SAU 70 School Board 11/10/2025

001the uh budget meeting beforehand went a little bit longer than needed and we all needed a little break. >> The commute from the super >> It was a commute from the superintendent's office to so far and the rain like just the traffic was incredible. Um so calling to order at 6:04 p.m. Um moving on to agenda review. Any changes? I just want to highlight the fact that we are basically holding two meetings this evening. So, we have the budget meeting, um the public hearing on the 2026 27 budget, hopefully the adoption of a 2026 27 budget this evening, and then we roll into our regular SAU meeting. Um and sort of anticipating that both meetings will be meaty. So, um just asking people to be concise, thoughtful, and your usual respectful selves. Um because there's

002a lot going on and we um when we introd when Michael introduces the budget, um I just want to make you aware that the budget the SAU budget committee is aware that this budget influences all subsequent budgets which are sort of waiting us. So, um the you know, we we recognize that we're crunched with time, etc., etc. Um but there are you will see hopefully from reading the um materials in advance there are some substantive discussion points to do today. So um with that any public comment on anything not on the agenda if it's on the agenda please wait anybody online is anybody online I don't have anybody online >> one person online but they >> thank you Neil Will you be the online monitor, please, >> for an extra fee? Yes. >> I'll buy

003I'll buy you the beer that Gina owes you. public comment. Okay, we are now moving into I don't know somehow my numbers got weirded out there for a minute. Um the public hearing. Please note we have devoted 30 minutes to this topic. I believe that is optimistic, but let's do our darnest to be there. Um be just to kind of ceue this up. I just want to give a very very public thank you to the members of the SAU budget committee um Michael and Tara and Warren who's been there um Robin was there in earlier iterations but she's away right now um Teresa I know that Rhett and it right were the other people and Brian were the other people that um influenced the information that we received from the SAU in terms of what

004their needs were and there's been a lot of work gone back and forth Um, and I guess I will also say that no solution is perfect. So there we go. And with that, I teed you up quite nicely. You don't have to be perfect now. >> No, no worry on that front. So Michael Costa, speaking as chair of the SCU budget committee. Um, the materials, although there are many materials posted online, the materials I'm going to focus on at first is of a slide deck and then if there are specific questions, but I'll start with a few preliminary comments as before we get into the slides. Um, like Lisa, I want to say thank you to the SNU70 staff, um, Robin, Lauren, Teresa, everybody involved in this. Um, I know it is a lot of

005work, and I also know that it's a time of great transition. We have a new superintendent, uh, we have a new business manager, and so we have new people in new positions. Um, this is my second school year, um, leading the SAU budget committee. Last year was a bit of a fog. I started a new job on October 1st. Um and so I wasn't as present as I would have liked to be during the process. Um I would make two sort of editorial comments at the beginning of this. Um I have as in preparation for this hearing gone back and read the minutes of every SAU budget committee and budget hearings from the calendar year 2023, 2024, and of course 2025. And I also went back and watched our hearing last November. And there's a

006reason why. Not because I'm trying to get a straight A in this, right? Um, as I used to tell younger people at law school, I got a straight A in a pass fail class, right? But, um, it's because we're dealing with two problems at the same time. One, how do we keep annual expenditures sustainable, which is more and more of a challenge in every business sector, nonprofit sector, government sector? And two, how do we address a deficit created by a negative end of year fund balance? And so I really wanted to go back because in my recollections of the board meetings and the committee meetings, I don't recall as robust a discussion as perhaps there should have been about the deficit. And I'm not trying to cast blame on that. Um I just think that

007I was trying to figure out factually what had happened. And looking back at the materials over the last couple years, um I think two fiscal years ago around 23, we we had a miss like we missed and we had a situation where we built a budget on about $200,000 of endofear funding. And then in that next fiscal year, we exceeded our budget target and didn't have that fund balance. And then last year, we came back here and talked a little bit about it. We also thought we'd have a partnership where we share financial services and human resources services with another school district. And to make a very business point about finances, it's very risky to pay for ongoing expenses with one-time budget. And so I would just urge all of us as we go in

008our journey on school district finance to be very skeptical of contingent plans, right? Things that might come true. Now, I'm still bullish on school districts sharing services over time. And if we had another opportunity to have that discussion, we should take it. But counting on it before it is signed is probably not the best thing to do. Um, taking a look at slide three. Um, I want to note for folks that expenditures are down in the most recent draft of this budget, but one-time reductions may mass cost pressures. And I want to go through here in each of these line items and and be very clear about what's happening. So the the budget that Teresa uploaded has an overall expenditure change of negative 1.3% when you take a look between FY26 and 27 which is

009about an $80,000 reduction. Now we give a list of kind of the bigger items that are reduced and you just have to be very clear clear to differentiate between what is green dollar savings money that we're not actually spending and there's one line item where we're pushing it to the other school budgets and I just want to be very clear about what's happening there. So, for example, with the capital improvement contract, TX Collins, we didn't renew that contract. So, there's $62,000 of savings there. We did allocate a position to help with a proposed partnership with a different school district. When that partnership failed to materialize, we didn't hire for that position. So, that that's money that we won't expend. Um, we reduce services, equipment, and supplies by $12,000. I think Teresa described it as, hey,

010unless something breaks, we're not replacing it, right? which is a tough position to be in, but but that's where we're at. And then there were some discretionary funds in the staffing line that were also removed. The other one that you see in there is decrease network contract expedents by 29,000. So generally um the way it's been done in the past to the SAU is certain expenses are allocated to the school to the districts themselves. Certain are retained by the SAU. As the committee continued to push on staff to reduce the budget, um Teresa and the team felt like when it looked at that $29,000 worth of contractual expense, it was not clear to Teresa and the team why that expense was still held at the SAU level because you could take a look at the

011invoices and see exactly what school was being charged what. >> And so from an overhead allocation point of view, it made more sense to pass that down. So it appears as a reduction here, but that 29,000 presumably will have to be absorbed somewhere else. And I want to be careful that because, you know, you could look at that and say, hey, that's accounting slight of hand. You're coming in with a negative 1.3% budget, but the taxpayer still have to pay that. And I would say yes, like somebody still has to pay that. I do think over time each new business manager has to take a look at what they think a fair allocation is based on their contracts. as a person on the board of governance. I I don't get in the nitty-gritty of those

012contracts and those invoices, but there is a difference between that bullet point and the other ones which are actual reductions and expenditures. Now, when I put at the top there in the title, expenditures down but onetime reductions may mass cost pressures, you're not going to be able to uh end a TRX Collins contract every single year, right? Like these are really the first couple are really one-time things. So we thought that we did for one-time purposes and they have not worked out. And so that savings mass the fact that salaries and benefits always require vigilance over time. And so although salaries are down overall cost pressures rage there was a 3% wage increase for most positions and some step increases. And then also the compensation committee to try to stay competitive with SAU staff and

013recruit and retain people granted some non-budgeted raises over the last year that end up catching up in the FY27 budget. And so you know it seems strange to give with one hand and take away with another in a subsequent budget. But of course we can all have discussion about the trajectory of FTEEs benefits and salaries in our budget discussions. So, I just want to say like be careful because in a year where you don't have those one-time savings, that line could grow sharply. Same with the benefits, there's a $47,000 increase. Nearly half of that's coming in retirement costs. And then I want to be careful with health insurance. >> Doesn't really show as a market increase in this budget, but rates are up 18%. A lot of times in budgeting, I think about the difference

014between being lucky and being good. Here there are some people that selected cash andlue payments instead of benefits. That works to the good. That's why you might have a cashinl benefits program, but people could make different decisions. And with health insurance rates going up 18%, if people make different decisions, that could prove very costly for the district over time. And then the committee chose to add back some expenditures. uh we had zeroed out the conference and staff development budget in the previous fiscal year to try to deal with last year's deficit. Um ultimately we want to encourage staff to engage with their peers and engage in professional development. So that was added back and then we increased attorney fees to match um our 5-year average of what we found looking at the budget that we

015put a very small placeholder in for attorneys. uh attorney expenses add up very very quickly and so it just seemed like a more reasonable approach to say what is our average over the last five years and use that as a placeholder. So that deficit again I just want to focus how do we get here? Um decision-m that really showed up in FY25 appears to be the root cause of the deficit. The approved budget used 201,673 and fund balance to buy down the assessment um and two problems. the FY25 expenses exceeded budget. In reviewing the minutes and the tape, it really the business manager at the time really frame that as we were not fully staffed and now we're fully staffed and some of the pay and benefits exceeded our estimates. I have not had time

016to go um scrutinize that. I I believe Teresa has seen the same story. There are um there are documents up from last year that represent the business manager at the times um attempts to try to explain that but that is the general story that we were given. Um and that available fund balance was less than expected and so we had a deficit um in FY26 as I said we we did not spend a lot of time we spent a meeting but not a ton of time trying to figure out exactly how to close the full deficit because we thought we'd have additional revenue coming in. We had a hypothesis that the SAU would gain 150,000 in revenue from operating shared services with another district and that partnership did not occur despite the confidence level at

017the time. In this committee, in this board's discussions last November, I would say um the idea was presented with a very high level of confidence and we wanted that revenue and so we accepted that level of confidence. Ultimately, not every risk pays off and the bill is due on it. Um, I did point people towards the November 12th SEU budget hearing, which I think captured sort of the fullest discussion of it. And that revenue obviously was intended not only to be good for the organization over the long haul, but also pay off a portion of the deficit in this coming fiscal year. And so the FY27 budget actually actuals contain a projected $145,000 shortfoot. And so um, in the committee's view and in my view, the SAU budget needs to address this shortfall. we have

018to be very careful kicking the can down the road again in the future. Um, and so I worked with staff to frame three options just because I think it's helpful to have options. No option is perfect. Um, not everybody in the committee felt that these options were sufficient. And so one was pay half now. So basically it very arbitrary option. Repay uh $145,000 deficit equally over two years. FY27 which is the budget we're considering and FY28. Um, so both those budgets would have equal deficit reduction. And then if you take the deficit reduction and the negative 1.3% year-to-year expense group, you would have an assessment that would increase 3.7%. Uh, you can pay most now. So, in a previous committee discussion last week, um, the majority of the committee felt like 5.4% felt like kind

019of the squeal point, like gez, it' be it feels hard to have an assessment above that. And so if you have a negative 1.3% year-to-year expenditure growth with a 5.4% assessment increase, that pays off most of the deficit in FY27, leaving $24,000 left for FY28, provided everything else holds. And one never knows in the budget what will or will not hold. >> And there is a typo on that. Um, >> yeah, it should be pays for 27 expenders, all but 24,000 deficit in FY28. Lisa encouraged me not to be perfect and to model that behavior for others. I made sure to have a typo on slide five. >> And then there's pay all now. Address the FY27 expenditures and deficit in one year. And so it require an assessment that would increase 6.31% to cover

020the expenditures and the deficit. And um one would hope that we would be done with it. So the committee just met from 5:15 >> uh to 6 o'clock. >> Yeah. on the dot. >> Um, and I I feel like and we addressed some of the questions on slide six. You know, it it does feel like the strong view of the committee is that addressing the deficit is not optional. You cannot kick the can forever. So, the key questions for both the committee and this board is how do you do that and when do you do that? Uh, it was the strong opinion of SAU70 staff that any additional immediate deficit reduction would involve personnel cuts. Right? It just it's a human being business. most are expenses in staff. Eventually, you run out of other things

021to reduce before getting to cutting staff. Um, and so one of the questions is how do we balance affordability for taxpayers with the value of the SAU being fully staffed, particularly given the steps we've taken the last couple years to try to recruit and retain folks and keep them here. Um, I want to note sharp assessment increases are unwelcome. However, where's the trend line going over time? I feel like representatives at the Hover Finance Committee as always did a good job asking like where is this going? Um, you know, for example, if you consider the SAU70 a service plus or a contractor, it's going up 10 or 12% per year. You have to ask yourself long-term questions about the trend. And I think that's very fair. Um, should we buy down assessments in the future?

022My answer would be no. I look forward to being a board member if reelected. Um, to say, "Oh, no, no, no. We tried that one time and it it it made everybody feel really bad. Let's not do that." Um, I just think that's how you get into trouble. um and small financial jams end up being large ones if not tended to. And then of course time is of the essence. A recommendation is needed as other budget committees seem to believe that they need certainty in the SEU budget to move forward. If anything, for the practical matter that you have an SA70 team supporting four different budget efforts simultaneously, which is not standard. So nailing down something so then you only have three to contend with would likely help everybody. There was a brief but vigorous

023discussion by the committee uh at the uh at the committee level. I think a couple of the points that came out of it were one in the previous meeting there was a discussion of you could have a plan moving forward the deficit that says hey we're going to raise the assessment 5.4%. and then the school the school board the SA not school board the SAU70 team will just be left with a savings target to zero out the deficit right um and that's that's not the work that those are not the way the three options were framed coming in based on where Teresa brought the budget and so you could do that and SEU70 staff clearly saying if you give us that target we have to we have to cut staff and so we're not prepared

024to make a recommendation like that tonight but that those are the trade-offs for the board to wrestle with because that's rightly the decision of the board. Um, and then there was a discussion of, you know, is it fair or unfair of taxpayers to pay off the deficit? Um, you know, it's certainly unwelcome to have a higher than wanted assessment. At the same time, the assessment was too low in a previous year and so this is a catch-up. These are unpleasant, but there is no free lunch. Um, and then we talked a little bit about the difference between, hey, that $29,000 of um, spending that gets reallocated out to the three school boards, how fair or unfair is that to call that savings because it's not a savings of green dollars. Um, I think as committee

025chair, I just thought the most important job for me was just to make that very plain to the board and the public that we recognize that that's just pushing it to a different budget. And so part of the way in which we got to negative 1.3% year-over-year spending is through that as opposed to true cuts. Um and then there was a vote 2 to1 um to go with option C to try to retire the deficit to be done with it and have certainty and then certainly as a SAU board we could instruct superintendent Steiner and the business manager on how we want them to address the budget in the future because we all agreed where we ended in discussion and which materials is where we should have started. Um, I do allow for new people

026at the table, but it takes time to get in position. But the discussion we're having on November 10th is probably the discussion we should have had around October 1st. It's not as meant as a criticism of the SAP staff. That's meant as just true and something that um if I'm still chair of the budget committee next year, I will partner with them on it and insist them on it because we got down to the meat of the issue, but just really late in the game. >> That that is all I have to say. Um, I would welcome Teresa to add anything from the SAU if if needed. I'd add ask SEU7 staff to opine and then um then my fellow committee members and questions from the board. Thank you. >> I will add just one

027thing when we do talk about the 29,000. We had previously cut that line. So, it's not 29,000 getting pushed out to the districts actually um because I believe that we had cut it previously by 4,000 anyhow. Um, and yes, and so pushing that off, I just want to kind of reiterate that it wasn't I don't want the interpretation to be that it was a shell game. It was meant to take and say if we're looking at the expenditures and all the lines that we reviewed and cut back everything we could, but we get down to what is it the SAU should really be paying for? we should be paying for costs that can truly be allocated to the SAU. So, if these costs on the invoice to say, well, so and so went to so-

028and so school. Well, then we need to build that out to the school. So, again, um I might have used the word probation earlier and probably not a correct one because again, if we identify what that expense, what school that expense belongs to, they're going to be the ones that incur that. It's not going to be just an even split across. Um, and there may not be any incurrence at all because as we move forward and talking about the reduction of this service that's supposed to be occurring because this is supposed to be a service that should have been weaned off by the end of next year. It's my original understanding. Um, so that was another reason from the beginning saying you need to cut this line anyhow. Um, and staff need to be trained

029to do this job in house. Is that a procedural thing? Garrett is with us online. If we could just have Garrett promoted to panelist, that would be awesome. >> Hi Garrett. Thank you. Okay. And with that, it's now time for board questions. Just kind of going procedurally and then questions from the public and then we will call for a vote this evening. Gina. >> Uh, Michael, thank you for an awesome explanation. I do have a question. I see online the administrator line student services to FTE. It is a 108,000 increase on the SAU budget. I was curious if someone could explain that. >> You'll see a decrease. Um, and I put it in the notes thing that stipulates that shows that um, like it's kind of coded to administration and then uh, support. So the

030um assistant director student services was listed down in the support services. So you'll see that that particular line has decreased by that amount as the other line. And I think I highlighted them. I think that was one of the things where I highlighted just kind of show the correlation between the two. >> And I guess just the second question I have to ask and I know it's a hard question. Have we considered a scenario where we eliminate a position to make up the deficit? because if we were a business that would be something we would be thinking about and I want to acknowledge and I've heard quite loudly that we were understaffed before and now we're at staff but given the um the calculation that was incorrect that we were going to get money for

031that line and we didn't get it. I think we're in a situation where we need to think really carefully about we don't have money we thought we had and we are at a deficit and what can we afford as a school district and I know that's a hard question to ask when you're talking about people but I think it's an important question if I were sitting in the office in the in the audience I'd be asking that question >> go ahead Michael >> sir um I I would say that uh there were generalized discussions about it um board member if I I think it was articulated the loudest. Hey, we have to be very careful about how sustainable we are and it's mostly staff costs >> and so um how do we break that down?

032>> Um and but we did not get to the level of hey if we had to make make that next move. Um, I will take responsibility of that because with um given the time and Robin being brand new as superintendent, >> yeah, >> personally, I was more comfortable with saying your savings target is X dollars and you work through a process to cut that out because I I didn't particularly without Robin there at the meeting not to be disrespectful. >> Picking how that would work seemed unwise. Yeah. >> But the Sims target would act as a proxy for something like that. Okay. So I would say a little but not as vigorously as you described. >> Okay. Mhm. >> And and just to to piggyback on the there was discussion like even amended in the

033vote that this is a recommendation for now with a with a directive that on March 5th or whatever it is that you know the next this budget is hopefully passed and put to bed we start a very rigorous process of looking at what is sustainable what's not sustainable like you know building the budget from the ground up so to speak um and taking a careful look at the office, but it wasn't comfortable given the fact that Robin isn't here and everybody's so new. Um yeah, >> Kelly, did you want to respond before? >> I I did. >> Okay. Yeah, sure. >> I did just Sorry. That is my primary objection to the budget that's put forward is that I believe effectively what we're doing is kicking the can down the road. Exactly. Because there have

034been no real reductions in expenditures in this process. The Trux Collins was a temporary contract engagement. So the fact that it was carried over was erroneous in the first place to this budget discussion. the extra FTE was associated with a contract that did not materialize. So, it should never have initially been carried over. Um some uh cost reductions in discretionary and in um supplies were offset by the readition of some um staff development and I believe some travel almost exactly like within a,000 or $1,500. So, my concern is that the SAU office may not have the um appetite to consider real cuts. And what's going to happen next year is that the total cost of employment per um SAU staff is going to continue to go up in a nonsustainable way based upon the benefit

035costs that we just >> so we are going to be here next year and the year after and the year after unless we do some kind of major analysis. and infrastructure adjustment. I just don't know any other way. >> Yeah. Thank you, >> Kelly. Oops. >> So, I guess I'm going to reframe a little bit how we're talking about the structure of this just because um for those of us who've been around for a while, we um went through I don't want to say dark times, but we went through some really tough years. We weren't fully staffed and we had people um you know having health problems because we were not fully staffed and because of the stress that that brought. Um, and we are now finally at a place where we are fully staffed.

036And I think, you know, we are seeing that we have a lot of new people. So, it's still really stressful this year because we have a lot of new people, but I think we're at least finally, um, feeling like we're staffed the appropriate level. Um, I think for me in just listening to this discussion, I absolutely understand we need to examine things critically, always need to examine things critically. So, I think going through that exercise is important. At the same time, um, you know, I think this understanding that, you know, there if if we were talking about a school budget, we'd be talking about what are trade-offs, right? Are we going to maybe not start a new reading program this year or maybe we're going to reduce, I hate to say it, sorry, the music,

037or maybe we're going to, you know, maybe we're going to not do field trips this year. like we'd have some of those things to weigh and the SAU budget is just staff that then essentially and there are a few other things in there but it's essential services right that the rest of our schools use and so there isn't really those levers to pull those trade-off levers we don't have access to that in the same way at the SAU um and so I think we just need to be really mindful of the fact that as a part of our overall budget picture. It is a very small budget and again I don't want to diminish the importance of having critical conversations and examining the budget critically. Um but I also want us to be careful about

038being um pennywise and how foolish to use a metaphor because I'm always so impressed with Michael's metaphor. So I had to get one in there. I I don't like to generalize from personal experience, but professionally I've reported to boards of directors for a long time. When they want to do what I want to do, um that's that's happy and clear, right? Great. Let's go do it. >> When they don't want to do what I want to do, that's sad, but also clear. Yep. >> What I struggle with is when the message changes over time. Mhm. >> And where I struggle a little bit with this budget um with the the discussion, I think it's the right discussion to have, but if I were if I stood in the shoes of our taxpayers, I'd understand the

039concern about the assessment going up and the sustainability of the school district. And I think that's appropriate. But I'm standing in the shoes of the SAU70 leadership. I say, you have a compensation committee and granted us raises last year. Now you're trying to take them back this year. Pick a late. And so I think time is the proper remedy for that and clear instruction to Robin as superintendent is the remedy to that. I I think for now trying to reset the chessboard for her and say pass the budget, we've dealt with the deficit. Now let's go forward. I don't know. It feels like the middle the proper middle ground given where we're at. Even if nobody likes how we got into this position, it's just my two cents. Um, I just want to make sure

040Marcela didn't have her end up. Yeah, Kelly, >> sorry. I just wanted to, you finished my thought there. I I think and part of the reframing is I I think you guys are phrasing it correctly in that we we perhaps underfunded this or we didn't think about how we were funding this in the right ways. And I think we're, you know, you you've done a wonderful job framing how we're going to rectify that. Um, but I also think we need to perhaps think about this as an investment and maybe understanding the the increase, which by the way, you've done a really good job of flattening that increase. And I don't want that to be lost in the conversation either. I understand there were some onetime things rolling up, but you know, that that trend did

041flatten through your work. So, thank you for that. Um, but I think if we if we can also think about it as an investment instead of like, oops, it's going up again, that might help us um, feel better about the money that we're spending and help our taxpayers feel better about that money. >> Yeah, Renee and then Gina and then Tara. >> Mine might be more of a >> online. Thank you. >> We'll get to you, Garrett. I promise. Uh a lot of my kind of uh frustrations I think in general with budgeting process is just the fact that we have four different budget conversations going on simultaneously where this the strategic decision may not actually lie in the budget we're having a conversation about. It may actually make the most sense to not change

042staffing at the SA level given the value they're adding. And actually at our elementary schools or our middle school or our high school is where we actually should be looking. And I feel like it's really hard for me to think about how to assess options for the SAU budget outside of that. So I'm inclined to like listen to the recommendations of of the committee because you've been in it. But I do want to urge us to really reflect on the budget process next year. I know Michael, you were temping this up, too. I really want to figure out how we can do this better and I know there's complications across state lines and things like that, but this feels strongly inefficient. Gina, >> I saw Michael's note and so I watched the board meeting from

043last year and I I have to ask as a board that we work collectively not to approve budgets moving forward that are based on we think something's going to happen because I think that we as a board need to own even though I wasn't on the board, I'm on it now and we have to own that it was a really bad decision. >> It was a bad decision. >> It's a really bad decision and I think that's why I'm struggling. I appreciate what you're saying around staff. I mean, I'm in human resources work, so I appreciate the need of work. I think Rene's point is spot on that if SAU is the top of the jellyfish and all the other tentacles are going up to go keep the metaphors going, we should be considering it

044more as a whole instead of in piece by piece by piece because there may be ways to >> you know I think we have to be I guess Tara and I probably share is like we probably do need to be looking with a little bit of a tighter um I appreciate how much you all have reduced things and we might have to be thinking more disruptively about how things are going to move forward. I just don't know. So, and that's all I'm done. Garrett to talk. >> Um, yeah, Tara and then Garrett. >> One quick thing I want to say is I don't feel like we did a good job of flattening out the budget increase because baked in were $115,000 in one time or aspirational expenses. So, really all we've done is eaten up

045that cushion, right? and then moves $30,000 to other budgets. So, this does not to me at all feel like flattening out the increase. It feels like I don't feel like this is a good job, which is why I couldn't vote to support it. >> I tried to be really fair about Terry's point in the title of slide three is finishes down, but one time reductions may mass cost pressures. I you know, I think better better luck than good sometimes. >> Garrett Yeah, thanks. I mean, I think we should be asking ourselves, I like to just confirm that the SAU is now fully staffed because if it is, that means that we've gone through a year now with a fully staffed SAU. And I remind everybody that we've sat in a lot of meetings and maybe

046some of the new board members haven't been part of those where we were legitimately concerned that payroll could not be made that we did not have the staff to do the proper accounting. Right. And I'll also remind everybody that a few years ago there was the compensation committee that did a very close look and determined that compensation at the SAU needed to go a bit higher so that we could move people and attract people into that those positions, right? Because there's that pushpull between teachers versus administrators. So I think we have to be careful here. These numbers are quite small, right? I know the percentages might look big, but what Breaking up. >> We're breaking you up, Garrett. >> Go to a different part of the soccer field. >> Garrett, >> I think we lost

047him. Are you >> Hey, Garrett, you're breaking up. Can you hear us? >> Can you guys hear me? >> Yeah, >> we can now. >> I'm sorry. Sorry, I just went over the pass. >> I was >> so I was just saying that I think we have to >> All right, I'll call back in a minute. >> Yeah, call back in a minute. Okay, Kellen. >> Um Oh, I lost my thought. Uh oh. I I also do think and you guys are making me realize this. I think this budget is a tempting place to have a little bit of squishiness, right? Because it can be assessed out to the other districts. And so I I I think historically that might be some of what we're seeing too soon. I because I'm listening to tear this

048115,000 that's coming off. And I'm thinking back to years past and think I feel like we've had this kind of like oh this 50,000 that we put in and that we didn't spend or that we you know whether it was because we were unstaffed or because we you know I think there's been a fair amount of that. Um and and 50,000 in this budget is a big swing right 100,000 is an even bigger swing right? So, I think we also just need to be mindful of those kinds of, you know, whether it's an unspent um fund balance because we were unstaffed or whether it's, you know, an expenditure that we put in. It's it's a tempting area to have that kind of slushy funding, I guess. So, we just that's I guess something to look

049at going forward that we can be mindful of, for sure. >> Any Yeah, Neil. Um I am curious do we anticipate any additional um changes resulting from uh compensation study committee for future years now. So this year will satisfy sort of all of the coordinates. >> I would say um the answer is yes but and the committee had a discussion about this um nearly all all but one recommendation was acted upon. It is not clear whether that action will be taken. So every so there is no other expense that is reasonably certain at this time. That's as much we went into non-public session to discuss this. So I I would say the answer is yes. But there could be one other small adjustment. But >> are you asking if we're going to spin it back

050up? Is that or >> No. There was a series of recommendations that came out of the compensation study committee and I know not all of those went into effect in year one. Right. We're seeing this now, right? But nothing anticipated for year three. >> Yeah. All all the ones all of them have been made >> except for one, but that's a separate discussion. >> Um I am curious just from a from a budget mechanics perspective. What would it mean to not satisfy this whole thing this year? >> Asked this question the other day. How about Treasury? Go ahead. And are we still talking about to to satisfy the deficit or to >> Yeah. If we if we for example chose like option A which was to split it you know one half this year half

051next year mechanically speaking what does that mean? What I'm hearing is like there's we don't have the revenue to cover expenses, but I'm guessing that's more than >> sooner or later it will catch up regardless. The cash flow will catch up. Um right now because the 150,000 short fall was anticipated in the current fiscal year. So, it wasn't that we went into this school year, you know, with with our bank account drained and stuff, but going forward by splitting that. I mean, it's going to be also us cutting as much as we can out of the current fiscal year, which we're still attempting to do that to save even more, which could possibly reduce the second half of the payments um deficit and everything else. But um yeah, I mean no matter what we do

052going into it um the assessment payments um on the flip side, and I don't know if this is where part of what you're asking, but when we get to the end of this particular school year, we might be asking for a prepayment on our assessment payments to to just keep going. >> Yeah. If if I may, we this came up in committee and I want to make sure I have it right, Teresa. I said in a simpleton's way, we have a deficit. How do we pay our bills? And you said we've been getting our revenue in advance and so just the timing has worked out that you're using some of the future payment to pay current bills. Eventually, that merry round will stop, >> right? >> And you'd have to get a line of credit

053or do something else to take care of that cash flow. just the the date of the inflows has covered the outflows so far. Is that clear? >> Correct. And in in June, um we received the the first quarter payment for the FY26 from the districts and everything else. So here it is. It's November and last week, last AP run, I asked for our third quarter assessment already because we'd already done the second or whatever and the third. So you can see how it's going to catch up in that respect. >> Yeah. Go ahead. >> One. Yeah. One second. So Neil, follow up and then Yeah, >> it's not a followup to that. I had an additional question. >> Okay. Can you hold that for a second and let's finish any other comment on this? Yeah,

054Gary, I just have a quick clarifying for like the really non-financially brained first year of budgeting season on the school board moment. >> Welcome. >> Thanks. Um, so my takeaway from your question, Neil, is if we were to do option A, is it even feasible? Like, will the merrygoround end before the end of year two? Like, is option A actually an option? I would love to know if that's clarifiable, like concretely. >> It would be in the sense of the same same concept would happen. We'd still get uh our assessment payments that are anticipated. So, it'd be like a note. And so we would just be getting them preempted. >> Okay. Terra, >> so relevant to what you asked, I was also concerned about how we paid this deficit because I am concerned from a

055tuition calculation perspective that if we pay it all at once, we will impact we will create a lumpy tuition calculation for a methodology that we just agreed to. So just to add that to the mix, >> I have to review that statement. But I have a different question. >> What is your different question? >> Um, so in one of the attachments this evening, we see the option A, B, and C scenarios as to what it would do to the assessment makeup for the individual districts. And so if I look at option C, which is the one where we take care of this all in a single year, and I look, are the numbers at the bottom correct? And as an example, I'm going to look at the Norwich School District one, which goes from 471

0561999 in the current year to 505612 for the for next year. We we believe these are the correct numbers. I assume >> which page are you? >> Yeah. Which one are you on? >> Under FY27 budget draft budget option A through C in the materials. >> We're looking at um a version of the table we've seen many times with three options. I got it. Neil's talking about um the allocation to individual school districts at the bottom of each table focusing keenly on the third table under option C. >> Thank you. Mhm. >> And the reason I ask is because if if I look at that and I compare it against the first draft budget that we've seen in Norwich and the uh the line item that is the SA70 assessment, the figure even with paying

057all of this off is lower than what we've seen in the original Norwich budget. because we've reduced our budget. We've gone back to the drawing board since that number was plugged into the Norwich and gone back and um reduced our budget more on the SAU end of it and again the scenario um so that would be the only contributing in that respect but the assessment based on the the what we're proposing 2.7 um have this memorized now um 247626 whatever the number and um based on that breakdown in the assessment based on based on the allocation and then I took the um in this scenario then I took the uh sorry >> no that's okay I think I'm your explanation is okay I think the way that I'm looking at this right is that very

058first Norwich budget that I saw which actually came in at a 6.47% 47% increase included a line item placeholder for the SAU assessment. Yes, >> that was actually greater than by almost $14,000 the revised figure here if we decide to take care of the budget shortfall completely. And so I think instead of me I just want to make sure that I understand the impact between >> higher >> and it's not going to be because it was overstated in that first Norwich budget that we saw. >> I I believe that that's true based on when we were first calculating out and doing that um uh quick model >> things and and doing the first guesstimation of what this budget was going to be. Right. So instead of immediately thinking that all this means tonight is I'm

059going to add another $35,000 to my Norwich budget is not necessarily true. >> Correct. >> Okay. >> Right. >> Um okay. I saw >> Should I ask clarification on that? >> This one thing that would be helpful on this is to see the Dresden breakdown because it's hard to that might be part of the shifting there too because this doesn't show how Dresden then subsequently breaks out to the sending district. You know what I mean? >> Yeah. And if that if that calculation is shifted and I don't have that number off the top of my head, but that could also be a piece of the >> true puzzle. >> Yeah. >> Sarah, my question was, >> do we have the numbers? Um, Teresa, have they been communicated to the various other budget committees about what

060costs they need to now include in their budgets for the $29,000 project? >> I have had some conversations with them. Yes. >> Okay. because that number is going to have to be added to the Norwich budget, whatever the Norwich portion of that is. And I'm not sure of that 29,000 watt portion of that, but there's a new item that's going to need to be added to the budget. >> Okay. >> Well, they already they already have they already actually incur those expenditures, but >> it's moving to a different line item, and they don't know that. So, we need to explicitly tell them so that they don't look at this number here that no longer includes that 29,000 and then miss the vote on their portion of that expenditure that they now need to account for

061differently. >> Yeah. Michael, so good news. Uh I'm on the Norwich budget committee. Uh >> Massachusette taken and we'll just make sure that when we have that discussion, we'll make sure that we we take care of that scenario. >> And Michael, you good? >> Okay. Um, at this point in time, we've been discussing this for about 50 minutes. Um, not quite, but good a good 40 minutes. Um, if anyone has new points to make or new questions from the board perspective, I would invite you to do it. If you're wanting to reiterate um, some of the things that we've already heard, I'd be happy to summarize what I think we've heard, but um, if there are new points, I would invite those questions now. Yeah, >> can you hear me? Scar. >> Yeah. >> So,

062I got full service. Sorry. So, my point was is I think I just like to confirm that this budget reflects a fully staffed SAU because I was saying that for those of us that have sat in a lot of these meetings over the past couple years and remind ourselves that an understaffed SAU is a bit terrifying, right? We have had situations where we didn't know if payroll was going to be able to be made, right? Right? And we've all sat around looking at each other and saying, "What happens if someone else is un, you know, gets sick or leaves the SAU, the whole thing collapses, right? It's very thinly staffed." And I think I remind everybody that it if it is fully staffed, it basically this increase was supposed to happen last year and we

063all got away with assumptions that were wrong. Right? The 150 grand was a bad assumption. And it was a it was a improper estimate. So to with the amount that we're looking at here, I mean the numbers are quite small and as Neil just pointed out, probably now understated. This should just be paid off all tonight and just move on assuming that we've got a fully staffed SAU because if we're going to go back and start saying let's cut the SAU after the conversations that we've had the past couple years, that's like the definition of insanity. When you look at the dollar amounts that we're looking at here, which are very small, when you look at it as a p, you know, of our overall what $35 million budget, talking $150,000, it might look big

064from a percentage standpoint, but this is what it costs to run our district. So, we should just do it all tonight and just level up and know that we have a fully a fully staffed, properly staffed SAU office now. finally. It's not been fully staffed, I don't think, for like as long as I can remember. >> Thank you, Garrett, that you you are echoing some points that were made earlier by some of us who have been around for a while. Um, also understanding that, you know, we do need to look at budgets carefully every single year and look at what's sustainable and what's not sustainable. And I think we all um have learned a lesson of budgeting from hope. Yeah, there we go. That that is not a really good plan. Um so if there

065are any other questions from the board. >> Oh, I'm sorry, Lisa. Sorry, one more comment there. I mean, not really. That's not really an accurate comment because I don't think any of us understood what was happening with this with this lime person coming in and how that was ever going to work, but it was told to us that that's how this is all going to work, right? So, I mean, there was a lot of confusion on all of our behalf and we all just said, you know what, it's most important to fund the SAU office and get it fully staffed. >> Yeah. Okay. Thank you, Renee. Uh I just want to understand um this is less of a question more point of information I guess um how the number of students the enrollment projections um

066kind of play into the overall allocation of the dollars because I know that you know the number uh in that's listed here for Ry was 463. I think the latest projection from last month was 451. Same thing for Norwich. It says 326 except the last meeting you guys had. I think it was 320. I didn't find anything for Dresden, but like how does that all play into this? And do we need them to finalize you now to get the percentages out? >> Michael, you want to take it to go? >> It's it's on the chart, too. If you look and you'll see a problem. What they're using is the last finished school prior, as we're saying. So, we're not using the FY25 numbers for the for the student ADM. We're using the the states reports.

067So, they don't have their 25 out. So, we're we're a year lag on when that's calculated. Now, as far as the certified FTEES using a more common more current, sorry, um number and everything else. So the calculation is actually um taking that average taking the students and everything else figuring out their percentage and then you're taking the certified staff the percentage based on the FTEs for just like I said certified and then you're averaging those out and that's how like Dresden I get to 57.11 >> is based on those two calculations being averaged out >> so they're based on actual hard locked in numbers which are from we're always lagging we're always going that game. >> I figured there was a reason. I just wanted to understand it. >> Thank you for asking that. Okay.

068Any comments from the members of the public before we move to hopefully a vote on this? >> Yes, please state your name and your address. >> I'm Greg SM Tyler Road handover. I serve as the chair of the handover. >> Thank you for that. >> I just uh would commend you on on being able to focus on what the issues are. And one of the things that you've talked about is is the budgeting process going forward with since there is not an appetite um appetite to to do anything with regard to staff tonight. Um I've heard the terms understaffed and fully staffed quite all this evening. And just from the me from the public's perspective, I think it would be good if there would be more justification for saying understaffed or fully staffed >> because

069when you look at the the number of FTE 18, that's a big number. and whether that is truly defined as that's the absolute necessary overhead to to run the school system fine but there has to be more confidence on on part of for that really to be true so that would be simply my my car so in in future you really got to get down to that >> yeah thank you for that um I I can give an illustration if it would be helpful of a couple of years ago the business office in particular um had someone out sick had um didn't have an assistant to Jamie had Jamie had someone out sick for payroll somebody something else happened that somebody else was out and suddenly you know what had been an office that was

070managing but because people were already doing more than their fair share of job were now having to take on additional jobs and um there was there were some yeah it it was not good. Um yeah so all of that >> and so I think >> also the configuration of that >> and so we talked a lot about job redundancy and also making sure that more than one person in the office knew how to do multiple jobs so we wouldn't be caught off guard again. So there there's been a lot of discussion about that, but you your point is really well taken of justifying >> they are supposed to be performing, >> right? Exactly, Kelly. >> Yeah. It occurs to me that that I mean we talk about zerobased budgeting in other districts, right, where we're,

071you know, asking teachers to really start from the very beginning. What do you need to make your classroom function? Excuse me. I think that um that's what we're talking about here, right? is like zero base like who's doing what jobs, where are they reporting to, and are we staffed appropriately? And I agree that I would love for us all to come to the table next year for this process and be able to say we are confident that we are staffed at the right level. We need every single person in that office. We are confident that we're compensating them fairly and at the right level. Um and and we feel really strong about the budget that we're putting forward. And yes, it's going to cost 6% more. and here to block, right? And I think that's

072that's what I'm hearing a request for. >> Yeah, I agree with that. Deb, >> I would also just say that I think it always helps when you're talking about a workplace that is uh paid for by the public. Yeah. >> And staffed uh by various individuals. It's really easy in the different schools to know, well, that's my that's an English teacher, that's a math teacher, that's a science teacher. This is what they do. And it's less clear in an SAU office where what people do and where the law requires people to do things. And I think that just clarity about the staff and responsibilities may well warrant more visibility on on the SAU web page. And I think that's a really legitimate concern and a pretty easy thing to do. And so last thought, I

073I know that we have people in our SAU office who are working >> 60hour weeks, you know, and so I think that's um >> that also that visibility is important. And I'm not saying we should add staff, but I I do think that that should be part of the conversation. If we have people who are working well over what a normal job capacity should be, we need to understand that and get to the bottom of that as well. >> Right. So, >> and I think also a list of essential tasks and who's who's tackling them. and then bonus tasks or you know what we would like to see happen. Yeah, it yeah that conversation feels really important. Michael and then Neil >> Neil >> uh knowing that we are about to move into an area

074where we're going to motion for approval of the budget. I am a little bit uncertain as to what that expenditure number should be >> for the motion. >> I think I have it for the motion. Are we comfortable? Is any more comments from the public before I move on? >> Just a second. Okay, seeing none. >> Which one are we doing? >> That's what we're getting ready to have a motion. Michael's going to give us a motion for what we're doing now. And Carrie, what is your question? >> Yeah, my question is not a helpful one in terms of speediness, but I have to ask it because it's on my brain. Um, I hear resistance and I'm just curious. Is there a plan of the three? Is there a plan like Tara if you've been

075a part of the budget that feels safer or Gina I know you were concerned as well about have we explored and really dug into this for people who are more f like is there a alternative that feels better or is it a situation of we have no good options as a non-financial person I just feel like my due diligence is to hear that thought of what an alternative would be. Yeah, >> they're all valid options. If you're asking my personal preference, it would be to split it over the two years um to avoid lumpiness and to avoid for whomever is involved in this process. Next year on behalf of the SAU, it seems that the SAU takes one-time expenditures and runs with that money as if it's a necessary operational expense when it is not.

076And so I would caution the board. Whatever additional funds that we add into for this process to make up for this shortfall need to be subtracted out of the analysis next year to the extent that they should not show up in the percent increase because they are not true operational expenses. >> Gina, you had your hand up. >> I my I think my bigger issue with tonight is how we got here. Um I trust that the committee has raised good points. I think our colleague from the finance committee raises an excellent point like we need data to talk. We could get benchmarking data from other SAUs to show staffing but like I think as a new board member even having not been in your discussions. I don't have transparency. I want to believe that everyone's

077valued and needed and that they're doing their jobs, but I don't know that. So, it makes it hard for me not to ask hard questions about our staff when I don't know. So, I really trust that the committee is doing and asking hard questions and I'm left feeling a little but >> thank you. >> Welcome to school board votes. >> Yeah, that's I hope it's not like that. That's not I don't that's not that's not how I operate as Thank you. Are we comfortable moving to a motion? Michael, do you have one? >> Yeah. Um, two comments a motion. Um, I think it's appropriate for the taxpayers here represented by the handover finance committee to push us for to seek further justifications. I think it's perfectly appropriate for us uh to take the one team

078member that we manage, superintendent Steiner, and ask her to justify her budget and her team get familiarity with it. Um, and so to make a motion, I would say with gratitude for the work of the SEU team, SAU budget committee, and the Her Finance Committee, I move to approve the FY27 SAU budget with a net district assessment of 2,883,967. In accordance with option C, that represents a 6.31% increase to cover both FY27 expenditures and the current deficit. Any further discussion? Sorry. Second. Sorry. Second. >> All in favor. >> And I will participate in some discussion if that's okay. >> Okay. So, I just want to um >> Can I just Kelly needs to go? I'm giving you permission to go. I'll be back. You're okay. Thank you. >> Unofficially. Whatever. I gota go. >> Okay.

079>> She'll be back. She has to Her son is being recognized in the in the soccer banquet right now. So, okay. Yeah. >> Um I'm in support of the the motion that was made, but I want to make sure that we've got the language right because you referenced net assessment and I want to make sure that that because we're here to approve an expenditure budget this evening. Right. >> Okay. I I'm just trying to make sure that that motion and I would accept a friendly amendment captures $2,8837 2,883,967. We take a look at option C. It has an expenditure budget of 2,740,626 and then the deficit amount for a total required of 2883967. I have made hamburger out of that motion. I would accept a friendly amendment including >> sub. No, I I I think

080you got it right. I just was looking I wasn't Yeah, I wasn't sure if that final net assessment number was inclusive of that 2,300 that shows in there. >> Yes, because I think that is interest income. >> Correct. >> And it offsets some of the deficit. >> Correct. >> And it makes the negative non- tax offset slightly smaller >> and then rolls into that final 2883 number. >> Okay. So that Okay. Yep. I'm good. >> Okay. So, we have a motion and a second. Further discussion. >> Any further discussion? >> Yes. Um, my colleague to my right has over and over again been so thoughtful about money and I've attended other committee meetings with her where she never fails to identify concerns that I value. My colleague on my left similarly overwhelms me with astute

081thoughtful commentary. One is suggesting plan C. One is suggesting plan B and I >> A >> plan A to split it. >> Right, Ter? >> I was suggesting A. >> Yes. I beg your pardon. >> I just want to make sure. Thank you. One is A, one is C. And I'm just really struggling to do the best thing for the district. And you know, fortunately, you're not my children, so it's not like I'm playing favorites, but I wonder if there could be just one brief statement from each of you about I mean, is that being really babyish? >> Just you may request whatever you wish. I would love one statement from each of you about why I know you you feel strongly about lumpiness and um >> so if you don't mind I'll get you

082a blended go first. >> You go first. >> Um I um I think the merits to to kind of flip this on its head. I think the merits of Terara as a position are that um it gives it it smooths things out and it gives the school district and the board time to try to address that without passing the whole thing to taxpayers. Uh, I think the merit and so I like that it appeals to I think the reason why ultimately I'm persuaded with option C is I don't want this hanging out over our head for the next year. I want to deal with it once and be done and have certainty. And two, I do not want a situation where the SAU business office says look the advance from one of our funders has

083not come. We we we don't have money for this. What do you guys want to do? So I simply want to deal with it now. deal with it once and then if we want to seek savings we go strategically to Robin and say hey you need to you need to justify the essay you vote in the manner in which Mr. Snider described that's ultimately that certainty persuades me at the end. >> Um and I I voted just for the clarity of the other committee member because there were three of us. I voted for um option Z because I just want this to be done. I don't want it hanging over our head. I feel that we keep kicking things down the road. And to me this feels like one thing that we don't have to

084kick down the road. It is not a big amount of money in the scheme of all of our budgets. And it just felt like I don't know. I just want something off our plates. >> So yeah. >> So I too do not enjoy carrying over debt or deficits. I am not a fan of that. In this particular case I generally I am a fan of radical transparency and responsibility. And I feel like to pay this off in one fell swoop when we know that the cash flow situation is going to continue to be problematic moving forward. To bail out the problem in one fell swoop and to potentially cause a tuition calculation issue is not the best way to achieve the transparency and the accountability that we really need to do. The work that we

085need to do to get our heads around this problem and to resolve it moving forward. Not just in a one time we rip off the band-aid once and it's over. If we do it thoughtfully over two years, I I feel like we will get to a better end of results at the end of that process. >> Thank you. >> Yeah, I'm not gonna this is not a rebuttal. I would just say I'm one school board member. >> I have no power and authority by myself. I would just say whatever the will of the school board is, we should express that tonight >> so people can move on with their budget. Exactly. So if if option C is disfavored, >> we I do think we have an obligation to select something and not >> oh absolutely

086>> prolong the process. >> And to some it feels as if either option A or option B takes care of the deficit. So we are all agreeing that you know we're not pretending this deficit doesn't exist and we're just going to kind of do some magic number something. We are we are addressing it. It's just a matter of do we pay it in >> is how and when >> in one lump sum as we have a motion on the table right now or in over two years. So any further discussion on this? I keep looking back. Yes, Renee. >> Um does the tuition comp uh analysis has been mentioned a couple times and I don't want to make an assumption on what you're trying to say. C can you just explain the tuition method? I'm

087just concerned because these this will be carried through to the other schools for their budgets so that when we do the calculation based upon that new format that we determined that to bring through the entire deficit in one time and pass it through is going to potentially make our tuition calculation a little bit higher than we would have otherwise like because of the ones situation. Whereas my hope would be that if we split it in half and and took care of it over two fiscal years that then we would not have any extreme impact. That's my hope. But this has not been fully vetted in any case. It is just thanks for your question. >> Is it possible to quickly run the tuition calculation or is that too much to ask? Okay. Okay. Just I'm

088just asking like you know. Okay. Seeing no further discuss. Hey Marcella. See no further discussion. May I please call for a vote? And we have Garrett. Are you still on the line? >> I am. Bomb. Yes. >> Okay. Here. Russell. Yes. No. Nelson. No. >> Costa. Yes. >> Christy. Yes. >> Uh Deon. No. a no. >> No. Yes. >> It was yes. >> So I kind of lost track then. I'm just like so one >> that was six. >> Six to four >> and Kelly was a yes. Yes. So so seven to four. >> Okay. Um so that motion passes. I would like to thank everyone for your excellent questions, the excellent discussion. We were very focused. I really appreciate you. Okay. >> Thank you very much. Oh, I think it was my thing. >>

089I don't know why I checked it. I heard it. >> Debs participated in the discussion. I'm like, we're being recorded. Um, and also I do want to I do not want to lose the very important points that Tara in particular so art, you know, articulated throughout this of we have to we have to be more transparent and do a better job from, you know, a much much much earlier part. I won't even say of the budget process because I feel like we always say the budget process starts in September. To me, this discussion of what the SAU office looks like and needs to look like needs to happen in April, May so that we can have that information on September 1st when the budget process um kicks off. So, that would be that would be

090my request to Robin. And, you know, I can't won't make it formally now, but um it feels like something that would be useful for the budget process to have for next year. Um, and thank you all so much for coming. I really appreciate it. Okay. >> Can I just >> Yes. Um, I just think Kelly's vote, even though she said I'm a yes on her way out, I don't think it should be counted in the count because she did miss the whole exchange at the end, I think, is a valuable >> six to four conversation. >> Yeah. And she does feel badly that she had to leave when she did. So, she was doing her best not to have to go. Okay. Um, we now move into our regular meeting. Thank you again. >> Thank

091you. >> Um, okay. Business requiring discussion. We do have a reading of policy and I guess Marcela, you're here representing the policy committee. >> Comments. >> Since Ben is not here. >> No, >> it's a draft. It's a second reading of policy GB GBA. >> Nothing's changed. >> Yeah. Okay. Straightforward. Assume we're still pro. >> We're gonna have >> Okay. So, it's a second reading with no changes since the first reading. No changes. Okay. Great. Um the second item we have is a donation from the friends of Hanover Norwich Schools, which I have to be honest, I was so um focused on the budget. I wasn't looking at this. Is there Lauren? Can you take this? Oh, hi. >> Yay. Here's some gold for you. Hi. Dante wearing my environmental club sustainability coordinator hat. Um

092I don't know if Deb Robinson is online. Is she online? I Okay. >> No. Okay. So, she and I um have been talking with the um friends of Hannover Nor schools about the sustainability coordinator. As you know, we have an adopted SAU climate action plan and um the friends basically are supporting our request to have somebody in the central office because it would involve all schools helping to coordinate the great work that's happening. This includes everything from the composting at the Marian Cross School with Cat Buckston one hopefully carrying it through the district at that point happening at the high school level and thinking can we get our students into the elementary schools you know that idea of curriculum uh consistency across K through 12. We're also looking at it from a standpoint of what

093can we grab hold of in teaching our students how can we get someone to coordinate that effort. um also a part of sort of studentf facing work also staff supporting them um in their ability to maybe introduce this into curriculum you know learning which again Jay Fischer is talking about composting what he's doing with with the students at the high school level anyways the idea is for a $5,000 stipend um and there's a job description there we are you know saying this is a pilot program after hearing the discussion about the SAU budget um I am acutely aware that this is, you know, it is what it is now. We cannot predict the future. Um, so that's what it is. I'd be happy to answer any questions you might have. >> Deb, >> well, that's

094the heart of it for me is the line that says with time expanding and in budget for future years >> and there is no way I can commit to that tonight. >> Yeah. >> At all. I I you know I I think that was a hope when we were writing it and I don't think at all it's actually something we want the board to commit to. Um we recognize that this is a stipen and stipens by nature any grant funding are here today and perhaps gone next year. Um I think what we're looking for is is to not lose momentum without any commitment from the board for having it in the in the budget. Um, we also have another group that I'm helping to spearhead, which is a climate action implementation team. We've had one

095meeting. We're interfacing with people who represent the nonprofit organizations in our communities. We're al also looking at other organizations in Vermont, New Hampshire, to help sort of pull on that expertise locally and bring it into our district, Dartmouth College included. uh you know again as far as I know when I've listened to Torx Collins and other things we have a very busy board very busy administrators and no one positioned to help sort of do this networking effort um so any help the board could provide friends is thinking we want to have the students learning and I think Capid is going to be saying we want to have community involvement um so that would be the nonprofit sector and that would go on whether this is approved or not by the board so and thank you

096>> anything maybe a question or idea is um there's a program at Tuck where Tuck students join boards of local nonprofits and they do it and part of a way to build experience and I guess one question I'd have is because we have the resource of Dartmouth College here is there some potential volunteerbased partnership that would achieve the goals of this role without it committing us to a budgetary ious commitment and it also gives them real experience and things like that especially in a time when it's very difficult for early career >> graduates to get real jobs. >> Absolutely. We're looking to connect with the sustainability >> um work at at Dartmouth for that reason. So yes, any Yeah, we're definitely yes. >> Any other questions? >> Yeah, Deb, >> this is not a question.

097I just want to confirm that we've got $5,000 coming in to do this for one year. My and that's fine and I'm ready to vote on it. My sticking point is with the language in the document that suggests the door is opening and it will keep opening. That's all. >> Lauren, >> um just making sure that the friends were aware that that there there could be two options here. one that there wouldn't necessarily be the board's ability to say yes, we support this and and that they would still be okay with processing this grant if that were not a part of the original proposal, I guess. >> Yeah. And so again, this it's the board's discretion. If you need a confirmation, obviously you need it. It's a no vote tonight. I mean, yeah, we've seen

098this proposal. We go to the next meeting. Yeah. Laura will also we have been we've been Robin and I have been part of all of the emails as this grant was written and ultimately um given to the handover Norwich um friends. So we've been aware of this work. Robin supported this work. Um and I spent nearly all day today with Jay some high school students over at Marrying Cross learning all things compost >> worms. >> I was in it today. >> Okay. So the that the the understanding is this grant is here for this year. The language calls for multiple years. We may be able to approve it with a caveat or no. I mean do we need to not vote? I I guess like I'm looking to the people that we're dealing with the

099friends of hand schools like what would they be com what is the best way to handle that part of it because I haven't been in conversation with them. Um, I would say probably to be transparent with them and make sure that what we're approving is the right thing that we're approving would be my recommendation is to make sure that they would confirm that they are okay granting us the $5,000 even without the ability to commit to putting it into the budget in the future. >> Neil, what was your Sorry, I saw your hand too late. >> Uh, yeah, I would strongly advocate that we I don't think there's a timeliness factor associated with this. I think we should um postpone this for future discussion. There are some things in here that I would want to

100confirm. Um I I am not entirely certain that there are some constraints associated with this grant and I'm not sure how much of those are we would be responsible for implementing. So does it need to be a minimum of 10 hours a month? >> Right. There are things here that are typically not associated with a grant. >> Yeah. >> And I would just want to make sure that we've done due diligence on our side to make sure legally um if we are going to accept this, are we bound by the constraints that are presented in this offer this evening? Or is the board simply um accepting the $5,000? We are generally agreeing that it might go towards this effort, but the rest of this we are not required. We are not bound by and I

101would just want confirmation on that before we went ahead and approved something like this. >> Carrie, did you have your hand up? >> I would second. Okay, >> I think we should wait. >> Okay, that's all I was >> Are you all comfortable going back to them and having that conversation? Okay, >> but to clarify, chair, right, part of the conversation is on our side and legally determining whether or not we are constrained by accepting this grant to the conditions. >> Yeah. So with the re So a recommendation around that feels like it would be $5,000 for a sustainability position at the SAU level for the remainder of this school year and not and then leave it up to the discretion of the SAU what the job des I mean we don't normally approve job

102descriptions here like and let you guys decide what you correct. I would highly encourage the chair to follow up and figure that out. >> Okay. Well, I mean, yeah. Okay. >> I would be happy to have that conversation then. Okay. >> Thank you. >> Great. Thank you. >> I'm going to move to approve items B3D. >> Thank you. That was going to be my next adjustment. >> Seconded by Deb. Well, I I need to make some corrections to the minutes. >> Oh, that would be lovely. >> So, I can still second. >> You can second it and then let's have your descriptions. Yep. So, Deb seconded it and then what are your caveats? >> Um, there's a place where Teresa's last name is simply spelled T A Y. So, that needs to be fixed. It

103also says at one point before the superintendent gives her notes, it says that chair Christie called on Robin and you didn't because you weren't here. So, and I just chair Kelly. >> No, it was Chair. It was Vice Chair. >> Um, and I just wonder >> I just wonder whether in that line it doesn't say in the list of people, it doesn't clarify that you were absent. And I don't know if we should do that. I haven't really paid attention in other ones. Okay, so that's my third thing. So you need to be Lisa Christie needs to be shown as absent. Um the business administrator needs her second syllable and the superintendent's report was preceded by vice chair Nelson asking her to give a report, not Christie. Okay, there. Now I'm right. I'm done with

104my corrections. Okay. I would note quote that my name I was misspelled at one point and that you were a great chair and no one appreciates your genius in your time. >> Oh, thank you. We can add that too. >> There we go. >> Deb did a wonderful job. >> Okay. >> So, we're good. >> Yep. >> Okay. Um Garrett, are you are we still online? So, we have to go around the bend or you >> uh Sure. Palm. Yes. >> Okay. Carrie. Yes. McConnell, yes. Yes. >> Nelson, yes. >> Yes. >> Christie, yes. Yes. >> Sullivan, yes. >> Yes. >> Okay, great. Thank you all so much. Um, moving into the next part, um, report of the chair. Just briefly, thank you everyone. I hope everyone's having a good school year. Um, I hope

105the students and teachers are enjoying the fact that we, you know, got through Halloween and, um, we're getting through our first snow and hopefully winter sports are going to be as successful as fall sports and all the theater productions are going to be spectacular and the holiday concerts will be wonderful. I will encourage my fellow board members to attend um, some events at the various schools. They really are pretty spectacular. Kelly, >> comment on that. If you guys are on Instagram, the students are doing an event of the week and I just had to call it out because it is amazing. They're like concentrating their efforts to show up for what and it's a variety of things. It's sports, it's theater, it's music and I think it's very cool that they are taking that initiative.

106So if you're not following that, I recommend >> we'll add that to the Instagram feed. >> Okay. I'll save my Instagram question there after >> we'll get you signed up. >> You have to have it. We'll get you all set up instead of fishing. Um, so that's my quick report is just thank you to everyone. Please take advantage of any of the holiday offerings that are coming up. Um, and enjoy whatever snow we get because I'm kind of tired of this rain already. Okay. Um, next committee reports. You just had a huge one from the budget committee. So, we will pretend that there's nothing else to say. You don't have anything else, Michael? >> We left it all out in the field. Any other committees have met since the last time we met about what

107two weeks ago? Three weeks ago, whatever it was. >> Week ago. >> A week. A week ago. Just a week ago. No one's met in the past week. Okay, moving on. Superintendence reports. So, I'll put C and D in together just to say that we met just over a week ago and pretty much the life has been budget and continuing all the good work that was reported on at our previous meeting. So, I have nothing additional to add this evening. >> Okay. Thank you. I I would just note very briefly if I may. Um Robin's been gone. Lauren has been um playing her role and Robin's role and has done a really wonderful job. I I don't know. I love it when I can leave and other people make sure everything's running great and so

108kudos to Lauren for that. >> Thank you very much. >> Yeah, doing two jobs as as we were discussing earlier, doing two jobs is difficult. I started this role saying that I was learning a lot very quickly and that has continued. >> Um Teresa, did you have anything else that you needed to say? >> Just working on budgets. Um and then just again, same thing I've been saying before is um working with Janice a lot on transitioning and getting more and more off my plate and what that position what I was doing in that position and getting her to do all those tasks. Mhm. >> That's good to hear. >> That's good. >> Yeah. >> Thank you. And again, thank you to all the SAU staff. Um I know budget season is really stressful for

109everyone in that office, so thanks so much. It's a lot and we know that it's a lot. Back to Rene's point of can we make this more streamlined. Um anyway, next. Um we do not have a need for non-public. Yep. No, just double check. >> Okay. No need for non-publiclix. So we have now returned back to the public session that we never left and public comment. At this point, the public may address the board on anything that you have not already heard about tonight. Seeing none, um agenda topics for next meeting, please send them to me. We have a long break from the SAU meetings. Um we meet next on January 27th. Um, so there may be a me a reason if things come up to do a special SAU meeting. I feel like there

110always is attached to a Dresden meeting. Um, so, you know, be on the lookout for that. But for the most part, the next regular SAU meeting is January 27th. Yes, Kelly. >> Um, just a heads up for newer board members to look ahead to January. There are many, many, many meetings in January. Yes. Um, because of the budget >> presentation. So, um, just give that a look so that you're not caught off guard by it. >> Yeah, >> Michael. >> And then, um, you know, I think just to keep some of the momentum the next time we are back in regular business with the SAU if we're able to keep our other meetings to an efficient amount of time. >> Um, a very brief presentation by Lauren by Robin or her team on here's just

111the org chart. here's who we are what we do. >> Let's just you know at that point she'll be in position four months >> you know not for us to meddal because that's not our role but >> you know better to have a slow and steady journey of understanding um to be ready for next year's budget >> and and I would add to that if there are any tasks that you feel are not being accomplished um you know like that would be good for us to know as well. Yeah, Kelly, >> I also think to the extent that it makes sense to put a onelide blurb about, you know, the board had this conversation in the context of our budget presentations in January, it might make sense, right? That because that's going to be a

112piece of those discussions and being able to bring in we are looking at this. Here's the work we've done just since that right >> November meeting. >> And to let the public know who isn't who didn't listen tonight that might come to the public presentations in January, right? um >> because it does tend to be a slightly larger crowd. Not much, but slightly larger. So, >> okay. And with that, may I have a motion to adjourn tonight's meeting? >> Bless you. >> Do I have a second for Michael's movement? Yes. Carrie. Okay. I'm gonna start with Neil. >> Yes. >> Sullivan. Yes. Yes. >> Yes. >> Christy, yes. >> Yes. >> Nelson. Yes. >> Yes. Yes. mostly. Yes. And Garrett >> Palm. Yes. >> Thank you everyone.