001Smith here. Yep. Verification of agenda posted. That has been posted. Stand for the pledge of allegiance, please. To the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Agenda topic 1.4 discussion review election results from April 1. Discuss consolidation process and timeline. Discuss next steps. Actually, all right. Real quick, just a shout out to all the staff on staff appreciation week. Thank you. Um we have a difference in posting. Um our agenda was posted with public comment and that somehow got got changed but green post we can have public comment. Yeah. So yeah. So I don't somehow that got taken out when it was posted like in one place but everywhere else it was posted with public comment.
002So, um, is there anyone here that would like to offer public comment? We would love to hear from you. off, but make sure you talk into around this. So, all right. Please talk into the mic. Thank you. No public comment. Anybody we can move on. Hey, uh we will talk quickly about the results. So uh the results on April 2nd 1st I was so we had a total between the two communities we had 2234 voters. Um so it was a very good turnout for our voters. Uh total yes votes were 1616, no votes were 618. Uh Loyals yes votes 760 to 383 no votes. Uh Greenwood had 856 yes votes compared to 285 or 235 no votes. So quite uh quite a figure that says uh the two communities are telling us to move forward
003uh with this [Music] process and we had we had a FAQ sheet. We had some things out there prior. Um but I I really see the results driving where we're going with this. So, um, our communities just spoke. I think if we go against our communities, I think that will be something in 3 years when both are looking at a referendum, that would be something difficult to pass if we are on our own, if we're not continuing with this process. So, um, overwhelmingly, like I said, voters have the community spoke. So what we are here tonight is we want to make we have three new school board members. We want to make sure um everyone voice their opinion and that we can all get on the same bandwagon and and move forward with process. So
004so we're all together knowing what what what does it look like? Um we talk a little bit about timeline and and different things like that. So, is there any discussion from the board on election results? Any more discussion about that? I think they were pretty clear. actually came back higher. Uh the election results actually came back higher in support than the first time we did the question just to the school district. I thought that was telling. So on the on the survey that we did u year and a half ago there was roughly 550 people took that survey. So this time there was like I said just under 2250 people taking voting. So very large amount of people you know to vote. And yes thank thank everyone for coming out and voting April 1st. Any
005other discussion on the voting results from April 1st? discuss consolidation. All right, the next uh next item is to discuss the consolidation process and timeline. Um, you know, there's, you know, a few different timelines that can be considered. All of all of you have a a sheet in front of you with uh what was presented to us from Bear back when they did that brief financial study uh on this is all in statute. You know, there's there's three different models, a 12-month timeline, 18-month timeline, a 14-month timeline. Um you you'll notice that in this all of those timelines uh result with the start of a consolidated district in July July 1st of 2028 which is the 2829 school year uh which is what we presented to both communities uh through all of our communication through
006board meetings through FAQ pages um and such. So it was uh the 2829 school year. We actually had one model that was a 27 28 school year, but that would not allow the school district at Greenwood to add two board members um to make to give equal representation uh in decision-m. So, uh it was large in part talked about the uh 2829 school year being the start of a consolidated district. um that's you know both meets a statutory timeline as well as would allow us to run the current operational referendum cycle that both districts have um year the the last year of both districts current operational referendum is the 2728 school year. So the 2829 would be the start of a new district and the start of a new need hopefully much lower need for
007operational referendum dollars. Any questions, comments, thoughts on that. Um there is possibility to do it one year sooner than what you have if the loyal board would agree to when we do the consolidated board. Not the voting for the consolidation but the consolidated board when we're together if two people would step back we could save the community over half million dollars each community. But that would be a choice the board of the loyal would have to make and I haven't talked to the loyal board of people to do it. The other thing is your referendum for 20 November of 27 that's non-election. I don't know how you plan on doing that. Yeah, I see that on on this sheet. I'm not sure how that is. Um I know that stat by statute operational referendums can
008only happen on regular election cycles. That's not a regular election cycle. I'm not sure if the same statute is something we'd have to look into. I'm not sure if the same statute applies for a local government decision. Like if we couldn't I I don't know if we were able to have a um it's called a referendum, but I don't know if we would be able to have a local election, special election. I don't know. I don't know the statutes for that. That's something I I we had the same question about that. I'm not sure how that would work or if that would work because I think we can get this done sooner than what you're saying by one year and save each community a half million dollars. If two people from the loyal board put
009the consolidated board together would have to recuse themselves. If we would have vote on it as a board financing the savings the savings and that's what we had the consolidation what they figured through the timing we figure it would be a million dollars before district so each district will be a half million. So you're saying to start that will start the new consolidated district in the 2728 school year. Thus remember when you do that right if that that's the course that the boards choose um when two districts consolidate all current operational referendum dollars sees so we would both it's not I don't want to say lose but for lack of better terms we would not we would not capture the final year of our current operational referendum dollars because the last year is in in
010greenwood is 1.725 million and I believe is 1.5 in in Loyal. So you wouldn't capture those dollars for that year. We will need operational we made that clear from the start. We will still need as a consolidated district operational referendum dollars, but it should be at a much lower level. So the other piece to that is making sure that there's a timeline that allows us to go to operational referendum to function as a consolidated district. And I I'm not I I don't know the answer to that because I know we can't have an operational referendum in November of 2027. So if we start in 2027, the operational referendum would have to wait until April of 2028, which is the second half of February, the primary or February. So we would we would have to run
011over a half year on fund balance and and current revenue mix. Is that possible? as it stands right now is say that is possible because we both have healthy um fund balances. Uh is that something that both boards want to bank on? I don't know. But we would have that's the only way you could you would have to operate on your fund balance to make ends meet. It may put a district it's it's it's hard to say. It may put a district in a situation we have to do some short-term borrowing for a year to to make ends meet and wait until that, you know, until those referendum dollars are available later in the year. I don't know. But we we would have to take some have some serious conversation about how that would how
012that would work because we talked you guys about getting Bob in here. How soon are we going to get him in here for presentation? But Mr. President and I are meeting with um Bob Butler from WASB on Thursday. We tried to get him meet with him sooner before tonight's meeting and he wasn't available. So, we are meeting with him Thursday to go over services that WASB could offer. Um and from there, we're hoping to set up a time for him to come and meet with our joint board to talk about what services WASB has to offer us in this transition. um and how he can how they can help us help navigate this process. Yeah, because I was thinking um like I sent our board email that was the old board because ordering of the
013resolution don't actually have to happen in December. Correct. That could actually happen this July. Yeah. These are the three by statute. These are the three timelines the resolutions. is there's a 12-month timeline, an 18-month timeline, and a 14-month timeline. The 12-month timeline, all resolutions have to have the final the final piece of of the resolution has to be that the consolidated district starts July 1 of because that's the start of a fiscal year. So, um the starting for a 12 month would be July or the resolution would have to be made in July and that gives you 12 months to the next July or one resolution is in December. That's the 18month, a year and a half to a July. And the other one is a May. It's a 14 month, a whole year, and
014two more months to July. So those are the three by statute. Those are the three uh options for a resolution to consolidate. That's why I want to get pop in here as soon as possible because if we would pay in July of before July 2nd of this year from my understanding we did before July 2nd put the resolutions to each school they would have one month to agree to it which would be August. After August September if the public is not happy with what we did they could bring 10% back and put it back for a vote in the following February. If not, they don't get that 10% in December of this year, we could possibly have election for the new district already. You and I don't know how all that stands where the consolidated
015that does. Um, that's why I would like to get Bob in here to get clarification if this is possible. That's the plan. We need Bob. Um, so just jumping off of what you're saying then, Kirk, I mean, one of the things too is we can, in my mind, we can take some of these savings in the process as we're working towards it. Um, I don't see any reason that we would have to wait until July that we we don't start realizing some of those savings. I my plan would be to to start making some of those movements earlier on so that we do gain some of those savings as we go. So, and I I guess I'm going to jump in and say we can't talk about this until we have a plan in place.
016So, we can talk about all the savings we want, but until a plan is in place to prove those savings exist, we need to start talking about the plan. So if you think you can do this in a year, I don't. But if you can prove it, let's see it. But it it's all a smoke screen until you can actually say this is what's going to happen when, where, and how. I agree. And I just want to mention I I wasn't sure if I should say this when you asked Mr. Green about the um if anybody had anything to say about the voting. Um but this kind of falls under both. I just want to say that um I think again overwhelming yes which gives the board a direction because as a new board member
017coming on um it's good to have that direction. Um, but I just want to just say that we have to remember this was an advisory question and a lot of people that we talked to I would say that um people who said yes uh said yes because they want us to look at it and give them a plan and that's what I think is important that some of these logistics that weren't figured out before that's what we're supposed to be doing. And then I heard a lot of people say they voted no because they didn't have enough information that maybe they would have voted yes um but they just didn't have enough. So I agree. I think it's important to remember that um we kind of said we were going to meet and and have
018a plan. So we can we can talk about the timeline as much as we want and figure that out, but I think we really need to have some information to give to people. So I just want to um comment on two things. Um in my opinion, we should consider looking at possible consolidation in four state phases or steps. Number one, gathering the gathering information phase. Number two, the analyzing information phase. Number three, the decision making phase. Number four, the implementation phase. The gathering information phase may include some of the following activities, and we've already hit on some a few of them. One is having one to two Wisconsin Association School Board representatives attend an open meeting to provide specific information on how a consolidated board would be established, the roles the new board would have
019versus our existing boards, reviewing timelines, and answering questions. Uh second item under that would be reviewing current courses that each school offers including the number of students in those courses and the existing staff of each school. The third item under that would be having an open house at each school so administration board members staff and the public can see firsthand what we have. The next item would be finding out what our existing consultants, Spare Financial, um, HSR, CIS, etc. uh, could help us in including their proposed services and costs. And then another item under the gathering information that I think we should consider is inquiring with neighboring schools to the south, east, and north as to whether they wish to join our collaboration and look at possible ways to work together. The analyzing information phase
020would then start looking at the following. A building study looking at all options, pros and cons of utilizing the existing buildings versus something different. Financial study, which would be a more detailed review of our finances, and a projection of the operating referendum needed for the consolidated school. And then another item under that would be continued use of consultants to assist us with providing information. and then the decision-making phase would follow next and finally the implementation phase and process would begin. Um we certainly can establish timelines for each phase. My concern is that we allow enough time in each phase before moving on to the next. We have one opportunity to do it well. If not, we may find ourselves saying, "I never thought that before." And that information really affects our decision. I'm not saying
021there won't be new information along the way. I just want us to keep our minds open, consider all options before making certain decisions and to trust the process. It's I feel it's important for all stakeholders to be informed and involved. Unlike some rumors that our boards and or administrators have this all determined regarding school locations or any other specific thing regarding consolidated school district. I will say again after saying it at our most recent boil school board meeting last week that we don't have any grand plan on what to do next. We waited to see how how our communities responded to the questions if they want us to consolidate with each other. Now we know what direction they want us to go. Lastly, before any of the phases I'm I've referred to take place, we
022need to look at our mindset. Are we looking at at this with a we/ them mentality or are we looking at it as an us mentality? Each of our school districts refer to helping all students learn. Moving ahead, we need to keep our focus on our students, our staff, and providing the same or better education opportunities and not be focused on the other issues at first. And these are my initial thoughts for discussion. Well said, Tom. So Tom, with all them phases, were you going to do what the public said ahead of them and then start them phases or do them phases and then start the timeline? I would say all of this depends on that meeting with with uh WB to find out what you know get the questions answered on on how how
023that all works with with drawing up the um resolution order and consolidation and and how everything falls in place. So, um I just want to make sure that we're we're g gathering the information and that we're not getting ahead of ourselves so that we can we can um kind of go through a process and maybe those phases can also I was thinking about that they could be called steps you know within each phase you could have some of those same things happening you could have some decisions made and implementing things as you go. But um you know, I guess I don't know if that answered your question, Kirk, but I I really feel that WB um has to help us navigate process. Yeah, I agree with you on that. Would I get here as soon
024as possible? Now for discussion purposes two years ago when we originally went to the public the first question which was three we modified to one the agreement was we would if it came back in support we would look at feasibility upon being done with feasibility then we were going to move into facility okay so at what point and this is back to some top steps at what point do we as boards now say okay we it's come back overwhelming We do have a barrier financial study. When do we reach out to a consultant, an independent consultant, and then start looking at what we actually have for facilities? This is a serious question. I think that's one of the steps in your phases that [Music] yeah information um and I think that is something that important
025I in order to have a plan I I I would agree exactly what Tom had to say those four phases would be something you know I know but you have 20 what was it 06 07 when we had this last venture um you know they had an ad hoc committee so is that something that the boards want to take a look at um but I think you're right I think only that phase or fa those four phases would be something crucial to to have the public involved and and input with with that stuff. Um, and you're right, I think having Bob Butler once we meet with him Thursday, get that set up, um, give us a little more direction on how to get things moving. So, Matt Kavista could not be here tonight. He is
026coaching middle school track, but he did give me he did give me talking points that he did want me to include when when it seemed relevant. Um, one of his points was that he thinks we should develop an actual plan for consolidation with details and have it ready for a ballot a ballot vote in the communities by fall ballot 2026 before we would actually make the motion as a school board to start the 18-month process for consolidation. He believes that the plan needs to be transparent and state where the school buildings would be located as is as it is not financially feasible to keep all school buildings open. He thinks it should indicate who the new superintendent would be or what the process would be in selecting that superintendent. And he also thinks it should
027indicate the amount of referendum dollars the voters would be asked. So I I think Matt agrees with the sentiment that the plan needs to be put in place. your timeline. From what I got out of the public, they said consolidate. So, we should consolidate first and work on the rest of it after that because that is what it said on the ballot. Consolidate means one. That's what I get out of what the ballot says. With all due respect, I I know that it was an overwhelming yes, but the question as as somebody who sat over there not that long ago, the question was do you support the work to look at consolidation? So, I just like I guess is there a difference to you? Like is there a difference between should we look at consolidation
028or we are consolidating? What was the question on the ballot? It was to consolidate. Do you support the consolidation of the school district of Loyal and the school district agreement? That was the question. There was no if this or that or any part of it. It was do you consider it. So all the steps that Tom is putting in place, I agree with we need to do them. But after we have a resolution made I think um yeah, I mean I agree with everything that Tom said. I just want to make that clear too. I I think all those steps need to happen. I just I as somebody who was sitting on the other side and I think a lot of people and maybe I'm wrong. We're told it was an advisory question like should
029we continue looking this because if it was yes we're going to continue to look and if it was no we're going to go to uh collaboration and continue collaboration. So I'm not saying that I don't think we should do all of these things. I do I think that an overwhelming amount of people said yes continue to look at it. But I think that they're expecting and maybe I'm wrong. if I'm wrong, you know, and there's people who are like, "No, we'll have to make the plan and do it without us." Then fine. But I think people are expecting a plan and before before we say yes, just by I think there's I think there's people that have multiple thoughts like on on how to do this. Um, but I think the the big thing is
030that it is an overwhelming that we need to do it. Um, or we need to move forward with it. So, I think finding that path forward is what we're what we're going to have to figure out. Um we had significant discussion over the last two years about also uh you know getting to consolidation and then doing this work as one district because we know that you know if history repeats itself if we approach consolidation with a lack of better terms us versus them mentality like instead of as Tom said the US mindset, the new us is Loyal and Greenwood together. Not not Greenwood versus Loyal or Loyal versus Greenwood. It's Greenwood and Loyal together as one making decisions for the greater good of the new district, right? Um I'm not sure like again if history
031repeats itself I don't know that that can be done efficiently as two different districts. So I think that and that was that was that was a lot of the conversation that we've had previously in joint board meetings that was in the FAQ page uh about you know do schools you know where where will kids go to school? um do things have to change right away? You know, and the answer is no. Consolidation can take on hundreds of different forms. It can look look many different ways. Um, you know, and and the conversation was about consolidating, running as we are now, and then working together as one board, one district to determine our efficiencies to figure out how can we be most efficient. And then also include that gives you gives time to listen to the
032listen to the voters, listen to the public and get their input on hey how is this the most efficient and is this the most efficient way that our community wants to afford because is there is there not only efficiencies in you know moving kids, moving staff, things like that but it's it's the money side which I think It's a a quite a large driving factor behind our communities and why we're we're having these conversations. Um, but having that conversation together as one district, uh, and taking out that us versus, you know, us versus them mentality was a large part of the conversation. And and I think the the feel in in a lot of people I talked to uh is that it's going to be a lot I don't harder but it it it's going
033to be tough to do if we don't remove the barrier of two districts and trying to make those decisions as two districts. I think we have to start thinking that way already as a us mentality because if we don't we we are going to continue just like the last 65 years. Um and we are doing it in a number of different things but we need to continue moving forward with with doing things together and and having that mentality of an us In the past, every time it failed is when we chose where the schools and that would be. So that wasn't an us mentality. So if we unify to begin with and then figure it out, then it's an us mentality. I guess explain to me how we were then truthful with the public that
034we went we said this was an advisory question. It came back overwhelmingly yes we should we all agree that we should move forward in some form of study but then we're going to consolidate with no more input. Um if the vote would have come back 4555 yes I think we should have go back to that but by being over 65% for loyal cuz I can't speak for Greenwood theirs was higher by coming back at that greater percentage the people knew it was brought out by the board in our meetings in these joint meetings that somebody might lose the school they didn't they knew that when they went to the polling place but they didn't have to answer that question right it was vague but remember back in history if we put where it is it
035fails we changed it this time so it didn't fail so if you go to work and do the same mistake and do it three times how long are you going to have a job the definition of one of the points I was making you You know, I I I get where you're coming from, Kirk. Um, but I I think we need to make sure that the public and others including the staff are involved in it and all feel ownership in it because I think if we try to push it as a board, that's when we're going to have um people, you know, asking more questions and we might not necessarily have the answers because we're we haven't gone through like I've mentioned before some of those phases. Um so I I what I don't want
036the parents to be that we're we're pushing it so fast that we don't have all the answers because I think that there's a lot a lot of things to consider um on everything. And I and I I understand where Mr. Green is coming from because if we were to consolidate you know, as a district kept everything the same, you know, we wouldn't have the efficiencies that we would were thinking we would have. But, you know, so I can see that side of it, but I really think we need to we need to um make sure that we're not giving the appearance that we're trying to push it through without really analyzing things. And that's why I mentioned that you know taking enough time for the information gathering then going to the analyzing and and so
037forth. So that's I think it's very very important that we make sure that we're addressing questions and getting the getting the community involved with some thoughts. And that's why frankly I thought by looking at the schools we all get a better view of what we where we're at now and seeing the courses we know what courses we can offer what we offer now are there are some other courses we want to offer um with the staff that we have um and mentioning those other communities if if we have a couple other schools that are interested in participating. It doesn't have to be consolidating with us. It it could be, you know, sharing classes or or um participating in other activities. You know, students can participate in other activities. I I guess I want to make
038sure we explore all the different possibilities and look at it not just as a three-year process or whatever it takes us to consolidate. I want us to look at as a five or 10 year process. What's what do we see ourselves? What kind of school do we see ourselves in in central Wisconsin? What what is something that could be sustainable that that we are proud of that we can, you know, make sure that we're have the same type of education that both schools are providing now and better. um something I shared and this is just another discussion point but I really think we need to bring our businesses in to say what you know what are the job possibilities in our area. We know that a lot of there's a lot more students that aren't
039going to four-year uh colleges. They're going to technical colleges for a one or two-year program or going right into the workforce. So why not look at trying to involve the businesses to say what skills do you want us to be teaching to these students? Are there some courses that we need to offer and maybe the technologist can help us with that and look at that as you know okay if if we have extra facility space between our two schools maybe that's what we can utilize it for. Um, just another thought and I I'll credit a former board member that said you have to think outside the box and I think you know who who that is that in the past that has said that more than once but I think that's what we need to
040do is look at what we have but then think outside the box. What can we offer more of that would benefit our community? Yeah, I agree with you Tom. I don't want the community to think we forced it. That's why I think as soon as we can get Bob Butler into the presentation here, have the community ask him questions, have the board ask him questions so we know where the community stands and so us as board members have a better idea on the advisory. Question on the ballot. I also agree with you, Tom, on, you know, that this is more than just the 18-month timeline that we're looking at and when that timeline starts, I think is important. But I also think that going off of our advisory question from the ballot, like I sat
041in an open forum meeting where I know I said if you don't you care which school it's in, vote no. Or if you care which town it's in, vote no. So, we know that you're contingent. And if you're not contingent on where the school is, please vote yes. Because I personally don't want our districts to spend all the money on all of the legal fees and all of the things all over again if we can avoid it. But also working into the US mentality starting right now. And so anytime between now and whenever we pass a resolution or whatever it is to consolidate, we are talking to each other when we're adding clubs or adding sports or changing class times or changing curriculums or whatever. So that we're working together and saying, "Hey, do you
042have any students that might be interested in this or is this going to work for you if we change this?" because that's what people who are working together do instead of just looking out for me first and then oh well if it works for you great I I think we need to move forward from that and really think of it as well I'm you know our teacher suggested we do this so maybe we should look at it well hey let's let's talk to Loyal and see if their teachers think that too or what whatever it is instead instead of this just, you know, tunnel vision that I feel like most school districts have had for years and years. And I also think it's great to open it up to other districts and see what they
043want to collaborate with or how they'd like to share or if they even want to because I think we're all in a very similar situation and need to remember that our kids need to be first and our teachers and staff are right there with them. If we don't take care of them, they aren't going to be able to take care of the students. Um, I'll second what Mr. Wy said before. Facts, right? We need facts. We can play the what if game all night long, right? There's a thousand different scenarios that we could run through. If this happens, we'll go to this. We just don't know, right? That gentleman that's going to come and talk to all of us, right? That's step A. Once you go to step A, then we can look at step
044B, right? Otherwise, we're going to sit here and throw darts at a dart board and then figure out what's going to be next. So I I feel like we this is a step of working together at the le right this meeting right now right but we can you know we can guess from there but let's just take it step A and then figure what step B looks like right this is a good idea but that could change depending on what that gentleman has to say so we got to be open and flu to that together I think that's that's a good way to look at it too Tom, I just want to jump off a couple things. Um, you know, number one, I think we have to kind of turn it over to our administrators
045to start putting together, you know, give them what we're looking for. And I think that's what we're doing here tonight is this is how we want this to work. Let them come up with something and then bring it back to us. Um, and like Sean said, I'm totally fine if it's going to be, you know, it's going to have to be flexible because things are going to change as we work our way through that process. Um, we're not going to know everything. You know, we're not going to know step 26 at this point in time. Um, somewhere in out there, um, there was discussion about about the staffs and stuff. Um, you know, I think we talked about class offerings and stuff and I I look out at the audience and I'm going those are
046the people I need involved in class offerings cuz I I that's not my expertise. Yeah, you guys. Um, so I would love to get the counterparts from both schools together and you know if it's club FFA get the two FFA together and go okay how how would you guys bring this together and let them be part of the process and then if they have difficulties that's what kind of comes back to us but I think we need to give that direction of we're seriously looking at consolidation at this point in time. How are we going to do this? And how are we going to make it the best for all of us? Again, can't can't agree more in the the mindset of we need to do the best for at this point in time, they're
047all my kids. Um, you know, everybody everyone in the the two districts. So, [Music] So, Mr. Green and myself were at a superintendent conference last week. Uh just in talking to bear and talking to a number of superintendents, um they they talked about how how things are going with this and obviously they have seen the boat and things like that. Um, and we talked about mil rate being very close, no debt with each and a six or seven mile distance between, but they said the number one thing is your boards are willing to sit down, talk and work and we we have we have for the last two years basically um and we are working towards something more um on spectrum. Uh so I think we're on the right track but we need to continue
048and we need to continue exactly like I said we have something let's make sure both are working whether it's a teacher whether it's a class or an academic or a extracurricular or whatever. Um, what I would like to see real quickly is what are your thoughts? Each individual board member, what are your thoughts? um because we do have some new board members on um but right now in line and what what are your thoughts on moving forward and we've heard a little bit but and in general where you at with with this with with the vote clarify I'll start um I believe with what we have presented in front of us July of 2028, what we need to keep in mind is our current referendums. If we do not do something before then and have
049a plan in place, we're both going to be needing operational referendums on our own still or possibly together. So, I just want to keep that in mind. I think the vote is very clear that the community wants us to continue to move forward. If it were up to me, I'd bring my kids over here tomorrow or vice versa. It doesn't matter to me where the school is, but uh I am excited to work together as one and not two. I think I pretty much just said what I uh was meaning to say earlier, but I agree with Luke. I I'm looking forward to working together. I'm excited to be a part of this community as much as welcome into our community and have it be one. I know my kids are excited about it too.
050I think a lot of the parents are as well. And I think the more we can communicate and work together through the process, the better it's going to be for all of us to try and do what's best for all of our kids and all of our teachers and get the best education and opportunities for those kids. pertaining to the referendum talked about um does everybody understand I guess I don't think we made it really understand but clear is that weird financial report and that wasn't handed out and that showed with the school study that after 5 years oil and green combined school district would still be I don't have paperwork on it was like 10,700,000 still in debt the two schools study after 5 years study and they were talking about roughly possibly have
051a$100 $900,000 cost still showing that we were going to need a referendum and it was like 7 1.5 million. So, we talk about consolidation, but I think people need to understand out there that even with there is still going to be a high need for a referendum out there. And if we're not passing a referendums now when we found out it's only about a million dollar cost savings, still going to have a large referendum both. So, keeping the three schools system, that's what I like to instantly make sure the public understand. And then I guess my question would be probably talking about consolidation is asking for it. I would like to ask our superintendents what schools have they found that aren't consolidated or a unified school district. Where have they ever seen a consolidation that
052we don't have a plan on? That's what I would show me in all of those columns. Consolidation. Show me one consolidation where this the districts did not have a plan. Yeah, the the $10 million is I believe if I remember right over five years or at the end of five years. So when you do the math right now, uh like I said earlier um before you got here, so you missed my part. Uh in 2027 28, Greenwood will will receive $1.725 million and Loyal would would receive 1.5 million. So that's 3.25 million something like $3.25 million between the two of us. Um, if you take that over five years, that's 15 over 15 $16 million. So, there would be over five years at least a $5 million cut to the amount that we would be
053requesting from our taxpayers. Uh, which is a to me a significant sav that's that's maintaining pretty much maintaining what we have now um in and moving forward and not taking into account that expenses are going to go up. I would say we'd be naive to think and I talked about this at a previous meeting meeting. I think we'd be na be naive to think that our referendum expectation wouldn't go up after 2728. Like I would anticipate loyalty needing more than 1.5 million to operate on their own. I would anticipate Greenwood actually I know you know we would be looking at 1.8 1.9 and $2 million is it's pretty clear um just with standard inflation and stuff. those those expectations are going to go up. Um but the overall you know combining and then asking for
054a combined operational referendum would be a significantly less ask than um what what we're asking in separately now which would say better than tax dollar but we know that also teachers wages will increase insurance will increase will go up I mean last year it went up 100,000 it went down this year but went up 100,000 so that's saying how many years are you going to continue to be able It'll go up either way. Whether together apart, those numbers are going to go up either way. So, if we can start that base lower again, it's it's it's going to go up, but it's going to go up from a lower starting point than it is. Now, if we maintain where we're at now, 3.25 million, it's going to go up from there every year separately. But
055if we reduce that back to say $2 million, it's going to rise. It's going to look at the inflation. It's going to go up from there. But either either way you look at it should be a pretty significant cost statement for taxpayers. And that's all I'm saying basically spread over that's going to still be a large referendum that we're still going to have to then you bring in possibilities too though I'm I'm just talking whatever that also if it gets to the point of where a community does lose its school as a consolidated school districts there are does get tough. I'm not saying not to consolidate. I'm saying there's things to think about that it might be tougher when one town doesn't have a school. That's a possibility. I could see that possibly 10 years
056down the road that then at that point in time trying to get the other district or the older district or the one community or district who I would agree with to even get a pass that is a possibility to it's harder once you sometimes to get referendums passed. So I guess that's all I'm pointing out that you're still having larger referendums. you're correct that that it's going to come down, but it could go back up again. And that's what we have to consider, you know, and the effects it's going to have on your communities in your school district. If you pass one, you still might not pass. Joe, you have to pass Michael asked a question. Are there any school districts that have gone through something like this, not exactly similar, that you can kind
057of look at as like a guide on something and see like these questions ever? So, the question was, are there other other districts that have gone through a consolidation similar to this? Um to our knowledge, my knowledge, the last couple districts in Wisconsin uh to go through this was the Shite Warehouser School District. Um and before that would have been the Schwam again, which is Park Falls and But Glidden. Um yeah, butternut in the middle. Um still operating on their own for now. But those those are two. We've talked with a couple of them. Um, and they, you know, it's going well for them. But I mean, they've gone through similar stuff that we're asking right now, the questions and stuff like that. Maybe using them to say like, hey, how do you guys get
058past that, right? You know, some Yeah, we have. It's been it's been a we have talked to to especially Shan and I have talked to them a little bit more and it's it's been a few years since that's happened. So, circumstances are definitely different with operational referendas. um they didn't they didn't rely on operational referendums um because of the funding formula. They weren't districts that operated on that. Uh we both are and and that's not going to change here without a change to the state funding formula. They ran they're ready to do the same things that we are. All right. Probably already uh schools different things like that. uh Park Falls was basically done, had no money, and that's where they looked at a a three- town scenario, but decided not to join and and
059so they did go a number of years without having to go to a referendum. I think one thing to remember is that no matter if you stay as Greenwood, if you stay as loyal, if we have to go to referendum as we know we do and it doesn't pass and it doesn't pass and it doesn't pass. Either make the cuts or the state steps in and your district gets dissolved and you end up wherever new lines are drawn. you are still then part of the district who likely needs to pass a consolidation or not a consolidation, I'm sorry, a referendum. So, you still have to pay taxes for a school, but right now we are in the driver's seat if we want to work together. Like, we get to control our own destiny right now
060versus, you know, getting to a point where it's like, well, you're not financially viable anymore. So, So Mr. Leonard, you were at the strategic planning for Loyal. One of the top three things that came out of strategic planning was that they wanted basically to transparency. Correct. They wanted to have what I kind of took was the study done brought back to the taxpayers so they decision. I that's that's my question. Trust, transparency. All right. Trust and transparency was recruit retain of teachers was our staff was number one and then trust and transparency was the second. All right. They want to be informed. They want to continue. They wanted to and I I think we're talking about making sure that our communities are involved with with moving forward and Oh, I guess that's the question. That's
061the question. I get that they wanted the feasibility. We should have feasibility study so we can understand where you know what type it is financially. You know where schools are going to be. That would be that would be telling us the truth of what's going to happen coming out and I think that gets more to a facilities right I understand and I think we've already done study show now we need to look at the facility side of things and when you ask you know for all to give you direction moving forward I really think we need to look at study. Um, personally, I couldn't believe we studied a three school option because I didn't think that made any sense at all. We're going to consolidate. Something's got to close. We got to save some money.
062But if I have an independent consultant whose profession is this, telling me, hey, we can have three schools because we're saving X, Y, and Z here. You believe the professional at some point. Um, eventually some emotion needs to be taken out of the decision. I think by doing that with an independent study, you you can see ultimately what they see from a thousand people. Matt, for clarification on the strategic plan, Chris made it clear that it wasn't about consolidation. It was about our school only the first night. I know you weren't there, but it wasn't the transparency that they wanted transparency in the port and that they want transparency and everything. I'll agree with you on that, but it would to turn it into a buildings and all that. None of that. We made that
063clear that strategic planning that we were talking about oil. We were not talking about consolidation. Chris, make that loud and clear. Just to kind of um given Mr. Lner's question about where we all stand, I just want to say that um I think that the us we mentality is what we have to have. I think um I'm happy to work with Greenwood students, communities, parents, teachers. Eliza, I agree with you that like kids are excited about that, parents are excited about that. Um, I think we're all here to do that and we're we're discussing it. We might not all agree on every topic and that's fine. We're not going to um but but we're here and we're respectively having respectfully having these discussions moving forward. What I would like to see moving forward is again
064um like pretty much what Tom had said and I don't know I don't know at what point each of those happens. I don't know where that falls in the timeline, but I think gathering information and starting with a building study is is probably where we should start. Um, and again, whether the truthful openness, transparency, whether we're talking consolidation, schools on our own, either way, I think as a board, we should put that whether it was at strategic planning discussion or not, we should be doing that. And we should be truthful, open, transparent, giving people all of the information. And like Tom had said, we have kind of I don't want to say one chance to do this, right? But people are counting on us right now if we are moving forward and looking at consolidating
065as one whole district. They are counting on us to do this effectively, efficiently, correctly, not rushing it. Um people are saying like, "Oh, you know, you can't you can't just throw this together." And the last thing I want to do is is be a part of a board that slaps this together and calls it a consolidation and then it for I don't want to say it fails, but it doesn't look as good as it could if we would have taken our time. So, I just think um it's important to go through the steps that Tom had mentioned, start with a building study, but really just keep that openness and and transparency with people. And hopefully as we're trucking forward, we're getting more people on board with us to move forward and we're not losing people
066as we're moving forward. So um yeah, so my stance is um kind of what Krisco was saying earlier um before coming on the board um what I heard from people in the community is they want to know a plan. We need a plan. They want more information because like you said, it's not necessarily that they were voting yes, consolidate or no. It's they wanted to continue to know what is the plan. With all due respect, Crystal, when you do the facility study, how are you thinking as we until you put we together and then do the facility study? I get what you're saying. That's a hard question. I know what you're saying, but I think how I guess my question to you is how what what do you think it should be the first step
067then? If we're not going to do a building study, who's like what what is what is the next step to do the most efficient for tax being in business? Do the most efficient for the taxpayers? You unify first, then you do your buildings. I think all these things are are great discussion points and I think that's I think we really need to have um the WB people here to ask those questions and to to to look at different scenarios. Um, you know, at first when when we were looking at this and and you know, I was, you know, and and having been involved in the process almost 20 years ago, it was it was that where we had the building study and then just as was said, um, you know, one community ended up having
068the, you know, having the high school, they had elementary schools in both communities as I think Matt pointed out at the last meeting, and and middle school was that one community. Um, but I think, you know, it's we have to we have to look at a lot of different things and I just I think the impression would be if we decided to um and maybe I'm wrong. I guess that's we need the feedback from others is if we were to consolidate first without having the answers to questions, it leaves a lot of it leaves a lot of questions. So then it's even though you could be saving the money, I I I hear what you're saying, Kirk, that we're saving the money, um especially if we were to save it a year earlier, that makes
069a lot of difference, but I think we need to make sure that we're we're getting the answer to the questions and um making sure we have the input from people. And I agree what was said earlier that um I think Dean mentioned the staff involvement and working together now and I know there's been some of that already with the um with the uh um you know the days that they work together. But but I think that I I see that side but but I also want to respect the communities and and people who want to have some input and ask those questions. Um I I think too we got to look at it overwhelming. Yes. They want they want facts. They want information, right? And I don't think we're giving our voters enough credit. I
070think both both districts have really smart people and they understand that there's eventually going to be a decision that's not going to be super fantastic, but it might be super fantastic. But let's look at the numbers and see what the numbers say, right? Cuz that go, okay, that makes sense, right? I I think they all understand that something has to change, right? And what that looks like, who knows? But when you have facts from a completely unbiased source that doesn't know anything about either side, you can trust those numbers, right? You can trust that. Not that we can't trust each other, but it just makes it a little bit easier. Right? Now, we can all sit and make a decision that that makes sense for the taxpayers, right? Okay. Financially, that makes sense and then
071we can move forward. We back around, excuse me. Um, back around to just giving my highle thoughts here. And, you know, I've addressed several of these already, but um, to me, the the voters spoke pretty clearly. It's no longer a question of if, it's how and when are we going to to do this? And from tonight's conversation, you know, the how is what what's the plan? How are we going to put this together? How are we going to do it? And again, I go back to I look at the administrators, you got a ton of input here tonight, start putting the the plan together, and then it can come back to us for more discussion on how we proceed with the plan. um 100% would want all the teachers, support staff, um administrators all jointly
072working um to see how they can bring their different areas together. Um again, you know, I think from the board, we need to give a a direction that we're seriously looking at consolidation. Um, and we need to go into this time frame with that mindset and how are we going to do it? And there's going to be bumps, questions. Bring those questions back to us and we'll have those conversations, but let's talk about the easy stuff and um, you know, they're the closest ones to the issues. They're the best to have those conversations and resolve those. Um, I I really think coming out of here tonight, we need to come up with a a plan. Um, and with a target in my mind of July 28th, but again, that can change. Um, nobody's knows how
073this process is going to be. So, if that changes, I think we can all be flexible with that. But I think we need an end target that we're working towards also. So, I just want to say I agree with you. That's what I've been asking for is the numbers should lead us the building study. That's being transparent. I mean, everybody know that we're looking at the numbers. We bring the facts back to this court. It starts with those studies and then that should go. But I don't like it. Let's not do that. That's Kirk, I I guess I had a couple of minutes to answer Crystal's question. In a way, I guess, you know, people are engaged for a long time before they get married. And you kind of want to fly to Vegas tomorrow
074and do the thing. And where I'm going with this is we can have these conversations on the front end before we've got to make this decision. Because if we get into it and you get married and you wake up the next morning and you regret that decision, that's a big deal. So let's take it, let's do all the work on the front end and know that we are satisfied with the results and then move forward. And that's not an us versus them. That's a collaboration. That's working together for a common goal. And then when everybody has peace about the decision, then we go to it. Right here, the timeline's presented to us. The earliest is December of 2026, but that's over 18 months away. There's no reason why we can't have a definitive good plan
075ready for 26. And then the people know exactly what they're voting on. And we've done our work. We've done our job at that point. It's not, "Hey, trust us. Let's go to Vegas. Let's work together first. You're right. I don't want to push this through and I don't want to regret it. I'm 100% with you with that, Derek. But I think the voters spoke loud and clear that we need to unify first. And that's back to my original point that what was the question on the ballot? Do you consolidate or not? If you're going to consolidate with 28, no matter what, why do we need to know where the building study is going to be before you put a new board together? let them figure that out because they will do the most cost saving.
076If you put a collaborated board together, the new board might not agree with what they did and could be wasting a lot of the taxpayers money. And Kurt kind of that point too is I I've gotten a lot of feedback from individuals in both communities and not 100% but a lot saying we've seen enough studies Don't spend money on those types of things. You got the direction, figure it out. Um, not to say that we we can't have those conversations, but I have gotten feedback like that. Um, I just want to ask a question of kind of the whole group here. Um, one of my thoughts is, you know, this is a monster thing to to take on here. Is there any logic in breaking up into like financial group um staffing group where it's
077not the full board and the full board reports back some of the discussion in progress. Yes. I I believe Dean and Farm volunteer. Uh I think we want to keep it as a whole. Uh we tried that originally with kind of a joint couple people from each side and there was a lot of questions from other people. I think the more people we collaborate in a meeting, public included, uh, we solve a lot more problems that way. We hear a lot more opinions. Um, the thing that you might think of that I don't think of might be a huge issue. So I and I see where you're going, but yet I still believe we got to keep moving. And everybody involved with that's where it's all going to come down. Do you think it's possible
078to agree that a like a a timeline a target date is as we've presented numerous times to both communities 2829. That is the target to consolidate. We have we have a couple different three different timelines that lend themselves to starting you know July 1st 2028. And that and I guess it's my opinion, but I think we've been really clear with people that that is the that's the target that's the target date for consolidation. Um and then we bring in WASB and use their services or I mean that's what Mr. Leer and I are going to talk on Thursday. What are those services? Hopefully we can utilize those services to figure out the how how do we get there? And I because they're going to want to know like when we say how do we get
079there, they're going to want to know when you get when do you want to arrive, right? Um and I think that has been if there's one thing that we've communicated pretty clearly. We haven't given really any other timelines. It it's been 28 29 um that's you know that's when it needs to happen. uh that gives us time to figure out the how is that is it those would be two steps at least acknowledging that 2829 loyal and Greenwood will be one district now we're going to employ WSB to help us figure out how do we make that happen because I I just I know we're we could sit here for a long long time tonight and we're not going to agree on whether we should do feasibility studies whether we should not whether we should
080bring it to a resolution ution or bring it to a referendum, vote prior or not. Um, and there's arguments for both. There's there's arguments for for all of those things. Um, and and some of them, most of them involve around time and money. Um so is at least coming out of this meeting we have a target date of and we're committed like as a joint board we are committed to listening to our voters who have advised us to consolidate that they want us to pursue consolidation and and and from what we've communicated 2829 has been that target. Can we at least leave here tonight knowing that that is the target and opening that that school year and then we figure out the how with those [Music] resources. I guess I would like to hear if
081that is something that can come out of this meeting as a common understanding so that people know that that is what we're doing. I uh yeah, Joe, I I think you're on the right page there. That gives us plenty of time for Tom's list of gather gathering, analyzing. Um I think everybody kind of agreed with Tom. He uh hit the nail right on the head there. Um so I think yeah, the more time we have, the more like Derek said in his speech, you know, we get time to line it up before we have to look back and say, "We thought we missed this. This is huge." Um, so I I agree with that. The the 28 mark is what we should be looking at in my opinion. Uh, I guess Eliza wants to know.
082Yeah, Eliza, I'm all for the consolidation. Keep looking at it. If you're asking the question, are we in favor and each of us favor? I'm in favor of looking at that as the tenant date as when we when we would be looking at it for the reason stated that due to the operating referendums and where we're at there. Um and and then you know just seeing where things go I guess after discussion with WB if if anything changes there. But that's I would be in favor. I guess I I just want to talk right. I just want to throw one thing in before we go all the way around cuz I agree with the date. Um I would actually like to go a step or two. you know, I I think you already got planned
083Thursday meeting with with uh Bob. Um but I even before our next meeting, I would love to have just a even a rough plan started of how we're going to work through some of those um ideas so we can have something to discuss next time. Um, and I guess I'd like to give that direction to the administrators also to start putting that plan together. Maybe that means meeting with the presidents to put that together. But that gives us something physical that we can can look at next next time we meet and have conversation on. So I just want to get that in before everybody said yes. We had to go back around the same process. Yeah, I think that 28 July 28 would be a good good focus point. Um, one of the things I
084was going to say is I mean I want to be very transparent with everybody open on this, but we were elected to this position to figure this out. I don't think we need to go back and ask a lot of small questions. I mean, my guys today got put in a crappy situation, but they were there. They figured it out. didn't have to call me and ask me every little question. We're here to It's our job to figure out. Um I would go along with July 28th, but if we could do it sooner, I would 28 at the latest and I would like the other thing I'd like to say is can we put it for motion or put the resolution together for our next meeting joint meeting. It's a suggestion. to put the 28
085year to [Music] resolutionary December 26. The 20 December 26th, but we can make that earlier than that to my knowledge. No, don't start the process till you you set a specific date starting the process. Right. So, yeah, we need Yeah, I can agree that July of 2028 makes the most sense. Um, just to kind of work around that, like you said, we need to have uh an arrival time to tell them. So, um I think for all the reasons that were said to to focus on July 28th, um I also agree with the July 28 um date. It makes sense with both schools current referendums ending. Um I think that would be a good time and I will not be flying to Vegas. I would like to take time to make sure everything all the
086details are worked out thoroughly and everybody knows the facts and it makes sense. Yes, I would agree too tenatively said I agree with that tenatively if we do all get all the numbers together like that. I guess I could be okay. Agreed. Looking forward to the challenge. Yep. 100% agree with it. Dave, you said something kind of neat there, too. At the end, probably have a lot of this information already. Just gathering it again, throwing it out there, saying, "Hey, it's here. Maybe haven't looked at it for a little while, but a lot of this is probably already done, right?" To your point, too, getting a plan in place, right? Just following what the uh administration wants us to do, and then maybe looking back and saying, "No, we already have that. Check the box.
087Time to move on, right? Save everybody a little time. So, yeah, 28 sounds good. And I think the other the other thing that I think you know it's going to be a lot easier for our districts to work together if we have that target date and we have the arrival time. You know, we we know we have from now until then to get things right, but also it's been said a few times. I don't think that we have to. I think we owe it to our taxpayers and our our citizens to not wait until 2028 to capture efficiency and and savings and and things like that. I don't think we have to wait until then, but to have that commitment from both districts to each other makes it a lot easier to have those conversations.
088um when we're talking about staffing and we're talking about services and we're talking about co-curricular opportunities and athletic opportunities, you know, I you know, I would and not tonight cuz we don't have any actionable items, but I think that both boards need to think about how to make that commitment that you know and almost a directive to your administrative teams that at some point there has to be a line in the sand that we're working together. We're making decisions together and we're if if we're we're going to doesn't mean that it has to be identical, but it h it does to me it means that we have to work together and we have to share ideas and we have to plan together. Um there's there's just in my opinion there's there's no reason that we
089don't do that and and try and draw even with you know even the things like handbooks and compensation all those are things between now and then if we have that arrival time that we can start doing that will make a transition a lot a lot easier instead of doing things like we have done over the last you know number of years that could make it more difficult to get together in in 20 years could make that transition more difficult. Yeah, Joe. I mean, in the two years I've been on the board, a lot of our conversations start with what's I mean, we Yeah, we have a ways to go, but we've moved the pendal for sure already. So, yes, I I want Yeah, I want to see that commitment um laid out, I guess. And
090I would agree. I would say if we are looking at anything, we need to start exactly that. How can we work whether it's academics, staffing, extracurriculars, you name it. Buying things, big equipment or big [Music] something. Work together on it and make sure we're all on the same page. Um it really starts it has started. I think that we need to make sure that we are focusing on that. Yeah, I agree. It started by I think now it's take the next step and I think that in my mind that's in the plan you know if we want to talk about getting handbooks identical or you know similar enough that we can go forward. I think that's part of the plan you guys can put together for us and we can have those conversations. um not
091that you put the plans together, but at what point in time is that going to happen? When is it going to happen? Who's going to be involved? Um how does that work? So to me, that's part of that plan process is all those little details and how we're going to analyze that information to counter off that need. We have started because we started what we went to deal with policies that you guys have done. We based them off what you did. We've made some tweaks into what you guys did, but I would say probably 90% or better is already agreed on that and we're working with the same company. So, we've started that process. Yeah. Well, it's going to have to be gone through by the new board at some time, but yeah. Or even
092to make modifications to the policies from now going forward. Yeah, we should talk to you guys. What do you think? Hey, we're seeing this in our school. What do you guys think? Or you guys are seeing something? Ask us what we think and can get them policies together. Anyone else have anything? Anyone have any comment for public? All I have to say is if somebody has no opinion, they should be at the meetings. I'm not at everyone, but it's very informative and if people think they're not informed, they should be here. This place should not be empty. That's all I got to say. Just so people at home know what you said. Do you mind saying that into the mic for us, please? I'm not good at that. You You are great at it. I
093really appreciate that cuz I think everyone should hear exactly what you just said. I just think that if anybody has an opinion about this moving forward and they feel not informed, they need to be at these meetings. This place should be full. It should not be empty. They have no room to complain going forward. These guys are doing a great job and thank you. It's not easy. Thank you. So, if you didn't get this out to people that are watching live streaming, she just said if you have an opinion, you should be at these meetings. All right. Very informational. So, and it's we have a handful of people out of almost 2250 people that voted. So, thank you very much. I guess I just last time I'm going to clarify. I know that a lot
094of people might think my comments and stuff. I guess to know a little bit of background with it, those of you who have never heard this before, my wife came from. So the history why I'm not against Greenwood I'm not against the oil do want us to work together that's but I grew up in southern southeastern Minnesota and I did see a lot of consolidation happen around and I saw how communities struggled and still struggle today after that's why when I say transparency I'm not trying to wreck it either community want people to be informed and understand the effects it does could have on top cuz I saw that happen all around me with my wife's school and then one of my current officers that works came and he also lost his school and they
095talked about how their towns are now compared to what they were then. So I don't have an ax with anybody. I just want people to understand why I am as passionate as I am about this and I don't mean life. So that's why they need to be here. Just a thought if we can decide on when we're going to meet next or if we can, you know, decide how often we're going to meet. Are we, you know, do we want to meet monthly and on a certain day or, you know, just a thought just so we kind of are planning ahead and what's the next when's our next meeting? Maybe it kind of relies on when Mr. Buckler can attend or someone else from WSB can attend the meeting and maybe that's kind of reliant
096on what the next meeting is. But just something to think about so that we're we're constantly making progress on on getting going through those phases. Like I mentioned, I would assume that you all want an update after we meet with WSB. So we'll see what he says on Thursday and and what their availability is to either come here or if we have enough information just to share ourselves, we'll look to schedule another date based on our meeting on Thursday. Does that sound acceptable? For transparency purposes, I just assume he would come to the whole public. Yeah. Open the joint meeting to the public. Yes. And have the public ask him questions. We're just going to ask him questions just for transparency. I don't think he's opposed to that. I just I'm not going to put
097words in his mouth. I'm going to We're going to meet with them on Thursday and see what their what their services are available. That's why I'm here. That's why I guess I just want to I mean when are we looking at are we looking at the next month like June because tonight that's why I come here. I was coaching middle school Greenwood oil track and all a sudden I kind of heard a little bit of what was going on kind of got concerned with me but I just think we should be watching all the sports things that are happening. a lot of circles. Yeah, May is a May is a tough month. So, I would assume it would be maybe after graduation after we get through that. Yeah. How did the uh team do? How
098are they doing? Great. Thank you for coaching. Thanks, Coach. Could this set girls to the first place? Yes. Middle school track. So just to reiterate um like I said earlier I think having us sit down for the last two years and having talked uh I think that's been I hear a lot of people say well why are why is no one else looking at consolidation? Um I think there are I think there are a lot of them thinking about it but here's a step right here that they can't get at they can't get their boards together. So, um, kudos to you guys on getting this done and and continuing the process. Uh, and the second thing is I think we have a lot of eyes on us to see what's what's going to happen here
099and then that'll piggy back on whatever happens to their district. So, with that, if there's no other questions, no comments, thank you everyone for coming out. Thank you for your comment. Uh safe travels and we would have to adjourn to second. And lastly, I would like to on behalf of Mr. Green and myself thank all our staffs. It is staff appreciation week. So, I'll make sure that uh everyone reaches onto