million resulting in revenues over expenditures of of just over $2 million. As we work
027through um these two reports, there's not a lot of inferences yet to be drawn just because it's it's so early. We're coming off of paying um just primarily August hours been there's only three days of school. So the first report does summarize the actual against the preliminary budget as we haven't accepted a final budget yet. So you'll see that there you can see that uh revenues represent 6.3% of that preliminary budget and expenditures of 4.6. happy to answer any questions. But even going down to the second part of the report, it's that comparative report. And um again, there's not a lot of inferences. But one thing I'll point out on the the final slides, the graphical depictions. Um I pointed out last time that the general fund balance wouldn't quite look the same in the
028second month. It was a matter of timing as we got our our August payment a day early, so it showed up in our July statement. But you can see how it's come to even out here. Um, happy to answer any questions. >> Questions from board members for Mr. Bombach, >> Dr. L >> from you or maybe anybody else. Have we gotten any more clarity out of DC? What what's going to be happening or what's happening with any of the federal programs? >> Yeah. Um, members of the board, happy to answer the question myself or anybody can jump in here too. But, um, I I'd say no is the answer. Um, be looking forward to some of that. uh information by the end of this year so we can really plan ahead but as of this
029point there's been no update. >> Other members of the administration want to weigh in on that particular question. Okay. Uh other questions for Mr. Bombach from board members related to the general fund financial statement. I would seek a motion to approve the general fund financial statement for the period of July 1, 2025 through August 31, 2025. It's been moved by Mr. Palmino. Is there a second? A second by Mr. Larson. Any further discussion? >> We'll take a roll call vote. >> Lun? >> Yes. >> Flynn? >> Yes. >> Pomacino? >> Yes. >> Larson? >> Yes. >> Cleven? >> Yes. >> Hodak? >> Yes. >> Anderson? >> Yes. >> Manley? >> Yes. >> Burger? >> Yes. >> Nine. Yes. Zero. No. Zero absent. >> Motion passes. 5F. consideration of fiscal year 26 district budget and tax
030levy certificate of tax levy. Mr. Bombachuk, >> thank you President Burgerer. Members of the board, I prepared just a little bit of a slide deck here that's same format as the preliminary budget and I've largely taken that context of saying what what has changed since the last time we spoke of this. Um so what the road map here is and um of course within the board packet itself is the state document that we'll need to submit um or get over to the county auditor. So it's in that format. I I cover some of the main points here and we'll of course have time at the end for any questions. So, first and foremost, um, kind of a road map here is looking back on this fiscal year 25 as we really wrap that up, looking
031at the, of course, the fiscal year 26 budget, which would be for your consideration for approval tonight, and then how that affects um, ending fund balances. And just a reminder, in this process, the last time we talked about this preliminary budget was in late July, so we could meet that o August 10th deadline to get the preliminary over to the county auditor. Uh, of course, there was a public hearing on September 8th, um, when no comments were made. And then our final budget will be considered here tonight, September 22nd, to meet the October 10th deadline because I believe our first board meeting falls on October 11th. Um, and then this has been a slide that we like to remind ourselves. In the center column top is that pointed out some of our fiscal goals here
032of how much we want to have in reserve at the end of certain fiscal years including the up approaching 63026 to have 15% of expenditures here. Um, and largely this update will say we won't make that target. Um, this was also one slide I decided to keep from the preliminary budget conversation as it tells a little bit of the story of the last fiscal year as I work into that that there were needs that emerged across the district last fiscal year as we had 200 new students arriving in our district. And so when looking through a lot of those numbers, we see um after the budget was set, additional positions added to address those needs. And that's how we um largely had overcome the budget um goals. And so this was that summary provided at
033the time too. We could see that we had a pro we had come into the year earlier around budget realignment conversations. Some of the budget was set on those aspirations and they weren't achieved for the reasons I just articulated. And then also um an inaccurate number as it relates to property tax estimates. They were less than anticipated. So you put those two together and you can quickly see how um things got where we didn't want them and out of alignment. What has changed now between the preliminary budget conversation in late July until um today is the first column here shows what we had set the budget at. The second column is that preliminary number that we last time we talked about here and said this is the way things are shaping up. And then what
034has changed slightly uh is is for the worst slightly of now coming over $2 million. As we worked the final numbers in as we called in um federal reimbursement and got those expectations a little more figured out. Unfortunately, it took us just a little further in that wrong direction. You can see on the bottom portion of the table a starting u beginning general fund balance and then ending fund balance. You know in both cases that has us right around that 6% but just below that 6% of general fund ending balance in this budget are a carry through of of what happened last year largely. So as we ramped up for addressing needs of additional students um throughout the year we did see enrollment decline which is quite natural progression um but you would normally you
035would anticipate um in the fall many of the same numbers to persist and what I'll tell you is that we've seen our student enrollment drop at that point or at this point in the year of course our contracts are extended our employees hired and so we are on a very similar path as last last year as far as the number of employees. So, it's hard to get ahead of that when when we have secured those positions. So, we have that as a headwind coming into this budget. And we also had other things that have been long since planned uh and and are we are actioning on. For example, the career impact is opening. There comes associated costs with that. There's virtual high school, not a large amount of cost, but associated costs. There have been
036decisions made around curriculum adoptions and investments. and then even some technology upgrades as we are getting near end of life for some of those products. This slide was discussed again late July. They um these elements persist. Um the enrollment information is new to us. Um as we pull it out into perspective. So taking you from left to right. Um the first two columns we've already discussed in this presentation. I'm sorry. Well, we have first one being that's how last year's wrapped up when we talked about the preliminary budget in July. The second column was the anticipated number of of 2.9. We knew we'd have work to do um to overcome that, but very little could you do um by this budget. We'd be doing the work for next budget. But in between the preliminary and
037the final budget, we did what work we could do, including um reducing supply lines, discretionary supply lines across pretty much across the board of a reduction of 10% saying, "Hey, we're going to enter a budget year where we need to be mindful. These are some things that can be worked into the budget and implemented." Um and those things helped reduce that um expenditure over revenue to just under 2.7. we had 157 students um reduction in enrollment um not show so to speak this fall. And when you take that times the per pupil calculation of just over $11,000 each um that has really put us in this reality of the budget saying you know by the end of fiscal year 26 this current fiscal year um we would actually be expenditure over revenue by 4.4 4
038million. And so that's the middle point here. Um what I had left the preliminary budget presentation with was some variables that could change. That's largely what this slide is trying to um articulate now is what has changed then? Did those variables change? So one thing as we work up all of our hiring and work it into our September 15th payroll, you've heard me talk about that. That's when we get a very clear picture about who's here to work this year. And it was largely what we anticipated as far as that bucket goes. We didn't see um anything too dramatic. A little bit higher probably, but largely what we were anticipating. Student enrollment was um something that was newer that took us to a different level there. And that's what I've articulated. That's 157 um kids.
039Uh that's the the financial impact of that. It's also new concept this year to work in property tax caps. And so um prior years we could benefit from any community growth beyond 3%. Both in new growth and in valuation growth and were capped at 3%. So when you work that into the figures that's just a reality. I don't think it was substantially impactful but um that's a reality in this budget. And then um grant allocations there were reductions. That's not what the question was asked before about what can we anticipate in future years. There were they were reductions on a couple of those key federal grants this year. Again, not making up the big difference, but these were things they listed as variables that would still come into focus and they've come into focus now.
040So, it's not a position um we want to be in. But with the with the property tax caps, just to show you how that comes to work on what you you levy as mills, if you have growth exceeding that 3%, you need to reduce your mill levy to bring it within the bounds of only a 3% increase. And so that's what this looks like. This is the certification of mill levy that is in the documentation for tonight's consideration. And you'll see the aggregate here across the number of different mills we levy will be reduced from this last fiscal year of 130 130.68 down to 129.85. And so that's that's the functionality of of the property tax caps. So it's a it's a property tax relief as designed by the state um for our local taxpayers.
041And that's what it becomes to look like. What the budget would anticipate then on our general fund balance um is is is really reducing this down to just over $3 million. So this is this is clearly um an effort here a signal for realignment work. Um we need to um go through conversations as a school board, as a community, as a a school district to make sure that we um shore this up and have strong reserves into the future um when enrollment adjustments happen or in both cases or when um expenditures exceed revenues. Uh what I would say here as far as next steps is administration's been considering this um since the you know preliminary budget early on and and even talked loosely or a little bit about during our board retreat about what will
042be the process to ensure um this comes together. Um really what I would say are these key points here that there needs to be a budget I'm recommending a budget realignment process administration is but to include open conversations about budget priorities again always focused on the student and the student outcomes what is it within our general fund that needs to be prioritized and then the connected question what is it in our general fund that shouldn't be um prioritized we've administration's envisioned a process of of getting to this question early and working hard on it and so board engagement throughout the year beginning in October. I will say too publicly that there's a lot of consideration about how to engage all stakeholders um open and transparency in this process and the board of course represents the
043public and so by having conversations such as these at the board table or via board retreats we certainly anticipate the press to be present and report on that and certainly anticipate that there are um mechanisms or channels for the public to communicate that back to the board. So we as a community make this decision and as a board we make good decisions. Um informing district employees and public throughout the process with those regular board presentations and retreats and then uh the anticipation about this timeline would be really working immediately. Um and decisions can come as they come throughout that process, but certainly, you know, by anticipated right around that start of March, we would have some clear decisions made for the following budget to help um realign those resources to student outcomes and get that
044budget where it needs to be and the balance where it needs to be. So, the administrative recommendation is to consider the approval of this budget in front of you uh and tax levy for fiscal year 26, but certainly happy to um answer any questions here. I just have one clarification and then I'll open this up to board members if you can go back one slide just just to be clear about the timeline. Your your final bullet point, this would be the start of March 2026. So, great five months from now. just so that everybody hears that um yes, we're talking about fiscal year 2027, >> but this process will take us to a final complete realignment over the next 5 months and a few days rather than 17 months. >> Okay. So, just so we're
045all clear about that, uh questions, clarifying comments for Mr. Bombach from board members, Mr. Cleven. >> And so the action tonight is the mill levy certificate. Correct. >> It's the mill levy certificate and everything that follows that initial page. So that's how we get to the county out of there to approve it. But we're also setting our budget for this year. So that will work into our accounting system and then put all the controls in place for the decisions that need to be made. And so I mean the biggest thing at least as I see right now is we're dealing with the tax le re levy and the revenue side but are there corrections and changes we can make in this operating year to kind of handle the expense side because I kind of got
046a mixed message there about staffing and >> sure >> what kind of actions we could or couldn't take. I'd like a little more information on that. I'm happy to comment on that and I invite superintendent to make comments too. Um but just as far as um continuing contract guarantees um certain labor rights, etc. Um our our certified individuals um are protected. They have a contract. There'll be no decisions made about those positions during this year. Classified don't enjoy the same protections. There certainly could be decisions made there. And then there's the other 15% of the budget. We enter into contracts in some cases. For example, our curriculum investments. You don't make those overnight. They get locked up and and anticipated. We had some um um technology was brought up earlier, so new uh equipment for
047our teaching staff, but we hadn't done it yet for some of our classified staff or our our um admin staff. So, we won't do that with technology. So, we'll look for all opportunities to um intervene. Dr. Brener, anything to add? >> I can just add, excuse me, a couple of pieces to that. Uh, this this work started uh several weeks ago, actually a couple of months ago with uh Brandon leading the charge uh creating a a Gant chart and just kind of uh amorizing out uh each week, each month, what we would need to do to make sure we would start course correcting in this fiscal year. Uh there are a number of things that uh that we're looking at and and I will say that one thing that's different than what we did a
048couple of years ago with the budget realignment process is while we engaged all of our principles and directors in large group in this room uh kind of working back and forth on concepts uh and getting to some force choices we've added some additional steps where we're actually um Dr. Glatch, Mr. Baky, Mr. Bombbuck and myself are going out to buildings and we're having intimate conversations with building level leadership seeing asking the question, what can you do this year to help reconcile that budget and what can you be thinking about? Um, so as we move into next year, what sort of changes could be made to help to help with the budget. So that's a new piece to the process. We started at Winship Elementary today. That was our first school visit. Uh, we have a
049number of them set up for this week and um, as Mr. Bombachuk indicated you'll see in Friday focus uh some hold the dates for uh three additional retreats uh where we want to spend some mornings with you. So when we get feedback from principles, directors and all admin, you can see what that feedback is and we'll also have some of them in the room just like we did with the demographic task force and schoolboard work sessions. uh the feedback that I received uh from people who were in the room was that was really a good process because all the people uh were were speaking the same language and were talking about the same things um clarifying questions could be answered by the appropriate people in the room. So um this will be a if it
050wasn't busy last year with negotiations uh it'll be somewhat busy this year as we try to reconcile that final number moving into next year. Yes, Miss Flynn, was that okay? >> Um, just looking at some of the um actual two revenue estimated, it looks like we um had some gaps in the like what was allocated and then federal funding in a lot of areas. There's some that are blank and then next to that is a has a number. So for example, like in revenue there's other restricted federal aid in two categories that has a significant difference or title for programs and community programs. There's one cell that's blank and the other one has a dollar amount in it. Um, is I know a question was asked earlier about the impact of the federal government and
051it was like we really don't know, but is a lot of this maybe hinged on what we do or don't know and we're trying to get ahead of potential federal funding gaps? Do we not have the money on a certain timeline? is that I know we talked about other things like we have less children this year and some finalized federal or finalized salaries but it looks like some of the changes might be federal funding too and I don't know maybe if I'm getting them switched around where it was estimated that we got nothing and now we're getting something but I'm just curious if we can talk more about that because I know when we were in negotiations one of the things that we talked about was part of the scary unknown with all of this
052is where we're at at the federal level and the state level. We just, you know, where do we begin to even have realignment conversations when there's a lot of unknowns and, you know, we're we're kind of going off of assumptions, which we do, our budget teams does a pretty good job of, but you know, my worry is always we plan for something and then the money doesn't come through. You know, even there's a section with career and technical like joint programs that had a big difference in there, too. So, I'm just curious about some of those conversations, kind of thinking out loud. >> Yeah. Um, members of the board, um, board member Flynn, you know, I'm honest, I'm not sure exactly which document you're referencing. Um, but what I can say is we first and
053foremost this is I would I have argued before it's sort of like good hygiene, something we should do each and every year. The word realignment is the opportunity to not just course correct when things aren't positive, but it's to continually reinforce the priorities of the district and the things that aren't priorities and point them towards student outcomes and you you can decide what's working and it's not working. So, I would say that's that's a really healthy thing to be doing in the first place. Um, and two, yes, contingency planning. I mean, that's a big part of why we want to build that reserve balance in the first place. That's why it's a board goal. Uh, I think when it comes to the feds and what they will or will not do, we learned a little
054bit this past year that it would be most likely, you know, title two or title four that would be of concern, which is a smaller number than all of the federal grants, but just the same, we need to be planning for it. That has been a part of the conversation. I would say that the way that this budget is put together is simply taking what they've told us we have received, which is a lower amount than the prior year, but it is not anticipating a complete removal of those. And of course, if that decision came, then we would we would need to do additional work to to make that um whole to cover that. >> Other questions or comments? Oh, yes, Mr. Baky. >> Yeah, thank you. Uh, members of the board, uh, member Flynn,
055I do want to articulate some of the the concerns that you do have relative to the uncertainty that did exist through the title funds. Um, one thing I also want to note is that um, we did receive a decrease in our title funds. Specifically, when I when I say that, I'm talking about our title one, title two, title three, title four. Again, I've shared that the overall decrease that we saw in those funds. Um, again, not all of those were completely decreased. Um, but when we look at them in totality, it was decreased. Um overall as a state in North Dakota we received right around an 8% decrease when it came to title one funds. Um and so yes we are seeing some of that impact. However one other thing I want to note is
056that when we talk about title funds and we talk about our federal funds typically it's a revenue and expenditure balance. Um so as we expend those dollars we also receive the matching revenue on the other side. And so when we look at our overall general fund, the only way that that really plays a huge impact on the general fund is if we don't have the dollars to match the current contracts that we are under. And so when we receive decreases and I will say that some of the uh notice of what our current allocations were this year were later than they typically have been, which again contracts are already set. um we have staff members in place and then we receive an allocation that is less or in some cases maybe more. It we have
057to do some fluctuations based on what the situation is and so the more uncertainty and the more um we don't know it makes it more difficult to do that. Um however on a typical situation the revenue and expenditures should match and should not overall impact the general fund as long as everything is set that way. I hope uh that helps answer your question. >> Yeah, it does. Um I think you know it's hard to play with dollars and cents when people keep changing their minds above us. So, um, my last question was, can you remind me where we're at on the on time funding schedule? I know it was like a graduated to get to on time instead of counting the students we had last year. Is it 100% this year? No. like the where
058we got revenue for students last year instead of how much we have in the seat. >> Just to clarify board member Flynn's question, uh the previous practice was last year's enrollment would determine this year's per pupil payment >> and there was some action toward getting it in real time. And so the question was >> the graduated scale >> was where we're at in that process of of that marking the actual students you have enrolled in that current year. Does that question make sense? >> Yes. Um board member Burger members of the board. Um yeah and Matt was just going to look that up so we have a concise answer. I don't recall exactly, but um yeah, I can talk about too the way that works too is they take the fall snapshot of just what
059the enrollment is this time of year and they will pay you off of that, but then they want to be careful not to have overpaid you. So they take another check in the spring for your your ADM and that's where we've seen a reduction. So then this coming budget they'll take back a little bit and say we overpaid you on that and then now you'll take a snapshot of your current year. So when you're in declining enrollment environments and we don't have a trend, we just have a single year of data. I'm not suggesting we're in a trend, but that's where it can be difficult. We could follow up with you too and make sure you have the answer. Uh members of the board, uh member Flynn, um if I recall off of memory right
060now, it's 80% is what our graduated rate was. I'm just trying to verify that here. So, um, but I believe it's 80% this year would be 100% correct. That's that's my recollection, but I'll I'll verify that and circle back. Thank you. >> Other questions, clarifying comments? Dr. L. >> Well, I just wanted to say I'm I'm certainly in support what what what's being proposed to tonight for for approval. Uh, I like the plan from what what I've seen. I just have two caveats. One is there should be no sacred cows when we're looking at the budget. That that means no sacred cows in anywhere. We should we should look at everything. Uh number two, do it in a logical, common sense, non-emotional way. And then three, I I heard I heard talk about the public
061and and and I like what you talk about, but I think we need to make sure that the public is well informed throughout this process in addition to staff, parents, every everybody else. I just want to make sure that that that they're informed throughout the process. And you you outlined some of the things that would keep them informed, including our meetings. So, but but I'm I'm generally in favor. I I like what I see. It's It's not going to be easy, but yeah, as as the old people at the corner can say, there's years that aren't aren't easy. So, thank you. I have just a a few things and then we'll we'll see if other board members have uh thoughts or questions before uh before there's a motion on the floor. Um we have seen
062this triple impact of federal support being um uh let's say uncountonable or or a moving target. And that's certainly has had an impact on districts across the country. Um this the state funding formula for for per pupil payment uh came short of of what we were lobbying for. Uh and the cap on property tax um is certainly another piece of that as well. These these all individually uh have their bases in in public policy. Uh but it it has made a perfect storm of sorts. Um, so this these decisions have impacts. Uh, I know I'm speaking more to members of the public than than those of us in this room. Um, but it's important to lobby for the importance of public education and for our title funding uh, at every level. Uh, the second thing
063that I'll say and and I know we we just have had a a a difficult realignment process. I I do think the conversation changes when we're talking about during this last realignment process. Do we really need to be at 15%, could we get to a 15% uh um fund? Could we get there more gradually? Is such a different conversation than we're going to be at 2%. If things don't change and so I just think everyone involved needs to hear that it is we're talking about some of the same things, some of the same concepts. Uh but this is a very different conversation and a very different time and so um we're willing to do the work. It's important work. Um and and we do need to look at at everything in a in a pragmatic
064fashion. And finally, I'll say because it's the one thing that that hasn't been said, there may be questions about um how can you be opening up a career impact academy? How could you be uh opening up a new valley middle school? uh talking about a new K8 school on the base in the midst of this. What on earth are you doing? Uh just a reminder um that the Career Impact Academy was a public private partnership. U some state support. This was not uh a property tax. Uh this was not a a referendum. Uh this is not sales tax, right? Um we are thankful for uh the successful referendum uh that has us opening a new Valley Middle School safety and security projects throughout the district. Those are separate funds that are not a part of
065this conversation. And so I just want to name that and get out ahead of it that we we are talking about our our general fund balance and revenues and expenditures separate from the projects that you see uh throughout uh district 1 and and uh and the air force base district. So um just wanted to name that in case anyone has any question about how could this possibly be. Um that's how it can possibly be and again our thanks to the public for their support. Uh but we are talking about separate um separate pieces uh separate ledgers. Any other questions or comments? Dr. Hodc, >> I'd like to hear from um Dr. Brener as to basically we've been hit with this triple threat storm and it's not going to be easy for us for any schools.
066What would the NDCL and the school boards association what are they doing to track some of these areas that are impacting and now will influence? Um my fear is that we have seen in this state um such an increase in um density in the larger schools Fargo the west and such. But what are you hearing one from other superintendent um about this and two what are the organizations that represent us as far as NDCL school boards association um united what are they doing to make sure that our um people that serve at the state department, our education commission and such as well as our legislators truly understand what some of their decisions have made. I know the tough part with the feds, but with this state and with this 3% cap, we've been hit hard.
067>> I agree with everything you just said. Now, to answer your question, um the 16 largest school districts just got together last Friday at Camp Grafton and Devil's Lake, and we actually talked about some of the challenges that we have in front of us. And we talked about this last legislative session. And you know what what we all agree on is this last session was pretty hostile to public education. You see the signs that are up around our community about we love our public schools. There's a reason for that and we're trying to get ahead of the next legislative session by symbolically uh communicating that public education is important. Uh we felt like on our list uh our 11 11 to 14 uh things that we wanted to get uh get across the finish line,
068we were 04. we were 0 for14, 0 for1 11, 0 for whatever. Um, you know, the the win that we had had to do with the air force base and uh having access to uh 2% loan money uh to build that school on the base. But um ND cell, all of us contributed uh through our membership for the North Dakota uh school study council. Uh we increased our membership fees so we could hire a lobbyist and a retired superintendent uh who spent a lot of time on Capitol on Capitol Hill. And it was just really difficult. Um I have some legislator friends um who I grew up with, I went to school with who are common sense people uh who shared with me that it felt like the wild west in Bismar. I mean they
069were public servants, public advocates uh public education advocates. Um but they were in the minority. Uh you know even in their own party they were in the minority. So, we know that um when we when we speak as one voice, we actually talked about this last Friday when North Dakota United, North Dakota School Board Association um and NDEL talked with one voice, we almost felt like we were punished. I think we were at 3% until the three organizations came together, really lobbied hard for three, and it went to two and a half. Um so, it's a it's a delicate dance politically, but that doesn't mean we're going to stop fighting on behalf of our students and on behalf of our communities. So, I I think there's uh you know, maybe the book end of this
070is there's good synergy uh behind school district leadership across the state um to try to get what we actually need to run our schools. I mean, we haven't even talked about um all the other communities with buildings that are over 100 years old. Uh we just happen to be in a fortunate spot here in Grand Forks where we now have positioned ourselves well facility-wise for the next generation. Thank you. Other questions, clarifying comments or remarks from board members? Uh, yes, Mr. Baky. >> Uh, President Burgerer, members of the board, um, just wanted to go back to, uh, member Flynn's, uh, comments or questions based on what I can see on the foundation aid formula. At this point, we're at 100%. Thank you. >> Thank you for the clarification. Anything else from board members? >> Yes,
071Mr. Cleven. I mean, just given the realities of contracts and all that, uh, we seem destined to deficit spend this fiscal year. Is that an accurate summary, >> Mr. Bombck? >> Yeah, members of the board, I would characterize it that way. >> So, it's really going to be incumbent on us to I'll just reiterate what we already know. There's a lot of work coming up to kind of get this back to that reserve fund balance we're shooting for. So out of just kind of there's no other option. I'll vote in favor of the budget. Uh but it's a bit of a p bitter pill to swallow that we're going to deficit spend again. >> Others Dr. Just one other comment to add to that would be that I think that's what I'm trying to say
072is we need the public to understand and it needs to be in there for because I don't want to hear the public saying we as stewards of their money have not been taking care of it. We've been hit with this triple threat and they need to understand that we're dealing with it. But I would believe that there's going to be many districts um throughout the state or deficit spending or you're going to also start seeing the cuts that are going to be coming and that's when we're going to be hurting our students. So >> others Mr. Palmino >> Brandon I just wondering can you put a number? I think people need to know what a number we keep talking 2% 3%. If we would have received the same as the higher ed received that 3%
073instead of 2 and a.5% what is that number that we lost? Was that close to $5 million would you think on student enrollment and everything? I can appreciate the question and I'd like to answer it but I would want to be accurate. So I apologize. I I don't know if I'll I'll have that ready right now. is if roughly a range between three and five million I would say it would be if that would be not exact >> it certainly could be I apologize I'm not sure I have that >> other questions comments from board members >> seeing none I would entertain a motion to um to approve the the attached uh budget and levy which calls for a total levy of 129.85 mills. >> So, >> it's been moved by Dr. Hodc. Is there
074a second? >> Second by Mr. Cleven. Is there any further discussion? >> We'll take a roll call vote. >> Anderson, >> yes. >> Hodak, >> yes. >> Flynn, >> yes. >> Manley, >> yes. >> Lun, >> yes. >> Pomino, >> yes. >> Larson, >> yes. >> Cleven, >> yes. Burgerer. >> Yes. >> Nine. Yes. Zero. No. Zero absent. >> Motion passes. 5G. Designation of NDSBA convention delegates. Dr. Brener. Thank you. Again, you have a memo from me. We've got the school board's convention coming up uh here in October. October uh the third week of October. Anyway, I think that that's on your planning calendars. And this board has authorized up to five delegates. And to date, we don't know u if any board members plan on attending uh either Thursday or Friday. Um but if
075you do plan on going, please let us know and we will make sure we get the names uh to the convention folks so they know who the designate uh who the delegates will be for Grand Forks District 1 School Board. Thank you. >> Any questions for Dr. Brener? >> Yes, Mr. I know I've seen these emails and I know I have the dates somewhere, but what are the dates of the convention because I'm going to be looking at my calendar here? >> October 8. Does that sound about right? >> It's more like the third week. >> The We're getting there. >> I'm sorry to ask you questions I should know the answer to. It is >> Mr. Anderson surmises the 9th and 10th of October, >> Thursday the 9th and Friday the 10th. >> Thank
076you very much. >> Any other questions for Dr. Brener. Uh tonight's action for the board uh is to to authorize Dr. Brener to designate up to five members should they choose to attend. So, I would uh seek a motion um that the board authorize uh Dr. Brener to designate up to five members as delegates to the 2025 NDSBA annual convention. >> It's been moved by Mr. Cleven. Is there a second? >> Second by Mr. Anderson. Any further discussion? >> All right. So, we've got one. Any other comments on designating and authorizing Dr. Brener uh to submit these delegates? >> We'll take a roll call vote. >> Flynn, >> yes. >> Cleven, >> yes. >> Anderson, >> yes. >> Hodak, >> yes. >> Pomacino, >> Lun, >> yes. >> Manley, >> yes. >> Larson, >> yes.
077>> Burger, >> yes. >> Nine, yes. Zero, no. Zero absent. >> Motion passes. A special thank you to Mr. Cleven 5H policy review. Dr. Hodc. >> Yes. As you can see within your packets that the policy committee met on September 11th. >> Would you turn your mic? >> Sorry about that. I forget all the time. So um anyway, the policy committee met on September 11th and with district administration, we are recommending um the following. Uh there are 13 policies, not quite as many as there were last time that we had to go through in that. However, um you will see that um the text is there for you to have reviewed. And I'm not certain, President Burgerer, how you want us to do it one by one again or just pick up on those that
078we want to discuss and do the overall however you decide. >> I think either would work before we start moving into the motion portion. Uh Dr. Lond, anything to add from the policy review committee meeting? So, it seems to me that we would certainly want to take BDD separately since that uh we had quite a bit of conversation about that at our last meeting. Um perhaps we'll start there and then we'll look at the list of others to see if any board members want to pull any out right >> of of that group. Um but uh but we'll take first uh policy BDD. Uh and so we'll go back to our um policy review committee members um to talk about this conversation specifically. Uh it is captured at least in part in the meeting minutes
079from September 11th. Um do either of you want to go first on on capturing the conversation and and concepts? >> Oh, Dr. Lunda first to Dr. Hodc. >> Thank you. Basically um with that we this was the policy that we did take the longest on for that evening and we considered a lot of um comments there. All three of us had done a lot of research. We looked at articles and what was happening in other schools as well and we also um had um the history brought up to us and what's been happening in the past as well. I would say that we considered everything from talking about um is there a way to maybe um bring up daycare um and have a stipen for daycare um with that and to do some things. So,
080we considered a lot of different ways of pro, you know, navigating um through this. Um we talked about um board member with no children or not needing to take off from work and such. um is their salary at one and um basically we I thought we did really well at running the gambit um with our discussion but what you see in front of you is exactly what we came up with um and that's we're looking at you know making sure that the VP um for this year is increased and that the increase for all board members would be 500 um starting in um 2026 July 2026. Dr. London, anything to add from your point of view? Any questions, comments, clarifying remarks from board members on this uh adjustment that that has been proposed uh by
081the committee on the adjustment to BDD, the two substantive changes. >> Yes, Mr. Cleven. >> It's nominal and but symbolic. I don't think we should give ourselves a raise right now based on what we just talked about our budget. Other questions from board members? Oh, no. I >> I understand. Thank you. Other board members wishing to weigh in. >> Dr. L. I I I agree with Jay, but I think the the reason we started this conversation, we've actually talked about it in previous years, is is the concern about about people wanting to apply to to the board. And I've been on the board for 25 plus years. And there's been some years where we've literally going out to the community trying to find somebody to run on the board. So, we have at least the
082correct number, if not more. And and I and so so I I think and and I think if you look and again we're comparing apples and oranges and every other fruit you want because every school district is run completely different. I think that's why we felt that we should increase it and we should increase it now so that for the next election cycle come next February when people are making decisions that they know what they're going to be paid if they run for the school board. I don't disagree with your your your thought process on it at all, but but I also see the other side, which is we we want we want good members, good community members to to to be able to to to decide to to serve on the school board. And
083if we're interfering with that, we need to take a look at that. Other comments from board members. So the recommendation of the policy review committee is to make two substantive changes. I should say three substantive changes. one involving uh the the compensation for the vice president for this current fiscal year. Uh one involving compensation for all board members for the following fiscal year. and a third that compensation be reviewed um on a two-year cycle. Um so that um future boards are uh cognizant that while there's never a good time to talk about board member salaries, that also means that it's a good time to at least review them. uh even if the board at that time decides we are not increasing compensation but that um that then they're making a decision for that following fiscal
084year. So uh I will entertain a motion to make all three of those changes uh to increase as you see laid out in your packet. Uh again, this is the committee's recommendation to increase the vice president's compensation effective July 1 of 2025 to $6,000. Effective July 1 of 2026, board member compensation to 5,500, president vice president to 6,500. And the third piece of that motion would be compensation be reviewed by February 1st of the next scheduled election year with potential changes to compensation to take effect the following fiscal year. >> It's been moved by Dr. Hodc. Is there a second? and a second by Dr. Lun. Any discussion on the motion regarding these three potential changes to policy BDD? >> Just the first reading. >> It's the first reading. This will be the first of
085two. >> Oh, okay. So, it's been brought to my attention that this is just the first reading on these changes. So, do we need to back up one step? >> As long as everyone understands it's the approval of the first reading, we're good. >> Okay. So, uh, just a clarification, this is the approval, if assuming this passes, this would be the approval of the first reading to these changes. Uh, the board can still act whichever way it wants on this motion. Uh, but this would be the first reading. >> Yes, Dr. L. I just wanted to point out that that and I think it's the third paragraph down that if a board member doesn't wish to receive compensation, Brandon will gladly take the check back and put it into the general fund or wherever. I
086don't know where it would go, but board members don't have to take compensation if if if they don't want to. >> Other comments on the motion, discussion on this motion? We'll take a roll call vote. >> Anderson, >> yes. >> Flynn, >> yes. >> Hodak, >> yes. >> Cleven, >> no. >> Larson, >> yes. >> Lun, >> yes. >> Manley, >> no. >> Pomicino, >> no. >> Burger, >> yes. >> Six. Yes. Three. No. Zero absent. >> Motion passes. Point of clarification. Will this come up for second reading? Our first October meeting as a as practice. Okay. Thank you. Now we have an additional 12. Uh the first reading of of these following policies. We have ABA AAA, FAB, ABDA, ABCB, ABCA, ABBF, DGA, FBA, HBA, HAC, ICCB, and FGCB. I believe that motion was
087to complete the first reading of those those stated 12 policies as amended. Uh, and what I was going to say before that motion came on the floor is if there was a board member who wishes to take any of those out to discuss separately. Uh, but there is a motion on the floor. Is there a second to complete the first reading? Second by Mr. Cleven. So any discussion up to and including possibly amending this and taking a policy out. Does any board member first of all wish to take out any of these policies to discuss separately? >> I think we need to act on There's a motion and a second. Correct. >> That's correct. >> So, the only way we can pull something out for discussion would be to amend the motion. Correct. >> That's
088correct. Okay. >> Yep. >> As long as we're all fine discussing these as a as a a packet of 12. Um, any comments from board members about uh the amendments to those 12 policies? >> I'll take a roll call vote. I need a second. >> Oh, I'm sorry. That was just a clarification, but not a second. >> There we go. Second by Mr. Cleven. One more time. Any discussion about the first reading of these policies? Yes, Dr. Hodc. >> I just want to continue to echo that a lot of these changes, if you read them where some were looks like we completely took some things out, that was all by legal counsel. Um, so we're not doing anything that our legal counsel isn't recommending that we do. >> State law. >> Thank you for that.
089Any other conversation, discussion? >> We'll take a roll call vote. >> Pomacino, >> yes. >> Manley, >> yes. >> Lun, >> yes. >> Larson, >> yes. >> Cleven, >> yes. >> Hodak, >> yes. >> Flynn, >> yes. >> Anderson, >> yes. >> Burger, >> yes. >> Nine, yes. Zero, no. Zero absent. >> Motion passes. On your same memo, you have two additional policies. Uh this would be to complete one reading of the following board regulations as written or amended. So I would entertain a motion to complete one reading of board regulation ABA-B and FAB-BR. >> It's been moved by Dr. L. Is there a second? Second. >> Second by Mr. Anderson. Any discussion on those two board regulations? We'll take a roll call vote. >> Anderson, >> yes. >> Burger, >> yes. >> Flynn, >>
090yes. >> Hodak, >> yes. >> Cleven, >> yes. >> Larson, >> yes. >> Lun, >> yes. >> Manley, >> yes. >> Pomacino, >> yes. >> Nine, yes. Zero, no. Zero absent. >> Motion passes. Five. School district boundary line adjustments. Dr. Brener. Thank you, President Berger. Uh we have arrived uh we have arrived at an actionable item on school boundaries and I'm going to read through the memo just so we have some uh historical context uh and a record of it as well. So over the past year our school district has engaged in a thoughtful collaborative and community centered process to evaluate and adjust our school boundary lines in preparation for the 2627 school year. The effort has required significant time, expertise, and engagement from a wide range of stakeholders, including the demographic task force, district
091administrators, schoolboard members, and the broader community. The process has included data analysis, public input through listening sessions, multiple board level discussions, and work sessions between the school board and demographic task force that ultimately led to consensus around the final proposed boundary lines. The level of care, transparency, and collaboration that's gone into this work reflects the district's deep commitment to serving all students and families equitably while preparing for future enrollment needs. As a result of these efforts, the district is in a strong position to successfully implement the proposed boundary line adjustments at the outset of the 2627 school year. And in the packet for the public who might be watching online or uh recorded uh would be uh a couple of different documents. One talks about the boundary line adjustments in the implementation plan. And the
092second document uh is more of a skinny version of who does what at what level, elementary, middle, and high school. And finally, in the overall board packet would be maps of the elementary line adjustments, middle school line adjustments, and high school line adjustments. So, it's the recommendation of the district administration that the school board formally approve the boundary line adjustments effective July 1, 2026. In alignment with previous discussions, the implementation of high school boundary line changes will be phased in over four years, allowing for a smooth and supportive transition for students and their families. Thank you. >> Questions for Dr. Brener. >> Just a comment, >> Mr. Cleven. And I might surmise there's not a lot of questions because this has been a very very well discussed and vetted process. So thank you to everybody
093who did a lot of hard work here. Thank you. I would seek a motion to approve the boundary line adjustments effective July 1, 2026 with the implementation of high school boundary line changes phasing in over four years. >> It's been moved by Mr. Cleven. Is there a second? >> Second by Mr. Manley. Any further discussion? >> We'll take a roll call vote. >> Manley, >> yes. >> Anderson, >> yes. >> Hodak, >> yes. >> Cleven, >> yes. >> Larson, >> yes. >> Pomacino, >> yes. >> Flynn, >> yes. >> Lun, >> yes. >> Burger, >> yes. >> Nine, yes. Zero, no. Zero, absent. >> Motion passes. Moving on to 6A, announcements. Are there any announcements for the good of the whole? Yes, Dr. Glatch. >> Thank you, Chair Burger. Just a couple. At your um
094placeholders, you have a little invitation for the welcome ceremony for our Kanama Exchange program um delegates who are coming here. So on October 2nd, we invite anybody including the local audience members here to Saratoma Park beginning at 4:00 to welcome that wonderful contingency of people. Um also the I don't think the general public can see but we have a wonderful group of human beings joining us in the audience today. Um Dr. Donna Pearson um and Dr. Chris uh are hosting a fullulbright scholarship program and we have 20 23 Fulbright scholars um amongst our schools um for the next several weeks and we're just really honored that they came to spend time with us. Lots to learn from them and hopefully they'll learn a few things from us as well. So, welcome everybody. >> Any other
095announcements? Yes, Miss Flynn. Um, I just want to give a shout out to the folks at Discovery Elementary. There's a special fourth grader whose birthday it was today um who's been in the hospital for quite a long time and her mom came and spoke to us I think about a year or so ago um about her um is under celebrating success at Discovery um and they encouraged everyone to wear purple and had um lots of fun activities and I just think it's one example of our um school district um showing care and concern and love for their own. So, just want to give a shout out and encourage others to do the same if they hear examples like that. So, >> yes, thank you so much. Any other announcements? >> 6B, board requests for future
096consideration. 6C, schoolboard meeting norms. Mr. Anderson, how did we do? >> Very well. Thank you. And before this item seven, just a reminder that our uh the facilities committee of the whole uh will meet after just a short recess. We'll probably take 3 4ish minutes to resettle uh before that takes place. We don't have a published time for that meeting because we never know exactly when this meeting will end. So if that interests you, please stick around. Uh but with that the regular meeting of the school board