001Hi everybody. Welcome back. Thank you Jam for switching this over. I really appreciate it. Um calling the meeting to order at 7:37 um p.m. Our first My computer keeps like there's weird a glitch every Is anybody else glitching every time they scroll? computer. >> Thank you, Ter. >> Yeah, it's like there's something happening every time I scroll. Okay. Um, agenda review. Does anyone have any changes to tonight's agenda? >> Did you want to change the staffing? >> Do we have to? There's a lot of the discussion. I mean, that'll be part of it. I feel like Yeah, I thought about that. Yeah. Um, thank you, though. Um, okay. Seeing none, at this point in time, the public is welcome to address the board. Do you have any You're just waving. So, um, nobody online. I'm
002not even online. >> Oh, so we have no one online. Is did we lose Michael and Gina as well? Okay. So, we don't have to go around the horn. There we go. Okay. Seeing none, we move straight into business requiring discussion. Um, our first item is an SAU staffing and organizational committee. Going to give you a little bit of context. We discussed it at the last meeting. Um, Renee and Gina very graciously jumped up with their expertise and willingness to help in this capacity. During the four chairs meeting that was right before the Dresdston meeting, which was right before this meeting, um, lots of meetings today. We discussed the fact that it that a committee structure is probably not best for this and that Robin is grateful for the assistance um but a different format.
003She definitely will be using Renee and Gina but under a different format which she will address during her report that will be very long because it didn't happen at dress. No, I'm just kidding. um during part of this meeting. Okay. So, um with that said, are there I mean we're good just letting we'll have questions for Robin if we have any questions during her report. Okay, great. Um the next item on the agenda is a budget strategy review committee. We talked about this at the last meeting as well. Um talked about it being an ad hoc committee. um talked about the importance of it starting sooner rather than later. Um and we talked a little bit about it again at four chairs earlier today and made some um recommendations which we would like to present
004to you all um because we are going to vote on the approval of this committee tonight. Um our recommendation was that the committee be two members um two from H I mean four members two from Hanover, two from Norwich and Robin. Um, so it would be five people ad hoc. It would start as soon as possible. Like if you guys could meet this week, that would be great. Um, but otherwise definitely as soon as the vacation is over, get started. The goals of the committee would be to evaluate current processes for efficiency, making things less siloed. We ran into some issues this time with discussions about Hanover, discussions about Norwich, discussions about Dresden and SAU not necessarily having one person who was involved in all of it besides Robin and Teresa. And they are already
005holding way too many things um to think of everything. So we're trying to figure out ways to make the processes less silent and make it more efficient while still being effective. So efficient and effective. We don't want to lose the effectiveness um but to increase the efficiency and make sure that we just sort of learn from some of the things that happened. Um we also want the committee to talk about the best ways to communicate about the budget to communicate about the budget process both to staff and the public and the board um and just really take a hard look at what needs to happen. The I the ideal is that this committee would come up with a recommendation to the board and the essay our superintendent in the May meeting. So pretty quick turnaround
006like two months. Um so that over the summer some implementation of those recommendations could happen so that in August when the budget process starts we have a plan that we know will need to be adapted but at least we have a roadmap and if we have to take a couple detours we will do so knowingly and knowing that we at least put some thought into it. Um so the recommendation that we um we thought and have sort of based on interest that was expressed in between these two meetings is that the committee would be from the Hannover side Renee and Tara and that from the Norwich side it would be Garrett and Michael. Um Garrett, Renee and Tara have said yes. Michael needs to think about it and see how it fits with his schedule.
007Um, so once we know that, I'll get back to you guys and you can get going as quickly as you possibly can. Um, so with that said, any questions from the board on this committee or its goals? Ben, >> Michael's with us, too. >> Okay, thank you. Um, or its goals or any other ideas of what they should look at. Um, one of the things we talked about is making sure we talk to the district attorney about, you know, can we have one budget committee? I don't know whether we can or not. Instead, I don't know. And we don't even know whether that would be a good idea or not, but just making sure. God, I just sounded like I was from Boston. Um, just making sure that we consulted legal authority. Um, because it
008is across state district. Yes, Kelly. >> Clarifying not the not the district attorney but >> attorney of the district. the attorneys for the district. >> Thank you very much. >> Okay, so I will quit talking. Garrett, >> um I wasn't at the four chairs unfortunately and I was asked to be on the silver tags in between on my way here. I think they just listening to it. I guess I'm not really sure if we know what the problems are we're trying to solve. So I understand like this budget season was a little rocky. There was a few things with the models just because you know we've got some new staff but I'm not really sure you know I guess when you replay this in the next year right once the once everything the wheels are
009greased a little bit better because obviously our previous finance director you know did everything had like all these models set up everything was kind of done right like all the things that we're used to seeing right that and that could be a one problem frankly is that we have a consistent format of materials, right? But I'm just I just literally hit my head right now. But there's not >> for the committee. >> But as far as like defining kind of what the problems were. >> I just want to make sure that if we are going to start down this road that this board at least has maybe given us like direction as far as what the problems are so that we're not sitting our first meeting being like, "Okay, what do we think the problems
010were?" Yeah, I I agree with that before Renee talks because I definitely want Rene's perspective on this. Um I just want to state very clearly that one of the goals is to be supportive of the SAU staff who are involved in the budget process. Um this is not meant to be a you know reprimand or anything for that. It's really to be in service of each other. So Renee, >> yeah, I think broadly just process and efficiency like overall there's like lots of room for improvement like whole scale and large and like small scale. So the and I think that's that is ultimately where we need to be going. I think underneath that there can be things like multi-year forecasting which then helps us anticipate when we're going to be seeing big changes or maybe
011we could invest a little bit more in like infrastructure in one year because we see like there's like a little bit of a boon like there's there's that component like the technical piece of it and then I think there's actually like that communication piece feels really important intertwining into the process and so there's I think models yes but models I think really need to be improved for us to be able to really anticipate and weigh in on the challenges we're going to see. Um there's like a whole bunch more that I think fall under that which I'm happy to enumerate. Um, but if you'll be on the committee, you'll get to >> I'll just add I mean I think we saw this year, you know, so Hanover was looking at this increase and then we
012kind of went, oh no, Dresden's got this increase and those are going to be added together and so there was sort of some of that and SAU had a big increase and then that affected how we were doing our handover budgeting and then you know so some of those like ah things happening at the same time. How can we make sure that we're a little more in lock step and communicating that more clearly out to the public? Yes. So we're not scrambling to to figure that out. And I think part of it too this year we saw was we spent a lot of time focusing on our expenditures and then those revenues hit us and we went, "Oh no, our do we need now need to go back and redo the expenditure?" Right? So again,
013just considering our processes, considering how it's all fitting together because at the end of the day, the voters get one tax bill, right? And so that's we got to figure that piece out. >> Neil and then M Michael's on one. >> Yeah. No, I mean, I think that there are certainly things that we can do to improve the efficiency. One of the things that I would caution against doing though is I would not spend money on an attorney to consider whether or not we can do a single budget. The answer to that question is no. We are three separate school districts. Um, now if you want to spend money to determine whether or not we should all consolidate into a single K12 district, >> that's worth having a discussion over, but don't waste money with
014an attorney to find out whether or not we can have one budget because that answer is no. The other thing that I would strongly encourage uh feeding information into the committee are potential changes that would be coming to the funding formula in in uh Vermont and any legislative changes in New Hampshire as well too that might affect how we um uh fund our school systems. >> Um thank you Neil for that. I should clarify um not to propose one budget but to propose perhaps what Kim was often pushing towards was a different committee structure so that people met all at once and could talk to each other at the same time and it wasn't clear whether that was possible at least from my understanding from a from an attorney perspective. So and I'm not proposing
015that that happens. I just think that those are the sort of things that we discussed in four chairs would be things that this committee would discuss. Yeah. So just really quickly, the simple solution to that is one in three meetings. >> Exactly. >> All at the same time, >> but we haven't we don't usually do that. So again, that that so that's the that's part of the process discussion. If this committee recommends that, that would be something that would happen. >> Michael, I mean, I I'm happy to serve on a committee. Um, I will observe that at times during this budget process, I felt like there were members of our board that wanted to jump the line from governance to management. I think that is a really we must be really cautious to stay in
016our lane and not suddenly want to jump into management and do that. I mean, in my view, our role is to be nos in but hands off. Um, and I just I think we got to be really careful that this isn't substituting our preferences for management and making sure that in the committee we stay on the governance side of it. >> Question. >> Thank you, Michael. >> Question as we set the charge for this committee. Um I know one of the things we had mentioned briefly in the four chairs discussion was um upcoming negotiations um and whether perhaps this committee wanted to take I don't know what that would look like but um defining what might be process I suppose is their main charge but um because we don't want to again overstep the role
017of the negotiating committee But to the extent that that's helpful in like this committee's strategic process thinking probably very state >> I'm taking notes and I can set out a summary of kind of what I've heard is the goals of this for the board to critique as this committee goes forward just so you guys have what Garrett asked for which I totally hear more clear direction about what's going on because the last thing we want is another committee to just say we don't need to do anything or >> Yeah. Yeah. Scar it. >> Yeah. I mean having served on multiple I mean I've done dress and I've done no a lot like these budgets aren't that complicated right. It's just more the process of waiting for everything to kind of settle both at the state
018levels and then even within our district and knowing you're right what the SAE budget looks like and what the Dresden budget looks like and you put it together and we're never going to get away from that. I don't want to not do this committee but like there are things that we're just never going to get away from because we have a fairly complex district and we all kind of have our assessment, right? It depends on what the waiting is every year. So, there's all these components that come in before you finally get your things, which is why inevitably we're always down to the last minute trying to get the numbers right that's acceptable and either making cuts or adding things. And I think, you know, the biggest thing is going to be having things like
019this capital improvement committee, which is that's a long-term plan, >> right? Anyways, I just want to state that and make sure that people are expecting like, oh, we're just going to all of a sudden have this like >> beautiful budget process that's going to go, you know, so easy, right? >> Um, just one thing what, sorry, what Garrett said reminded me too, it occurs to me what would be helpful from this committee would be processes so that the process is not personnel dependent. And I can give an example from the SAU budgeting process where because we were kind of personnel dependent, we sort of forgot that we had a shortfall >> that we hadn't carried forward and that was no one's fault. It was just that the person who normally kept track of that >>
020was no longer with us. And so it's just trying to make sure that that we do people change, personnel positions change, and to make sure that there is some sort of historical like a record or something about how things historically move. We lost Jamie and Kim at the same time and I think that was also part of where people felt a little floundering this year. So yeah, Tara and then I mean sorry >> Renee and then Tara. >> I think there's two things that I'm thinking about. One is that um at least I personally felt much more involved in the budget process this year than I think any board member should be ever. um like I just coming in from from working with school districts from working with CFOs and their teams like this is
021not a normal thing and so for me I'm like this seems like a process and efficiency thing which is solvable which is great. Um, so there's that component of it, which I just I want to like unpack a little bit. Like I don't may maybe my assumption is wrong that this is the way we're all supposed to engage, but it seems like it's not, which clearly ties into um I think what I'm I'm trying to reflect on what the handover finance committee shared. There's one piece here which I'm wondering is if this is part of our work, like how do we incorporate it? Um they in light of these budgeting challenges Henry Finance Committee recommends the school board's SAU administration and staff initiate budget planning earlier in the fiscal year which I think we're talking
022about or would come out of this I'm imagining would come out of this process conversation. Um they support a multi-year budget process which we talked about a little bit as well. Um they adhere adhere to a zerobased budgeting approach for all budgets which we have not done in any budget in its entirety and that is a big undertaking which would be a process piece which would be part of like how philosophically we all want to approach our work. Um but they're urging they're urging us to consider that. So I think that would probably be part of this committee's discussion. Um, and then four is implement structural changes needed to contain runway costs, which is more of a not necessarily that this committee would be solving for that, but that is something they want us to
023be thinking about. So, I'm I'm curious like as I read that like are those things we should be thinking about in this committee as well? Is this something different? Do we need a completely different approach? No. No. >> Garrett, >> I mean again, sorry, Tara first. Sorry, I forgot to share her hand first. >> Reformulating my thoughts after everyone has commented. Um, it may be difficult for me to be on this committee because this I think is um a process part but also a lot of the devils in the details. So there are things that we as a district do not standardize across our variant constituency you know little groups all over. Um this group pays x% for insurance contribution. This one is a much different number. Um if it's a bargaining collective bargaining unit
024we get all these kinds of details and understand what's on the table. If it's not a collective bargaining unit, we don't. So sometimes we miss the details. For example, Lisa, you and I, I think, have both been on the >> SAU. Do you know their percentage for health insurance contribution? >> No, I don't off the top of my head. >> We didn't talk about it because it wasn't a collective bargaining unit. And that's something that we should have talked about in the SAU budget committee. Um, so my thought is like we have to try and standardize things to make this less complicated for us and more coherent. But some of the structural budget changes that I think they're talking about, which I think we're going to have to look at at some point, is going
025to require us to take a larger look at the curriculum and the specific way that the schools are funding those curricular goals and are those the right goals. You know, we all have the same goal for the educational program excellence. There are so many ways to accomplish them and it is going to take not necessarily a heavy-handed dictatorial approach to make changes but there's going to have to be a conversation amongst school leadership and our superintendent and us who hold the purse strings and also curricular approval strings. Right? So I don't think you can do this process without getting into the guts of things. So if we're not going to do that, I'm not sure we're going to get to a place which is going to feel like a large accomplishment. >> Garrett, >> well
026again, I guess I would just make sure that we're going into this eyes wide open when someone's like every year we start with a zerobased budgeting. I mean that's again we we you know I would just warn people we're going to start our budget with literally zero budget and make the administration basically say come to us and say we need everyone like we start with basically you know it's our it's the it's the quick model that is zero base you're basically saying here's our existing >> it's zero increase right >> I mean I'm have real problems on this committee because again >> think there's a lot of people There is no saying that there's a lot of people that are looking to inject a lot of their personal >> views on the budgeting process. And
027I would say like if you want to do that then be on the budget committee and start trying to cut the schools rather than coming up with these inane terms like zerobased budgeting that are more for businesses. We're not this isn't like Elon Musk. It's like coming in. But if that's what people want then I'm not going to serve on this and and frankly don't want to run for school board again. Like this just sounds like >> Yeah. um >> a make work project by the by this committee. I don't think like they lost a lot of confidence because the handover finance committee didn't present a budget that they understood. >> I'm not sure I understood that. >> So true. >> I mean that's what happened over there. No one understood what the tax rate
028was in Hanover. >> So it created a whole it created a whole lack of confidence. >> So that >> we're able to explain our tax rate in orange. >> Yeah. because we calculate in a spreadsheet, >> right? That >> get the right tax rate. >> You guys can't do that from the school board. Then what are we doing here? >> Yeah, I think these are all really good points. I think what Renee read was the recommendations from the finance committee. It doesn't mean that that's what we have to do >> and I think that this is I don't think we can answer that question tonight. I don't think that's appropriate to answer tonight because we haven't that's a much longer discussion. Um but it feels like that would be part of this committee's discussion is
029how much of you know how much of this can we do and how much of it can we not do. Um but it's more I think this what I you know what we heard last month and during the budgeting process was we needed to be less siloed and have more communication and hopefully have a better process going forward. And if this committee meets and decides that there's nothing we can do to make anything differently, then you know that's your recommendation. But it feels like that's a discussion that's worth having. And I kind of like the fact that the four of you seem to have very different places where you're coming from. Um because that's how we're going to get to the best recommendation. But that's my own personal opinion, not my chair opinion. Um Renee,
030and then I would like to open it up to the public. I think we need to decide whether we want to do these things or not and why like that that is part of it but also I'm I so I' I've worked with a bunch of CFOs. This feels like a CFO job and we are acting as CFO and so I'm I'm just wary of that as a as a business and an organization that's like roughly $50 million. We we need that strategic thinking. Like I'm happy for our our team to play that role to set up like let's figure this out for next year in a better way and tease apart what of this that you know the recommendations are that we can or can't do. But I think it is worth discussing because
031it did not go well this year and I don't want to go back next year and be like all right well let's just try that again and hope it hope for the best. I think we at least need to reflect and decide do we want to continue it or not in the same way. Okay, Garrett. And then >> so this is my last question. So what we just understand what didn't go well this year because that's also something that I'm more like on the handover sorry side it seemed like everything was fine like the Dresden budget was made the SA budget was made. We did like we did every year. We took it, we then integrated in with the New York budget. Made some final things. Went through all the iterations right down to the
032last minute as all the numbers came in from the state to be our tax rate. Made some final decision based on you know five or six different options that we presented to the board in our last meeting voted on it. Done. So what hap like what what problem are we fixing here? like what went wrong on the handover side that the handover finance committee is like unhappy with I wasn't I wasn't meeting I don't know what happened. >> Oh I know. I I think there's um I think Michael also if you saw Michael >> unfortunately I had to step away. >> Yeah. You want to >> I mean I think that there were a few you know not least of which was we had massive administrative turnover right and so we had a lot of
033people that were brand new to the positions that they're in. >> And it's a steep learning curve in a in an interstate district with three different school districts and four different boards. Um I think um you know one of the early challenges was the budget shortfall that we had at the SAU level that I think a lot of board members didn't remember or realize. And so um there was uh you know effort put into trying to figure out what are we going to do with that. Once that was figured out then we turned our attention to the the individual boards. So Hannover, Norwich and Dresden. Um I think that the it was a challenging process this year. I think in part because we established budget guidelines and then the budgets that you know were first
034delivered were well in excess of those guidelines and it was one of the first years that I think that we've had challenging conversations about what reductions do we want to consider in order to get to those guidelines. that's not been historically a conversation that we've had quite very very frequently. So I think that was one of the one of the areas where this body as a whole just wasn't used to having that conversation, right? And I don't think that maybe went as smoothly as it could have gone. There were challenges in I mean listen I was the guy that sat here at a meeting and said the Norwich tax was going up by 56%. Right? If we don't remember. So, I screwed up, right? And and that was a a real wakeup call for me.
035I was like, "How did I get it so wrong?" Um, thankfully, we had, you know, you were able to run the numbers to factch checkck me and I realized where I got it wrong. But we had similar challenges on the handover side as well when it finally got down to the end. And you're right. Right. There's a certain aspect of this that is we are beholden to the state both states but particularly in Vermont right I don't we don't get numbers to be able to project a tax rate until December one >> right so there's just a portion of this that's time related that causes us to be reactive rather than entirely proactive. Um there are, you know, those uh long-term weighted ADM numbers are changing for us on a weekly basis. And the thing
036that's so frustrating about that is that swings in those two numbers can take what looks like a very reasonable expenditure budget and turn it into a very unreasonable tax rate increase. Right? And so there's two sides of the equation. You could look at the budget and say the budget's only going up by 3%. we felt like we did a really good job to turn around have the tax rate go up by seven to 10%. Right? And so it's a balance between those two things. Like if all we had to worry about at the end of the day was coming up with a regional reasonable expenditure budget increase and then say we're done, we could walk away feeling really really happy. But then we've got to deal with the resulting tax rate. Now when that initial
037calculation or somewhere during the process somebody screws up the calculation like I did or uh you know administratively we went from you know one number for handover to a very high number for handover then we're like oh crap what do we do right and so it was in a reactive mode there so there were I think multiple points during this process there's not the single fault of any one individual we all contributed to this right >> um but lead it it was a difficult process this year. Like I'm not going to, you know, lie and say that this was easy. And so I think to do a post-mortem and say, was there anything that happened during this season that we could improve upon in the next season to make all of our lives collectively easier?
038I think it's a worthwhile effort. Um, that was a lot of talking. Sorry. >> Yeah. And I I'm about time so just Yeah, go ahead. Um, Kelly had her hand up first and then Garrett. >> I also think we're being just a little naive and a little head in the sand about the hours that our administrators spent on this, right? I mean, and it's not just because we have new people, right? Jamie was staying up >> all night long. We know that. I got two hours of sleep last night. I got three hours of sleep last night, right? And and Cam Hartman, who was who we lost as well, who was doing a lot of CFO strategic thinking for us. Um, and I think, you know, that's some of the pieces that Rene is talking
039about that this strategic thinking, this long range thinking, um, some of that like what not not that this committee is going to do that thinking, right, >> but that the committee can look at it and say what would help us to Neil's point, what would help us not have our administrators staying up all night long to try to deliver numbers that are likely to have mistakes simply because they have been up all night long trying to do work that is too much in its current structure for one person to do. And so that I think was the impetus for this the request for this committee is to acknowledge that sure the process might have gone well for one of four boards this year. That is just one of four boards and it needs to go
040well across the district. We are at the end of the day sending one tax bill to our taxpayers in handover and one tax bill to our taxpayers in Norwich. And that process has to come together in a way that tells a coherent story, in a way that gives them a tax bill that is reasonable and that funds our education in a reasonable, wellthought, welld delivered, wellcommunicated way. That I think is the charge of this committee. >> Okay. Thank you, Kelly. >> So my comment is actually really exactly what Kelly just said because after listening, I've kind of become the conclusion. A lot of the problems to this really is when you talk about businesses like our bestrun businesses are businesses where you hire a person whose entire job is is to run the financial model
041for the company right that's all they do and we don't have that right now and if you think about what we lost with Jamie who ran all the spreadsheets that we're used to seeing there's nothing like and then Kim who basically ran a full was basically quit because it was a full-time job right so she didn't actually do her real job like that may be where this committee comes comes out. But like the fact that and you're saying like that we're spending too much time doing the only reason that Norwich kind of worked out is because two of us had been doing this now for the past three or four years and we've got spreadsheets that go back five years. So we could check everything. Now if one of if both Neil and I left,
042Norwich would have probably been like really messy this year because no one would really know what last year's tax rate was frankly, right? So like >> Okay. So I think we kind of have a little bit of a direction for this. I would be a little bit wary though of having too much things like zerobased budgeting and trying to actually manipulate the budget but more like process isn't >> that's fine right I think that's fine >> you can say like that's not where our priority is >> okay so I think we Linda has something to say and then we'll go >> you did earlier >> Linda Normont um I just want to say when I was on the board I did not or just I did not understand as much about the budget is I'm
043seeing every one of you working to understand. I just have never witnessed this before and I over overlapped a little bit with Neil and I am I'm just yeah dazzled by it all. But I I I wanted to say when I hear you talking about doing a postmortem, I'm all for that. You know, my background is the medical background and yeah, we it takes time to reflect and figure out what went wrong. Why did the patient die or why did the patient not get the outcome we wanted? I guess I'm a little bit nervous of the committee taking on more than that and thinking about I mean to your point I I do agree with you about but that I don't see that at the part of the curriculum and thinking about how we're cutting
044our curriculum would I would be uncomfortable with those committee doing that >> and that's where my point is at first I was thinking who should be on this committee you know because you don't want too many people because then you can't find a time to meet and I was even thinking maybe we want budget committee people and then I thought no this This is really, I think, an internal self-examination. You've all been walking on this fire. You're going to look at this and say, "How can we make it work better for us as board members? And how can we make it work better for our people in the SAU office?" And you are all so well positioned to do that. And then if it turns out to be more, then you might expand it. But
045I'm I'm so glad that was clarified because I was getting a little nervous. I felt like the board me board committee was doing so much more than just looking at the process over the last year and then come back to the board and then the board will discuss it because I'm also thinking there's a community out there that wants to know this too. So, right. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. >> They want to hear our clarification. >> Okay. So, with that it sounds as if there is a consensus this committee should happen. It should start as soon as possible. Ideally have a recommendation by May if not May by June. so that over the summer processes can be put in place that might be helpful for next August when we hopefully hit the ground running. Um
046and seeing no further comment. Great. Okay. Um would like to move into our items requiring action. Um one item approval of a new committee not committees um for D. So that would whoever proposes this if they could edit that accordingly and if I could have a motion please. >> Yes. >> So do you want just A through C and then do that one separately? >> Sure. Let's do it that way. >> Um so move to approve items B and C by consent. >> A second car. >> And we don't have Michael so we can just hand raise and vote. All in favor? Anyone opposed that pass for the notetaker? That passed unanimously and we don't have Michael anymore. So, it's just the people around the table. Um, and then Kelly, can you try approval of
047the new committee? >> Move to approve creating a budget strategy review committee as discussed. >> Seconded anyone? >> Renee. Thank you. >> Are we open for discussion? >> Yes. >> Any discussion? I'm worried about how this is going to go. Honestly, I think four people is too many. I think three people would be better. I'm okay not being one of those people. It doesn't have to be me. But also, because of the split in the spend, handover versus Norwich, it would really make sense to have two handover people and one Norwich person. >> Thank you, >> Kelly. And then Ben, >> um I was So one thing I wondered if we wanted to change the wording to budget. I know I made the motion, sorry, budget process review committee since that's what we talked about.
048So I'll put that out there as potential amendment. Um and I think we were talking about Robin being an official member of this committee, which would be a fifth person, >> which from a form standpoint means three people need to be present. um >> as it isn't policy, >> huh? >> That's exactly what it is policy. >> And and so my question on that then would be if we decreased um you still would need if you put on the you still need three and you have fewer people potentially able to to pick from. Yeah. >> Okay. Um Ben and then Garrett and I can't tell if Neil had his hand up or not. I was just gonna the comment that the intent was for the way there's inclusion among handover and or she get nuanced
049perspectives from everyone. >> I feel like the nor budget is really carved out. So really the you know what we're going to be looking at a lot of process because there was and there wasn't a lot of problems a lot of the problems were the handover dress you know I mean >> I mean I I certainly will go along with what the board says but I just have a concern that it's going to be um strange a strange functioning for you know concentrating on a lot of handover expense um and also So, I think it's really helpful, you know, for the all of the budget committees to be represented if we're going to be doing a post-mortem. And so, I'm not Are we going to get that? >> No, we do. We've got >> only
050if I'm on it. >> No, because Michael's on >> But then we've missed Dresden because I was on Dresden and SA. >> She Yeah, >> you Okay, then you got it covered. >> Yeah. So, he's Yeah, we're covered. All the budget committees are represented with those four. Yeah. Um Okay. So, I think we had Garrett and then Neil. >> It's not a big deal. I mean, I guess I was just saying that I would if I'm if I'm going to serve on I would appreciate if Michael was there just because he was part of the SAU. I was not part of the SAU this year. >> Well, he said yes, so we're good. Anyways, I I understand the need for fewer, but I think this is also going to be something where if someone's not
051at a meeting, it's it's hard to when you have three people and if it's like our policy, all of a sudden >> one person doesn't show up meeting Marcel or something, suddenly it's Ben running the policy meeting by himself and that's hard. >> That has happened before. >> Ben has those meetings. Okay, I'm not done. >> So productive >> and then >> um my so for starters I don't I don't think the composition of committee really matters a whole lot. I think really what needs to happen initially is to have that discussion and to service the things that we think might need to be addressed and then I would bring that back here. vote. Uh what we will immediately run into, which we've run into in the past, right, is uh jurisdictional issues. You're spawning
052this committee at the SAU level. The SAU level out of all of the boards has the only budget that doesn't get voted on by the public, right? You're trying to spend I understand the reasoning to do it here to try to get an economy of scale so that we can have something that applies to all of the districts. But I would have the discussion surface the things that we think need further consideration and bring that back here. At the end of the day, the committee is not to be in a position to make a binding recommendation for any of the boards, right? And so I whatever concern you had about representation I think goes away when you know that the output is not going to be binding on any of the individual boards. Right? So
053you could have two Norwich members, you could have five Norwich members and one handover member. It wouldn't matter. >> Yeah. >> I I think the reason for making sure that each budget committee was represented was for the process part because you needed somebody who was involved in the nitty-gritty. Like I couldn't comment if I was on it. I could not comment about the dressing process because I only saw what was happened at the board level. So that it wasn't it wasn't for >> binding recommendations. It was more just if we're doing a postmortem, we need the people who are in the room to talk about it. Yeah, we are used to seeing like three different like I I sometimes will read the handover budget materials and they're totally different than the Norwich budget materials as
054far as what's being presented which is totally different than the Dresden ones >> frankly because some of those were Kim slot right so we're used to seeing things in different formats >> okay um if no one has anything new to say on this new open discussion I think that we need to take a vote because I am looking at the time and yeah we're we're pushing and bedtimes. Um, Kelly, >> can I suggest my amendment um to change it to budget process review committee instead of strategy? That feels a little >> Yes. >> Seconded by Carrie. Okay. So, all in favor of the formation of the ad hoc budget process committee um for the SAU, which will report their things that need to be discussed. They're going to surface things that need to be discuss
055discussed going forward for the board and by May or June. Um, raise your hand. All in favor? Anyone opposed? Unanimous for the noteaker. Thank you everyone. I really think that this was a good discussion and I think hopefully it provides some guidance for the four people who have agreed to be part of this and I really appreciate their service. So, thank you so much. um report of the chair. Nothing other than happy Ramadan, happy Lunar New Year, happy Marty Gro, happy whatever I've missed, including my sister's birthday. And um just want to thank all the board members for serving. Um thank all the board members who have decided to serve again or run, decided to run to serve again. Really appreciate that. Um look forward to working with everybody come March in whatever composition that
056we are. And just a reminder to the public to please vote. Um voting is I'll be Kelly. It is at the Richmond Middle School for Hanover voters on Tuesday, March 3rd. >> 7 to 7. It is in um Tracy Hall for Norwich voters from 7 to 7 as well. Um if you needed an absentee ballot, I think that ship has sailed. So sorry about that. Um so please show up in person on March 3rd. And um I also again just want to extend a thank you to all of the staff um in all the schools and the SAU office and all the students who are working really hard. And I hope everybody has a great February break because you all deserve it. Next committee reports. Any committees? >> I don't think anybody any I don't
057think anybody's met since our last meeting. Okay, Robin, you get to have your long report now. >> Okay. So I have been reviewing staffing at the SAU level and as Lauren mentioned we have posted our director of technology position and our HR position has been posted. So we will be moving forward on those. But in the meantime, since our last presentation when I talked about our SAU structure overall and looking at these positions, because we have had turnover, we've really been looking at um some of the nuances around our job descriptions and seeing if we can tweak some of that. So, I am going to be reaching out to a couple of our board members who have some expertise in some of these areas to talk about just maybe some ways of restructuring potentially. Um,
058and it's been, you know, it's hard losing people, but it's also gives us opportunities to look at how we can change things up too, which has been positive. So, we are hiring a new person who will begin next Monday, which is really helpful. We've had someone out on leave. That person is coming back, too. So, you know, when we talked about our budget deficit for the SAU at the beginning of the year, I think obviously we did not know all of these situations would be in place that are saving us money, but also causing a lot of consternation. So um but we are in the process of posting those positions and hopefully once the principal search is done then I'll start that process as well. We I didn't mention this in the last one, but
059we have the principal search, our first round interviews are underway that's starting tomorrow for both the middle school and the elementary school. And um that will be the first round and then we'll move to potentially a second round in March depending upon how things turn out. We um also have been continuing with our leadership team meetings. This month it was at the high school and we're continuing to look at some of our data and this month we looked at institutional time data and again I've been providing that feedback to the staff and to the leadership team and um I also sent out a survey to our leadership team just to get feedback about how they thought the meetings were going this year, things that they liked, things that they'd like to see changed, you know,
060things I could do a little bit differently. So, that's been good because I have gotten some good feedback about that, about the format this year and really focusing around the topic of instructional data and taking that data and giving us more of a common language around looking at data in the classroom. So, I'll I'll provide you with some of the feedback that I receive once I really compile it. Um, I'm going to be working over the break on developing our principal survey for the staff that that gets sent out every year to the staff to give us feedback about all of our principles. So, I want maybe to make a few changes with that based on the principal evaluation process that we've been using over the past few years. And as you know, I've been
061meeting with the principles once monthly just to talk about different things like observations, how those are going, um, things that are happening with the budget, different pieces like that. So, I will continue with that. And then I've been spending time additionally in the schools and doing walkthroughs and and so I would like to incorporate maybe some of that into the surveys as well. and then working perhaps with Gina potentially on the survey for the school board members. So I know you do that survey every year as well. So I'd like to really think about that. And then I just want to thank everyone for filling in for me while I was out. Uh it was great. Big thank you to Lauren. She every time I checked my email and got something that I couldn't handle
062from far away, I sent that to her and she immediately was on it. Teresa for filling in in so many different areas while I was out and Ryan and Brett, they're just such a great team and um really just I want to say my thanks for them for doing all of that work while I was out. So, and that's my report for tonight. Any questions for Robin from the public? >> Thank you, Robin. Appreciate that. And welcome back. >> Thank you. >> Um I know the interim director of curriculum and instruction. Are you are we still calling her interim? >> Yeah. Um anyway, she has a different she has a different report for this meeting. So go for it, Lauren. >> It's the wide lens basically in consolidation of all of the other things. So,
063I'm happy to answer any questions. >> I hope everyone had a chance to read it. Any questions for Lauren from the public? Thank you so much, Lauren. Really appreciate it. And I will give her a shout out. She is keeping the principal search committee going really well so far. So, I will knock wood quit as I say that, but she's keeping us organized going up to the first round. Um, business administrators report. Teresa, did you have anything different? >> No, I probably could have put that one over here. There was so much on the other one, but >> Okay, great. Any questions anyone's thought of in the past hour for Teresa from her report to Dresden? Okay, thank you so much, Teresa. Okay, and we do have a need for a non-public session this evening.
064So, if someone could please move us into non-public. >> Oh, I can do it. >> Go, Carrie. I move to enter into non-public session at 8:27 p.m. under RSA 91- 3. >> And can I have a second for that, please, Ben? and around um here. Yeah, Garrett votes for this. Yeah. Garrett >> Paul, yes. >> Russell, yes. >> Yes. >> Key, yes. >> Yes. Sivan, yes. >> Connley, >> yes. >> And Christie, yes. Thank you so much. We will now move into non-public. Um for those of you that are in the public, not a lot happens when we come back except for um the next meeting is March 10th. >> Thank you for coming. Yeah. That looks real. >> We're good. We're not recording. >> We are good with Jam. We are recording. So, if
065everyone could take a seat so we can keep moving. >> Um, we have returned to public session. At this point in time, the public may address the board. >> Thank you. Um that's it. Agenda topics for the next meeting, please send them to me. The next meeting is March 10th. It will again be the reorganization and um welcoming of the new board, even if it's of old members. So it's still considered a new board. So um just another reminder, vote please vote vote vote. And that's it. Thank you very much. We are >> Do and I have a motion to adjourn. I wanted to adjourn this by myself. I really was like, can I do this? Yes. Okay. I move to the meeting. Seconded by Kelly. Thank you. Neil, yes. >> Svin. >> Yes. >>
066Russell. Yes. >> And Christie. Yes. Thank you everyone. Thanks so much. >> Scary. That's I was kind of I was kind of hoping we'd be elementary personal goal my topic.