001[Music] Heat. Heat. [Music] Heat. Heat. [Music] We do not want to lose momentum. We don't want to, you know, drag this into next school year. We want to make sure that we're taking appropriate action, but we want to take that action kind of in the context of knowing all of our options and everything that the community has said um that they value um about this. So, what I'd like to do tonight is just kind of step through this um the board members and I'll just say this um not many people know this. We we cannot meet outside of public forum. So um often you will find us having an initial conversation about a topic around the board table and tonight is representative of that. Um this is a kind of us calling a first read
002um of this. So I expect there to be differing opinions and that's okay. Um and as long as we leave with this evening saying um if if members of the district staff use these characteristics um to and kind of grade them on you know on a five or 10point scale. We should get information on the 13th so that we can determine you know exactly what would be the most beneficial cost effective you know way forward as we make decisions. So I'm going to stop and ask the board members if they have questions or concerns with this process. >> Yeah Andrew. Um thank you. Um, so I I do think the the rubric that is presented here um asks a lot of important questions. It covers um I have not at least yet found anything else
003that I think should go in here that's that's not yet in here. Um, however, I don't believe that um I don't think this fits a a traditional rubric in the sense that there are things here that you know certain answers to one category might simply be a disqualifier. Right? If this for example if an option is found that is can't really be done equitably or fairly across schools well that is probably you know probably doesn't matter how many points it got on you know speed of implementation and strategic plan and so forth. So, I think these are all good questions that we should know, but I think for the board's decision, I think the the qualitative notes might be more important than trying to find a find a numeric score. There's there's too much difference.
004There's things there's things that will cost a lot of money. There's things will cost zero, but it doesn't mean we should do all the things that would cost um cost zero. Um that would be my um that's my main I guess that's my main thought on the on the bridge >> and it's valuable and it's on point right because it is not intended to be an instrument like we would use in an RFP where we would at the end of this say here's a a table of all the options and their numeric scores the highest one wins. That that is not absolutely the case. This is just a a a set of variables or characteristics that we feel it's important to know if it's scores high, scores low, some of those notes um and there
005so that we can have those conversations, Andrew. Um and understand, you know, if um how they relate to each other, right? Um and there may absolutely be um a desire for the board to say if um feasibility p practicality scores a zero or a one it is a disqualifier right so um I didn't go into that that depth >> okay I think if we if we are going to if they're going if this is going to be used to present things with a weight on them that has a great influence if if things are going to come to us with numbers on them, that has a lot of power to it. And so then I think if if that's how we're going to get it, we should probably have some discussion about waiting some of
006these things higher than others. I'd prefer that we just didn't have scores on them. If we have scores, I I really don't want does it respect student rights and privacy to be >> the same >> a third of a third of five points just like um um what is the position of of a particular organization like those are not those are not close. >> Yeah. You you call out something else that I think is worth noting. The evaluation questions are not intended to subdivide the the value. These are just probing questions that fit the category out there. But I am open to modifying the rubric to just be notes. Um I I personally find value in determining you know on a scale right if you know feasibility is very feasible somewhat feasible very low feasibility.
007So I do think it informs us if we do have some sort of scale that um so I would if we want to go to high, medium or low so that it's not quantitative and it doesn't add up. I'm perfectly fine with that. >> Yeah. Thoughts? >> So I have a question and maybe a comment. So um so ultimately are we looking for this to be something that well first of all as I understand it we want this to be informative not something that is a grading tool >> ultimately and then second of all um is this something that we are thinking we might want to each use individually as we go through we talk about different options or is it something that we are looking to kind of collaboratively have one for? So that's
008a that's a great question. Um and the answer to the initial answer to that is no, right? And that that's a important thing. The district subject matter expert column is when I created this, I do not think the board members sitting around the table have the depth of experience or have had the opportunity to become expert in certain of the criteria. Um, so I put a the person in the district that I think should represent and actually perform the evaluation and provide the notes on on that evaluation for us to consume. So this is not an individual board member grading or or this would be something that we can then >> So that was my question was is this a tool then that hypothetically we would all receive filled out already and then use that
009to guide our discussion. >> Right. So again I'll see it as hey district you need to give us this kind of information right you need you need to have done this kind of research um and we need cost we need feasibility we need goodness of fit kind of information so other questions >> so just um I think what we're saying is that we are we the board members are all going to get the CISA 7 report and all of our administrative leaders are going to see the same report. >> But before we talk about it as board members, we will have their advice um using this movement. So, um, the intent is to have as much of that as possible on October 13th, recognizing that if you've ever spent time trying to get vendor information
010or what have you and timing and whatever, it may not be complete. And I want to leave um, some latitude. So, know that some of this information might still be forthcoming on October 13th. Um, but I wanted to I thought it important that the board deliver this to the district so that they can organize their input to us in a way that we all felt was valuable and helped us make this input. >> Laura, >> just to be clear, there won't be any decision making happening on October 13. >> I I don't know that. Well, I do know that it's a work session, right? And typically we don't take action as a board and during a work session. So I can say that with some level of confidence. What I don't want to communicate is
011a certain timeline for certain decisions. >> Others so >> sorry I'm just reviewing this quick again trying to see if I if I'm missing anything and I might be. One thing I want to always make sure to get with major systemwide considerations. Uh do we or can we make sure that we get some way of factoring in um both teacher and principal um I guess feedback? I'd really like to get more information on feedback from both of them about and and work that in with this. whether that's in regards to a wish list for them or priority list for them or whether they have a way to um indicate uh you know the document that we're looking at as we wait that makes sense. >> That makes um sense. So, in the email that I
012um sent out to the board, which the public doesn't have access to, but in in structuring this conversation, I wanted to first address the community feedback um that we received and I wanted to make sure that um we took immediate action on that. Um also open tonight is as we look at October 13, what else? Um and I I think it's valuable um to determine if there are other um feedback from u teachers building administrators that we want to entertain um on October 13. So, and I don't know if there's a way to do this. Um, but if there's a So, I guess what I'm maybe envisioning if this fits is having a possible category where u say that let me think of a better way to clear. So, um, Alex, if tonight you we
013leave here and you still want to make edits to this, please recognize that, you know, this this can can change be changed, modified over the course of this week. I just want to make sure that we kind of cut that off in time so that as the district does their work, they have a pretty stable instrument to guide them. If we're also including staff in building administration and feedback, student feedback should also be considered in this. >> Thank you. >> Absolutely. >> So I may reach out and get some feedback from the IC as far as how we make that happen. Okay. So um since not everything is available on the screen, let's just walk through the categories. So um what you can see is effectiveness and evidence, we want as much as possible for
014these to be evidence-driven decisions. Um then feasibility and practicality, right? Can we actually do this? Is it realistic? Um and um does it complement our educational operations? um as a as a category. Obviously, we are interested in getting the cost initial cost the program cost because some of these things the cost of a particular um weapon detection system is I think very was it very accurately kind of communicated this evening but there's labor cost and there's um maintenance and equipment damage what have you. So, we want to make sure that we have an understand of the long-term cost of ownership of uh any of the things that we um entertain. Legal and compliance, we want to make sure that any of our options that we uh entertain will pass legal scrutiny. Community acceptance and support.
015So, this is something that we might be able to modify this category to include community, teacher, student support as a as a category. Um, and let's let's make sure that we run that down, right? So, I can see an opportunity to do that. Equity and accessibility, right? I think that was spoken to. We need to make sure it doesn't disproportionately impact any specific student group. Um, and if you want to scroll down, time to implement. How quickly can the option be implemented? Is it long shortterm, longterm, both? Um, integration with existing plans. Um we have a security plan that we want to support and enable and mature um not um u take away from or otherwise confuse um and then should we be as a board taking this on. So I am just entertaining the
016fact that some of the feedback may be oriented to an operations decision um and it doesn't rise to the the level where a board policy might need to be created a board action. Um so the question really to the administration is um is this our lane or is this board's lane right and that's where some of the conversation will be. If obviously if there's an expenditure, if there is an impact to students, whatever, we want to codify as much of that in foreign policy as as we can. So in an email to board members, I just want to make sure that any decisions made that say that that communicates that's not board level, that needs to be captured, that needs to be discussed and be made transparent. Some of it, if it's controversial, absolutely, we
017should have that conversation at the board. I just think that some of it might be really, you know, squarely in an operational way. Um, not having seen the feedback. I just want to make sure that that we actually asked that question. Ed, you have a question. Um yeah, we want to make sure that any if there any decision to be made about whether I mean that would be our decision about the the board's decision about whose lane it's it is and I think you could have things that if they weren't emotionally charged and impacting day-to-day life of a school and students maybe would be things that we wouldn't you know mind having the administration do, but the public may simply demand a bigger role sometimes and that's I think that's okay. Um c certainly I'm
018not suggesting that if you know there's a suggestion that comes from the table that says you know hey you should subscribe to this journal of security policy for a hundred bucks or something but I don't mean that but I do mean >> things that maybe cost low enough that it might be construed as an admin decision but it's going to be something people see every day. I think we need to heir on the side of having discussions come come through the board. >> Yeah. So I I think that that discussion uh is healthy and in a conversation with Superintendent Dyer, we discussed exactly that. Um ultimately um there is a a very large security plan, right? And some of which we don't talk about at open session because it lays out our security plan. Um,
019and we just need to be careful. We could have the conversation and the output of that conversation being yes, this is operational or yes, this has to be a foreign policy. Having the conversation, I absolutely agree. >> And then the last Oh, Alex, are you? >> I >> Yeah, go ahead, Alex. >> I just want to make sure I I don't forget this. So, when you talked about the um community acceptance and support and possibly expanding that to include u teachers admit and student feedback. I want to just kind of briefly make the case that if it even is included um in some way, shape or form though, I feel like those should be three distinctly separate groups. I've learned in my experience that, you know, students, parents, and uh those who work in the
020district day-to-day tend to have often very distinctly different views on the same subject. And I think they all need to be considered um and be able to be kind of weighed against each other in I still don't believe really important distinctions. >> Well, I I appreciate that and I agree with you. >> Andrew, unfortunately along those lines, I heard um I did have some mentions um anecdotally, I won't say what what school or anything, but we had I I did hear some people saying that I wasn't I wasn't comfortable as an employee sharing with my chain of command at a table or next to me at a table. And I'm not saying that's because of I'm not saying that's because of this superintendent's administration. I'm not saying that's because this is the admin this is
021the message that is necessarily being sent. But it's a it's a it is an unfixable problem because it it has generations of baggage behind it. And I don't mean generations of superintendent. I mean generations of years. and we just have to make sure we're gathering that feedback separately. >> Appreciate that. Last thing on the list is professional association review. The reason why that's there is concurrent with this, potentially concurrent with this, um, we're going to go through and have a re-evaluation of some of our security plans. And I just wanted to make sure that we had a place where we could connect those activities potentially. So if we come up with um a recommendation and it it's a contradiction to um potentially something that comes out of that reevaluation, we just wanted to be able
022to note it um and as we go through this. So that's that's kind of the information that um we want from the district as they evaluate and process the information from the community. Um any other feedback or discussion on that? Okay. So then October 13th we have a a opportunity to discuss other things. So are there any other um agenda items or um things that we want to discuss during that work session that is outside of processing the the community feedback related related to safety and security? Yeah. [Music] >> Sure. >> Um I'm curious as to the rest of the board and hearing any feedback about um you know when it comes to backpacks having so right now we have no policy at all. um you know we currently are after um you know we're
023operating under a certain way um but creating uh a policy where it goes across our whole district regards to backpacks where students are having their backpacks in their lockers once they get to school and they need them there throughout the course of the school day um and having a policy that kind of basically encapsulates that. So just for reference point, our middle schools all do that right now. Um their backpacks stay in their locker throughout the course of the day. Um also a lot of schools around us in particular high schools also do this. Um and I think that that is something that we should strongly consider. So, I'm just curious about people's feedback on that way, shape or form and about, you know, not being and I bring this up one because it's something
024I've thought about for a lot of years. Um, I think being at our schools and having the backpack thing play out differently year from year, >> uh, school from school, but also because it's something a lot of feedback from the community. And I also think in a practical standpoint, um, it provides really an important extra layer of security with the barriers that are that happen. discussion. Chantel, >> I know that on the high school level, especially in our district, if we do push to get rid of backpacks, there will be a strong student reaction that probably will not be positive. >> Thank you. Um, and so I just want to lay off like when the weapon was found at Prebble, right? We kind of entered into like in incident response mode. Um, and you know,
025the administration has the authority to, you know, respond to that incident. I really have appreciated how the district has responded quickly to putting some um controls in place that didn't exist and we feel like address this type of of incident. Um after an incident is over the board I think it's reasonable for the board to enter into a discussion about are there any policy gaps right and do we have any situations that we feel like if in retrospective um we could have done things differently right and that's absolutely in the the governance roles domain so uh I think it's within every board member's right to kind of put forward a recommendation of how we go and we will discuss it at the board. Hearing student feedback is a critical component to that conversation. So I
026I appreciate being okay then I I'll call it a end to the discussion and we will move on to the agenda. I appreciate everyone's um discussion and contributions to that conversation. Uh we'll go to um section four consent agenda approval. Will someone please read the motion? >> James, can we take just a brief moment? >> We'll recess for five minutes. testing. Testing Okay, Kinsey, are we ready? We can go. All right, we're going to come back and now we're going to take on the consent agenda approval. Will someone please read the motion? Yeah, go ahead. I move that the consent agenda items be present as presented be approved. >> Second >> discussion Kenzie online voting is now open. All votes have been entered and the motion is carried with all board members voting in favor.
027>> Thank you. We're going to move on to um action items. A Laura, would you please read the motion? I move that the course listings for the school year as presented be approved. >> Second >> discussion. >> Kenzie. Online voting is now open. >> All votes have been entered and the motion is carried with all board members voting in favor. >> Thank you. Before we continue, I'll just make a statement that all of these items have been discussed at the work session and we're just going to take a series of votes. So, Andrew, would you please read the motions for the 6B? >> All right. I will uh move that the revisions to board of education policies and rules in the 800 series of policies as presented be approved. >> Second >> discussion. Kenzie, >>
028online voting is now open. >> All votes have been entered and the motion is carried with all board members voting in favor. >> Thank you. Andrew, would you read motion 46 C? Um, I'll defer. Could you read it, Sam? >> I move that the revisions to board of education rule 187, public participation at board and committee meetings as presented, be approved. >> Second. >> Discussion. Andrew. >> Um, yes. I think that um I I just can't I can't support something that is going to remove a method of participation even if it's an in infrequent one and I just think more work could be done to see if there is um a way without having to do the full um you know the full cost of the system. I think it, you know, Teams would be
029a Teams meeting could be a way to do it if necessary. I don't think it's going to be used often, but I don't want people who have to be remote for some reason have to choose a a lesser method or an awkward method. And a method is lesser if a person wants to be part of the official meeting and has to choose writing instead. Doesn't mean there's anything wrong with writing, but writing when you want to have been verbal. um I think is the issue. I would like to uh make a motion to postpone uh this change for one month uh to have more time to research and get maybe recommendations on a different way of doing it. So that's a move to postpone for a month. >> Do we have a second? >> I
030would second >> discussion on the amendment. So, Alex, >> I would just say I second it because I I don't think it it does any harm or or creates any kind of conflict with any timelines that I'm aware of um to at least take one other look to investigate any potential option >> others. Laura, >> what is the timeline on this? Is is there some pending timeline about whether or not the contract is going to um end or >> I know you're working on the volume um >> so there is some urgency to this vote >> and what I meant by timeline is I I mean that decision I think is going to happen no matter what but as far as like you know a timeline to figure out an alternative we can kind of
031implement whenever we think we might be able to if if at all that makes sense >> Janette we'll come to Janette we'll come back >> so Since we're talking about if we don't make this decision by October 14th, there's going to be a cost to the board. Um, and this is something that hasn't been used. By changing the rule right now, that doesn't mean that we can't continue to look at some options and revisit this when we discover if there's some options like meeting or or uh who knows what they're going to come up. um with this kind of stuff uh really progresses quickly and changes. So I would say rather than tableabling or postponing this, not tableabling it, postponing it, maybe um just changing that to we'll move this along for now for fiscal
032reasons, but continue to look at some other options if that's a possibility. Could we um change the motion in that way? >> Uh before we do um can I Annie would you come to the table? So just kind of ask some clarifying questions of you. I just don't know the answer to a couple of them. So, our current system that we have now is an outbound call that we would then connect and then they would be inside of a Zoom meeting. Correct? And we're not intending to move off of the Zoom technology for board meetings and streaming to outlets like YouTube or whatever. So the recommendation that um Andrew put forward as far as exploring other technical technology implementations that would enable this um policy. Are our options really broad or is would it be
033a move away from Zoom as the hosting technology for the meeting? Will will meetings plug in? Um I I don't know anything about our options here, but I don't want a policy on the books that in the event that in the November time frame and we haven't discovered and integrated that new approach that we are now in violation of our policy because no one can technically do this right. So, >> it's my understanding that right now with Zoom, if we want to have that ability to bring somebody in via a phone call to speak publicly, we have to have that add-on that we currently have right now that we either continue with in October or we decide not to. Um, I'm not aware of any other add-ons specifically with Zoom, right? Like that that's the
034option. It's either it's on or it's off. So, so my communication to the board, Andrew, I'll let you go next, is I think that we should take the decision to table this or to not accept this policy change as a, you know, re uh re-upping our contract, right? And I because I don't think we can take it on the basis of, yeah, there's something else that we can do. Um, Andrew, >> well, if if we want to just if we want to just save the money, couldn't we just invite the person into the Zoom meeting and then remove them from the Zoom meeting after their public comment like as a participant? >> Yes. If we can do if we can do if we can do that we can just not buy the out. >> Does
035anyone see any issues from an administration perspective? So I I recognize that we have historically not invited individuals to the zoom call that they have been watching on YouTube um the streaming because we recognize that we want some level of control over participation. However, we do have administrators join remotely um for for calls. So, um is that a practical application that we could No one here wants to block any level of participation. I feel like this was brought to us because we had a techno technical issue and and a cost that we wanted to um handle. So, if just simply inviting them handles it, I I have I can change my mind on the policy. >> I um I can support Andrew's recommendation to have us go back and take a look at what options
036are available. >> Okay. Then Andrew can I I don't know exactly the terminology, but I would I would um encourage you to withdraw your tableabling and let's just have an up or down vote on the policy itself >> because I don't know that the policy vote has support. >> Yeah, go ahead. >> I think too and write write this write this down because you're not going to hear this one from me very often. Um, I don't I think the 12 I think the 1,200 bucks can just not be renewed if we have an idea that there's another way to do it for the unlikely times it's being >> um so okay I'll I'll withdraw the um motion to postpone. >> Thank you. Right. So that means we're back on the policy. Is there any discussion
037about the policy? So, we can we can vote no without it being implied that they're forced to buy the thing. >> Correct. I think we we have disconnected a cost from the policy. Um, but unless she's corrects me, that's what I just heard that we have a way to invite them to the meeting and let them speak. Yes, we can give them no different than if you were joining virtually anybody here, we would give you the link and you would come into the meeting. That means the person is a a square >> right >> on the screen. >> Go ahead. >> Right. And then we could remove that, right? >> Yes, we can admit them in, we can remove, >> right? >> Um but just keep in mind they're a full square on the screen.
038>> Correct. I I would like to explore that before we would move to that. And that's my request to um >> sure >> not pass this. Let us dig into what the impact could be and whether just keeping it the way it currently is is the best option. >> Okay. Then let's go back to Andrew's motion to table. I I I appreciate that because you know I want to make sure we we kind of jumped into the discussion. It's kind of halfbaked. Um and that's partly my my fault but you know some of the technology might have been put in place because not everyone has a computer and can you know actually um join a zoom meeting. So there might be other aspects that we want to understand before making it. So, um, Andrew, if
039you want to >> Yeah, >> I'm sorry, Lynn. >> I just want to understand what is the difference between what what is being proposed and what is happening now because I've never seen it happen in the first place. So, what are we talking about? What are the two differences of how someone can join the meeting and speak virtually? So with the integrated audio line that we have, the person joins in via like a phone call instead of a virtual meeting and they're just we have a little bit more control of when they get called in and when they exit the meeting. Um very similar to when they come up to the the podium, they have the time to speak and then then that's over. So it's a little bit more controlled. I'd say it's maybe
040a little bit more secure. Um because we we called them, >> right? >> Similar to like maybe if you're calling into a radio station, >> right? >> Sure. >> And so if we change this then um they are going to be a box on the screen through the whole meeting. >> No. And why And why is having them be a box on the screen bad as opposed to being a voice on the phone? I'm sorry. I just don't understand. >> Yeah, >> everybody has a phone or access to a phone. >> So, I'd like to if we could just um let us explore a little bit. >> Okay. I'll move to postpone this to the um to the October uh regular meeting. Second >> discussion. Kenzie McCoy. I >> Gerlock. I Canel. I Meister. I
041>> Becker. >> I >> Minnow. >> I >> Larly. >> I thank you everybody and thank you Amy. Okay, we're going to move to 6D, the sale of Keller Elementary School real property. Um will someone please read the motion? This is still operations. So Laura, >> I move that the commercial offer to purchase dated 82125 for the Keller Elementary School property with modifications detailed in counter offer number two dated 91625 with a purchase price of 725,000 as presented be approved. >> Second >> discussion. No, Kenzie. Online voting is now open. >> Although it's been entered and the motion is carried with all board members voting in favor. I want to pause for a second and recognize that I think in the audience are a few members from the organization that just purchased that property from
042Evergreen Theaters. Welcome. Congratulations. All right. Okay. Moving on to 6E salary increase for 2026. It's 2025 to 26 fiscal year for educators. All right. >> I move that a 2.95% base wage increase for educators be applied to the educator salary schedule retroactive to July 1st, 2025 for those who are employed as of September 22nd, 2025 as presented be approved. Second >> discussion. Laura, >> I just want to um just verify that when we take these increase um votes for salary increases that we are restricted by the state as to what amount we can do like we are we are at the maximum amount that we can offer according to the state. Is that accurate? >> Yes. Okay. I mean, I think it's important for people to understand that that we're this is as much as
043we can give our staff members. Um, and I often feel that that is unfortunate. >> Thank you. >> Others, Kenzie, >> online voting is now open. All votes have been entered and the motion is carried. The results of the individual board member votes are as follows. Becker, yes. McCoy, yes. Larly, yes. Gerlock, yes. Mow abstained. Canel, yes. Meister, yes. Thank you everybody. Um let's continue to um agenda item F. >> Lynn, >> would you entertain a motion? >> Yes. >> I would like to move that we take uh items F through L as one vote. >> We have a second. >> Second. >> Discussion. Okay. So the motion is um can you if we can read it? >> No. Um just that we want to um move that all of the salary increases outlined in
044agenda items F through L as presented be approved. >> So Lynn made that motion. >> Second. We have a second discussion. Kenzie >> Larley. >> Hi >> Minnow. >> Hi >> Becker. >> Hi >> Meister. I >> canel. I >> Gerlock. I McCoy I motion carries. >> Okay. Um agenda item M Laura. I move that a 2.95% wage in increase for administrators be applied to the administrator salary schedule retroactive to July 1st, 2025 for those who are employed as of September 22nd, 2025 as presented be approved. >> Second >> discussion. >> Kenzie, >> online voting is now open. All votes been entered and the motion is carried with all board members voting in favor. >> Thank you. And N or >> Oh, sorry. Um on N. Uh Lynn, >> I would like to offer a
045motion. >> You're ahead. I move that pursuant to board of education policy 164, schoolboard member compensation and expenses, board compensation shall not be increased for the 202526 fiscal year. >> Have a second. >> Second. Oh, sorry. >> The discussion enter. So, we're talking about um we're talking about uh less than about $20 per per month for a board member. Um I think it's a I think it's a bad idea long term to let board member compensation, which is already low. It's lower than other It's lower than a councilman. It's lower than a um council member. is lower than a county board member even though board members represent a much larger territory. Um I think it's a bad precedent. Uh and then I think it's a uh anyone who anyone who would like to take their
046their couple hundred dollars over the course of the year and give it to the donate it to the district, donate it to an activity certainly can do that. Just like some people can donate their whole um their whole salary if they want to. Um I think it's a bad idea to let this to let this slip behind um especially when the adjustment is would be less than 3%. It's not like the year we did I think maybe we didn't do it the year that it was an 8% staff pay adjustment. >> I can't remember which year we we were looking it up. We did uh at one point suspend the policy for a year. Um you're right, we didn't take an increase, but then the next year we we let the policy stay. Um so
047yeah, Lynn, >> I would just like to explain I understand this would be a very this would be a token amount. It would be a very small amount. It wouldn't make a big difference financially, but we are facing a $4 million deficit. I have faith in our administration that they're going to figure out a way for us to do the work of the district and pay the bills in the face of that deficit, but still we are going to be strained. We have just had a very generous referendum from the community um and are making wonderful um improvements to our schools and building a new school with that money. But we know we're going to have to have an operational referendum next year just to continue operating. And this is just a small way that
048we can say just this one year, this one time, I'm not going to take a raise. >> Others, Laura, >> I understand what you're saying, Andrew. I know that um historically there is um when I first came on the board, there hadn't been any kind of increase for quite a long time, and it's sort of accumulated over the years, and to the point where the number was um not in line with the districts around us at all. So we we remedied that over the course of two years. We didn't do it all in one year. We did it I think over the course of two years. Three. Okay. Um and and and brought those those numbers in into line. Um and and that was that I think that was important because it is serious work
049that we do and um we need to you know and we need to attract people who want to run for for this position and that was part of the discussion at the time. Um, however, I'm going to uh support Lynn's motion because of everything you said. Um, and I I'm I'm comfortable with that. We revisit this every year, so next year we can talk about it again. Um, if I'm here, but I know um not everyone at this table will necessarily be here next year, but it's um it's a it's an important gesture and um I will be supporting it. >> Others Janette I too agree. It's a symbolic gesture. It's only a few dollars. Um, and I get what you're saying, Andrew. We don't want to set a precedent, but there has been a
050precedent sent prior when there was no raise taken. So, I I agree with Lynn. I would support it. others. >> I would just add that um in agreeing with the motion um as we look at the budget, there's a there's a high likelihood that we might even enter this school year in deficit spend that we're going to have to crawl out of um through the year. And um I think that's when that is less of like a a gesture and more of a you know you know until we write the ship you know I I've always seen that as a stipend versus a salary. And you know I'm very comfortable with a stipen being stagnant for a few years as we figure it out. But um we're not asking to remove the policy. We're asking
051to suspend the policy for you. Alex, >> I'm with Andrew. Um, the ultimate thing that I think about is is taking that and however way you look at it, yes, it's it's not a significant amount and I do agree with, you know, the gesture that it does send, but at the same time, I look at it from a motivational perspective that, you know, if we offer this to ourselves for the hard work that we do, then in my mind, it also makes me continue to answer almost all if not every single email, phone call, message, etc. and continue to do the immense amount of hard work that is ahead of us uh for the years to come. And it's almost a way to hold her to hold myself at least accountable. Um and something that
052will remind me to continue to to put in that time that investment to our community and our district. So um I'm definitely with Andrew on that. Andrew, >> if if it was a situation where it would perhaps the st um you know, I could see a situation where maybe it's stagnant for a few years and then you want to do a the last time we did it, the increments were round round dollar numbers. Um but it's not really suspending a policy. The policy says unless you make the motion, nothing happened. So nothing was really suspended. I think we should revisit the policy before next year though because what you're saying is it's zero or the CPI. So, right, that's that's what the policy says. >> And also, I don't know >> I don't know that
053it should be the >> it probably should just be the the board revisits every few years. We could look at a historical chart and then maybe if for two years we didn't catch up, maybe, you know, >> I think we should look at that. Um, and also it's it is weird to tie what the board's raise would be to be what's given to one of one of the groups even though traditionally it's it's been the same. So, >> yeah. Sure. Other discussions. Okay. Um, Kenzie does before she takes a do we do we understand what I stands for and nay stands for? >> Okay. We're voting for or against Lynn's motion. Correct. >> It is the motion. So there this one did not have a motion, right? It was absent and so she made a
054motion. That is so I means no raise. Nay means follow the policy in 2.9. Okay. And my voting went away. Oh, there it is. >> Online voting is now open. All votes have been entered and the motion is carried. The results of the individual board member votes are as follows. Meister, yes. Canel, yes. Mow, no. Gerlock, yes. Larly, yes. McCoy, yes. Becker, no. >> Thank you everybody. And that brings us to the end of the agenda. I would entertain a motion to adjourn. >> Second. >> All in favor? We are adjourned. Thank you everybody. You have been watching the Green Bay Area Public School District's Board of Education meeting. Please visit the school district's website www.gbaps. gbaps.org for more information on the district and future meeting dates. If you cannot fully access the information on
055this video, please let us know the accessibility issue you are having by calling 920-4482025 or by email at communications gbaps.org. We will try to provide the information to you in an alternative format and or make the necessary improvements to make the information accessible. [Music]