001[Music] Um so we are calling to order uh this reorganization meeting of the Lacrosse Board of Education meeting. Um we will recognize the Hogan Administrative Center occupies the land of the Ho Chunk people. Please take a moment to celebrate and honor this ancestral ho chunk land and the sacred lands. Wait, I'm reading the wrong one. Am I reading the wrong one? You're right. No, you're right. We just do that all up at the top. So, I have to do it later on. Okay. Or the board. Whoever gets to be president doesn't have to do later on. Okay. So, let me read this over again. I don't want to be disrespectful. We recognize the Hogan Administrator Center occupies the land of the Ho Chunk people. Please take a moment to celebrate and honor this ancestral Ho
002Chunk land. whole chunk land and the sacred lands of all indigenous peoples. Will the secretary please call the role? Mr. Alberts here. Mr. Vneski excused. Miss Fuks here. Dr. Garcia here. Mr. Jackson here. Mr. Ma here. Mr. Newmeister here. Dr. Sprag here. Miss Sucla here. A quorum of the board of education is present. So the reorganizational meeting of May 5th, 2025 is called to order. I also want to let you know, Laura, Mr. Begneski is traveling back from Europe and if possible will try to join us later on. Oh, perfect. Okay, sounds good. Uh, we will now have the pledge of allegiance. Please stand and face the American flag. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with
003liberty and justice for all. Tonight's agenda has been previously distributed to the board. I would entertain at this time a motion with a second to approve the agenda as submitted. I think second. I got to start first. All right. I'd like to make a motion to approve the agenda as presented. We have a motion. We have a second. I'll second that. We have a motion by Mr. Ma, seconded by Mr. Newmeister. Any discussion, questions. All those in favor of the motion signify by saying I. I. Those opposed? Motion carries. We have no public speakers for this. Okay. Then um I'm only read the part in blue. Okay. So, this is the approval of certification and summary statement of the board of canvasers. And um do we have to approve that? So, we need a motion
004to approve the certification and summary statement of the board of canvasers for the April 1st, 2025 board uh school board election as presented. I'd like to make a motion to approve the certification summary statement of the board of canvasers for the April 1st, 2025 school board election as presented. Second. Any comment? Mission or second. You'll get your chance. Um, we have a motion and a second. All those in favor of the motion signify by saying I. I. Those opposed? Motion carries. Next item on the agenda is approval of certificates of election. Um, and we need a motion to approve the certificates of election as presented. I will make a motion to approve the certificates of election as presented. Second. We have a motion by Dr. Sprag, seconded by Mr. Ma to approve the certificates of
005election as presented. All those in favor of the motion signify by saying I. I. Those opposed. Motion carries. Our next item is oath of office. So, uh, board secretary Seagerwald, um, will ask you to administer the oath of office to our, uh, newly elected representatives or reelected, uh, Molly Fuches. Am I saying your name correctly? Yes. Um, Meredith Garcia and Jeff Jackson, if you'd want to go into the center and Laura will meet you there. Never been my dream. So if you please raise your right hand and repeat after me. I state your name. I having been elected having been elected to the office of school board member to the office of school board member but have not yet but have not yet upon the duties thereof and tear up on the duties thereof. Affirm
006that I will support affirm that I will support the Constitution of the United States the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Wisconsin and the Constitution of the State of Wisconsin and will faithfully and impartially and will faithfully and impartially discharge the duties of set office discharge the duties of set office to the best of my ability. to the best of my ability. So help me God. So help me God. Congratulations. [Applause] Congratulations to all three of you. We'll now move to the election of officers portion of the agenda. Do I have to read the Wisconsin statute piece of it? I don't believe so. Okay. Um so the first item um is decision whether or not we would vote by secret ballot if there's more than one nominee. Do we
007need a motion for that? I'd like to make a motion to vote by secret ballot if there are more than one nominee. You have a second. I'll second that. We have a motion by Mr. Ma, seconded by Mr. Newmeister um to vote by secret ballot if there's more than one nominee. Any disc any discussion or questions? Just trying to remember if we did that last we did. Yeah, we did. All those in favor of the motion signify by saying I. I. Those opposed. We'll move on to the election of the school board president. Are there any nominations for the school district president? I'd like to nominate Okay, we have a nomination for Trevor Strike. Mr. Memeister, I'd like to nominate Deb Sukla for president. Have a nomination for Deb Sukla. Are there any other nominations?
008Are there any other nominations? Um, so then we would uh we will need to hand out the ballots at this point. Thank you. We have a tie vote for my com. We could do another vote. So, why don't we What's the process? So, we can ask the board if they would like to continue voting. Um, because Mr. Beeski will join us later, we could have a motion to vote to postpone till he joins us. Unless it would be to have your own and then we'll throw it in the get the smoke going up in the air. Say we need this. We need the special chimney installed. Thank you. [Laughter] That was good. and we still have a split vote or title I should say. We can continue to vote or if we would have a
009motion to postpone the election of officers until Mr. Bagneski can join us later on in the evening. and make a a motion to uh hold off on the nominations till Mr. Begneski could join us for all officers. For all no for president now I suppose for all officers maybe it's the best thing. Yes, all officers that seems the right thing. We have a motion to postpone until Mr. Beski can join us. Is there a second? I'll second. Any discussion? Well, um I will call until he does join the he did he did message me um yesterday and today because I said it's possible what if we have a tie vote I'm trying to figure how to easily facilitate the meeting I also checked with um an attorney from WASBY about this as well so can
010we continue the meeting I know there was a lot um well she would still be the vice president ones voted in. Correct. I assume so. I would think so. So, um the um we could certainly do recognition because there's no action taken by the board at that time. That's certainly something we could continue to do. There are other items on this reorganization um agenda. I don't know if you want to proceed with those or not at this time. What is the pleasure of the board? because um oh let me the remaining items are um we could do the we've got um besides representative yeah maybe go move down to 1.14 u so that would be reaffirm the board's purpose philosophy and governance commitment and then we have the approval of the delegate the CISA representative
011the tiff representative deputy clerk other appointments which include the LPF um and then approve our meeting schedule. So are is this board comfortable with proceeding with the current with myself presiding as vice president? Does anybody disagree with that? Okay. Two things. Could I ask who the second was for the postponement? Mr. Nmeister, you had the motion and then Mr. M had the second. Thank you. And we could probably probably dispose of agenda item 1.13 as well. Yes, I'll do. Oh, yes. Just to help out. I'll nominate Laura Stiger. Beat me to it. Um, did we do a vote yet for the postponement of the offices? Thank you. Okay. Any other discussion on the motion of what's being postponed? All those in favor of the motion signify by saying I. I. Those opposed? Motion carries. We
012will then move on to uh item 1.14. Reaffirm the board's purpose, philosophy, and governance commitment. Were we were we going to do the secretary? Pardon? 1.13. Were we going to do Laura as secretary? Unless there are Do you want to disclose board secretary or do we want to postpone? I was assuming that's all officers. Okay, that's fine, too. Absolutely. That's fair. Yep. Within the language, like I'm pretty sure that we're not going to be surprised in the result in that one, but Okay. Are we okay with 14 then? Okay. So, we'd be looking for a motion to affirm the board of education's purpose, philosophy, and governance commitment as described both in policy GC1, board purpose and commitment, and policy GC2, governing commitments. Do we have a motion for that? I'll make a motion to reaffirm
013the Lacrosse Board of Education's purpose, philosophy, and governance commitment as described in both policy GC1, board purpose, and commitment, and policy GC2, governing commitments. I'll second. We have a motion and a second to uh reaffirm the purpose, velocity, and governance commitment. Mr. Ma, um I'd like to instead offer a something else. I'd actually like to amend this and I'd like to argue that we should approve GC-2 for only a probationary six-month period statement agreed. Coherence based governance has proven a challenge for some board members represents and presents some weaknesses believed this to be a priority to examine this board term. While coherence based governance in theory helps us be more efficient by delegating our authority to administration, it has in some cases depleted powers vested to the board in Wisconsin statute 118. While policy is
014incredibly important to the success of the school district, so so is these strategic decisions coherence-based governance purposely leaves the superintendent and leaves a hole when it comes to accountability to the public. I believe it is necessary to evaluate our commitment to coherence-based governance, especially with the debate to standardbased grading. Over the past two years, board members have heard from our community the struggles from students, teachers, and parents about the transition to standardbased grading. While many of us have brought up these issues on the board table, we are instead still told that we will have uh little say about the matter of grading since has been delegated to administration. I'd like to advocate that this is an injunction for our power delegated from state power and that we should examine other models of governance to decide
015if this is the best approach to our commitment to governance or if there are other ways to possibly amend this. We need a model that will support the community as best as we can humanely provide. And we also need a model that promotes agenda planning, facilities, executive oversight, and accountability between both the board and the administration. This combining GC-2 for a probationary six-month period to examine our effectiveness and review if better options can be drawn to approve or replace our current model. Is that an amendment or a statement? I'd like to amend it. That's a motion for amendment. Do we have a second to for the motion for amendment? I'll second it. We have a an amendment with uh made by Mr. Ma, seconded by Mr. Newmeister. Any discussion? I disagree respectfully um with the
016characterization that the governance model provides I want to try to use some of some of the language there that that that it creates a gulf of accountability. I think that it would be unwise to consider abandoning an entire governance model over an an a sing what is essentially a single administrative decision that is admittedly causing some difficulties in in standardsbased grading. Um that any elected body of of nine people from this community are not really the people uh with the expertise or or the educational knowledge to be making decisions about grading schema. um and that is the reason it was delegated uh that kind of administrative decision to the district administration in the first place. Um so I I don't see that as a good purpose for reconsidering our our governance model. I think if
017there are shortcomings in the experience of coherent governance, um I think that is because like many things there is a learning curve to it that is incumbent on us as the elected officials um to learn and understand the system. We can review and reassess co coherent governance as we go as we have been as we have been having conversations for the past several years since its inception. So I I I disagree with the amendment uh and I I don't see a compelling reason to to think about abandoning coherent governance at this time. Other comments? Yeah. Go ahead. I mean the board has the ability to take on as much decision- making power as they choose, right? That's part of the policies is us putting policy governance in place. So if there's certain areas where we
018want to exercise more power, that's a double-edged sword, right? So we can take on as much as we would like. Um but again, that that's stuff that we own. So I'm to Trevor's point, I feel like there's if there's certain policy that that board members are concerned about, then that is something I think we should be sorry. You know, it's my go pick up my kids alarm. Um, apparently not doing that tonight. So again, I think that abandoning a governance model is probably the most drastic approach versus tweaking the governance model that we currently operate in. Just for a point of clarification, are is your amendment to continue with the current model for six months and then change it? What is I want to make sure I understand clarify this. I I don't say to
019completely overthrow coherence based governance how we do, but I think it's our responsibility to the board to be able to look at ourselves, see if there's way to improve it here. Um I like the idea of being able to make sure we have our own short meetings sites are going in there, but there are some points of which the the strategic decision making scope comes down to the school board. I would argue we have kind of left bare that we should be taking more of an active stance. I listed standardbased grading as more of an example for him too, but there might be other ways to approach. Um last last board meeting we had of course the facilities question right there and it's kind of making me wonder if there are other ways perhaps look
020at our facilities and this is not exactly way just to upend everything. It's as a way to keep ourselves accountable and keep the board accountable and everyone accountable. Make sure that we are governing the best intention at mind. Um that's why I'm saying like we keep this for six months while also examining see if there ways either to improve what we have to either give us more of these strategic decision- making powers that we need to have or if if it comes to it see if there's another way of another way of government's model for it. So it's not to upthrow it and completely throw it over the into the garbage can or the wayside. It's to keep ourselves accountable and to improve ourselves. So to clarify for the official record, what is your amendment?
021I want to make sure we all understand to approve it for a six-month period instead. Yeah. Yeah. So that way we can have our own way or look at ourselves and look how exactly is it is there any ways we can improve upon this that way when the six months come that we can decide is there anything we'd want to change from this. So um I would say that we as a board can review those policies and and continue coherent governance or abandon coherent governance at any time in the year. Um that we have that flexibility in the current policy. Um I do agree um that there have been some times where it feels like to me as a single board member that coherent governance has made doing our job as a board as governing
022as a board sometimes clumsy and difficult. I wouldn't blame it necessarily on the learning curve. Um I would suggest because I've used a a model just slightly different name um like this for almost 20 years. I do like the model, but I do think some of our policies need to be looked at more closely. Um, I think that the the community has expressed to us as a board for well over a year concerns about the grading model. We are not in any way I don't feel I could tell the district what grading model to use, but the policies probably need to be clarified to say what do we expect in a grading model? a model that's clear and understandable to the students, to the parents, that measures whatever we as a board agree it should
023measure whatever those things are that we feel um are making the current grading model clumsy. We as a board should say this is the community's value and this is what a grading model should include. Um I would also say that I think sometimes our current policy the way it's written regarding facilities um and again this is just my opinion um one member even though I'm sitting here in this seat um I feel like facilities sometimes we end up not having meaningful input as a board on facilities. Um we're not experts at when a roof should be replaced or what kind of roof we should put on, but um to be in a reactive position to just say here's the money or we need to do a referendum and not be part of a longer discussion.
024I think um I think we could tweak it. I don't think we need to fundamentally shift it. But I think personally I would like to see some tweaking there. Um so I I would like to see that. I don't know how how I would vote on your amendment, but I do think that this board, especially as we have some new people at the table, re new people at the table, um maybe look at some of these policies and how do they fit for us and um what's really in them and where where have we tripped over the last few years or year, however long you've been on the board, what's causing you um difficulty in the policy and let's let's revisit that. I think we should talk about those and say coherent governance is this
025is an answer to it or maybe we need to tweak our own policy. That was a long story. Sorry. Any other discussion on the motion? Not on the motion specifically. No. And I want to keep it to the motion. I think we're getting into a philosophical debate at this point. Yes. I I would just sort of reiterate I think for for exactly the reasons that that that you have stated and that that Jeff has stated, the the fact of our ability within the existing model to take on the level of responsibility for particular decision- making that we want. That that feels like what we need. I mean, I don't see the purpose of the amendment for that reason. Um, so I'm I'm I'm wondering where where it's coming from with with what that desire is
026to look at at things in that particular way that you're stating. And my hope would be that we do engage in those discussions. And and and that's part of the difficulty of of a governance process is is deciding what is our job? What is the thing that we are best positioned to do? uh and and where are we creating the enabling structure for the school district to do what the school district is is best able to do. So my question is just I guess my challenge to the board is to see if there's better ways we can better ourselves with our own government's strategic based um decision- making abilities. But I mean I will of course approve this if it's doesn't pass. But it's out of conscious I think we do need to improve quite
027a lot of this especially towards standard based grading. We can't just shut ourselves off on these things including of course facilities other ways as well but that's just my own conscious here. Any other comments? All those in favor of the amendment signify by saying I. I um two eyes. Those opposed. N. So the amendment fails. So, we're back to the original motion to approve the polic purpose, philosophy, and governance commitment. Any further discussion? All those in favor of the motion signify by saying I. I. Those opposed. We done as abstain. Please. Pardon? Put me down as abstain. Please. Abstain. Okay. Thank you. Um, we are moving close to six o'clock. Should we suspend? Should we table the rest of this and um give ourselves a few minutes and then we will go into the recognition
028portion of the meeting? And I'm going to work on getting a hold of Mr. Beski. Do we need a motion to table? Yes. I'll make a motion to table the remainder of the reorganization agenda until after second. Do we vote on a motion to table? Yes, we do. So, we have a motion and a second to table um the rest of this agenda until after the recognition portion of the upcoming meeting. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Those opposed. Okay. So, we have [Music]