001Not being here on time. It's Erica. >> Finish. >> Hold on. >> Right on time. >> Got to try again. >> I know. Uh >> oh. >> Guess I waited too long. >> You got to put your phone in one of those pouches. >> Weird. There you go. >> All right, we're live now. >> We are. >> Okay, it is 502. We'll call this order. We'll begin with the pledge of allegiance 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. might be our father. That's >> what a controversy that would have caused. >> Yeah. >> All right. So, we're going to follow the agenda as written, I think, which means we're going to move to number
002two, the consent agenda, and we're looking for a motion to approve the consent agenda, which includes minutes from the October 6th board meeting. Motion. >> I'll second. >> Motion made and seconded. Any further discussion? All those in favor? >> I oppose. Abstain. Motion carries. 5-0. I neglected to point out at the top that we have Leanne's side. >> Sid off joining us as the student representative this evening. Thanks for being with us. Uh, okay. We're going to move on into the business report. I have a wonderful gift for you guys tonight. There is not. >> You did send us phone numbers. >> Yeah, you guys numbers. I just got them this afternoon. >> So that's for the first discussion with the budget committee. >> Correct. >> Say that again. >> That's for the first discussion
003with the budget committee. >> Yes. >> Which is at our next scheduled board meeting. >> Is that right or wrong? >> That's what's on the schedule as of now. >> Yes. >> And that's not the 27th of October. That's the 3rd of November. Correct. >> Correct. >> All right. >> That is correct. >> So, make sure that we're doing a five o'clock start like usual >> here like usual. >> Sure. So far. >> Sounds good. That's what's on the schedule. >> Make it short because I remember someone asked me if we had meetings on there link for the 27th on my calendar. >> We must not cancel that. Not cancel that. I also I also have a Zoom link on November 27th. >> Okay. >> I don't know if you want to be >> So
004once we clear up those two things, we're all clear, then we're going to meet with the budget committee on the third in the context of a broader schoolboard meeting. So we'll kind of start the agenda should probably be shaped so that we go right into that discussion and then take up the rest of our business after they leave for their free stay and we'll talk about whatever the administration is prepared to present and review there and we'll talk about Lakeway. We'll have the bond figures by then some other things by then. Will you be doing a typical opening session presentation where you're talking about priorities and having some of the administrators present priorities by building or are we going to go right into a proposed budget? >> I think we'll go back into go into
005the budget. It seemed like a lot of the things we did before maybe was overkill. It took too much time and we never really got into the actual budget like we should probably shake her head. The dance of death last year. It's just frustrating when they get so consumed with test scores and things that they should discuss with us now and not during >> budget. Exactly. >> So, I I get that. I agree. By the way, I just want to make sure it's clear to them when we talk on the third that >> it will be seeing the proposed budget for the first time as well. >> Yeah. Yeah. We're going to talk a little bit tonight. I mean, we've we've all you've seen so far is just a a level service budget. So I
006will share with you some ideas to reduce that if we decide to go that direction. >> Okay. And we'll see if we're ready for the budget committee on on the third whether we got we have four days in basically two two board meetings in November and June and December and we don't need them for more than three. So okay >> it may be that it's not till the second meeting in November to see. >> Okay. Any questions on the no business report business report? >> We'll move that into new business and we'll talk about, you guessed it, budget updates. >> Okay, this out. [Music] Sorry, the format could never get Google slides centered on the same page. So this is just a very very brief little bit of where we are, what we've done so
007far. Um, so start with enrollments. Um, present enrollments. That's that's as of today. Ignore 9825. It's actually as of today. Cena ran this about an hour and a half ago. Um, so you see this number of students by grade level. Um, and currently we're operating under three sections. One reason I I I put that in there three sections, two sections is is we if we go into really deep budget cuts uh to get to the, you know, paying, you know, premium money for half of the bond payment, we're going to have to go pretty deeply into into teaching teaching staff. So that would increase uh section numbers by by quite a bit. So any questions on on that piece going to the next next page? >> Um each section has one teacher, one parent. Is
008that fairly accurate? >> Yeah, they don't all have a pair. They used to elementary school. They don't all have a pair. >> Okay. Now, >> is that because we can't fill the slot or is that due to budget cuts? >> Uh, some of some of both. >> Yeah, I mean I mean there's some that we did we chose not to not to fill. We have we uh we do have three open positions right now. >> We had to scale up the pairs just a little bit also. We can't hire them. We can't give them >> because of the loss of a couple of res. >> Okay. Um, and then the residency program. How many residents do we have? >> Two. >> And those are in a class with a teacher and a >> I think
009those two individuals are in a class. I know I know one that's the case. I think the other one >> and they're permanent in that classroom. >> They are four days. >> Yeah. >> I'm not certain. I think in the fourth grade I think in my son Evans class he has a parent. >> Yeah. And the parents are are assigned to a student. >> So it's not like they're a classroom para to assist the teacher are our parents are in IEPs >> right? >> So I'm not sure what the correlation is like if you're thinking there's a classroom here. Well, sometime well I guess on the street if there's any adult body in there it's an actual adult. >> Yeah. Well, I think with some of our you know we can't get too much detail
010in public but I don't really think that's a fact. But so is are we are we making is the administration making the case that Harris never plays on defense and always exclusively focused on individual students? >> They they have to by law that's why that's how it >> and is does the law require us to staff in that way or is that the most efficient way that we staff? It depends on the IEPs and how many kids in the room have depend on what they have. If the student has a one-on-one parent, then they'll have a one-on-one parent. Most of the time, an IEP will have so many hours a week of pair of support. You kind of spread that out under over several students that way. So that one pair, if they're not a
011one-on-one, they're they're supporting a number of students. Is that true for a high school too where it's for oneonone and not just special ed students and then they go >> in some cases? Yes. Yeah. But so if is it the case that if say I don't know I want to get into particular advice and we can have a discussion more next time but let's say an IEP calls for two hours a week of support for a student and if there are five or 10 students that have a similar IE right and they're all in the same class right then functionally you have a pair of supporting the full class, but supporting the full class in a way that is consistent with what's mandated by the law. >> Yes. >> It doesn't mean we're never doing
012anything with >> No, no, I mean like they I mean they will help. They'll help. I mean, especially younger classes, they'll help them with basic duties like lining up for lunch and lining up for drop off and things like that too where they're working with all the students, but mostly direct academic support is directed students have those services. I think it would be good information to have how many of them are specific one ons and how many of them share student hours because the more severe IEP or other cases would be in like choices or some other alter. >> Yeah. And when an IEP is, I don't know if the right term is sort of found, affirmed, confirmed, set, established, written, dictated, is there is there funding associated with that? >> We get we get
013um as part of the adequacy grant, we get funding based on the number of students that we have on IEPs. Believe it or not, it's not a heck of a lot of money. is $276,000. So it's not it's not equivalent to what our expense is to service the >> we get we get through the actually adequacy grant we get $276,000 for special ed weighted weighted enrollment which yields that and then we get about $28,000 that it comes through direct from the feds uh toward in this case it funds preschool a little bit not much and one of our one of our school. So all in total we get this is shade under $500,000 and aid of some kind uh for special ed. The rest is locally fun. And so if you maybe this is another
014breakdown to have for next time having seat but >> I'm sorry to de labor on the point but if you look at our in classroom headcount at Lakeway like what's the percentage split between teachers and pair of professionals is it 50 60 I I follow up for an assumption that it's mostly 50/50 with a slight tilt toward the teacher. But >> and the answers to my questions pertain to Lakeway specifically. So the high school is it safe to say it's one teacher per subject language? >> We the high school structured quite a bit differently. Um so how how it works in the high school the students who are on IEPs get their services provided through the three teachers that teach in the academy. So, and sometimes those those teachers are available in in the regular
015classroom. Most most of the time they're teaching their cabinet students, but they do case manage. They do they do attend provide some support. We're pretty uh I can tell you we're pretty lightly, frankly, we're pretty lightly staff at the high school when it comes to parent educators. Let me tell you I can tell you that like I want to say three >> off the top of my head >> but not two I think two are at um the academy >> two free two of the three we had four last year but we're down to three this year >> and you got well more than a definite >> oh yeah >> oh yes how many Um this current year at Lakeway we have 16 PAR educators that are regular special educator pair educator we have one
016that's a regular PAR educator [Music] Bronson we have two two pairs LH has two pairs and Academy has two pairs. So we have the district wide. We have 24 total actually 14 as of now. >> I'll be quiet now. Sorry. Thanks. >> And do we have open positions for high school? >> I think we're covered there. Okay. I think they're the only the three we have still are at the school. And how many how's the middle school divided right now? >> Is there one one teacher teaching English for summer? >> That that's we do have now. That's a good question. We do have a dedicated specialized teacher >> just like we do. And then we have some students in the middle school as well as >> So we have one we have two English teachers
017seven or just a teacher. >> We have we have one with English and math both we have one primary teacher. We have another another teacher who supports >> instructional support. And then high school's just our sting at the high school lesson two science teachers have >> is that based on >> 1.2 to social studies teaching. Yeah, it's based on the classes they have to offer. We're probably going to have to look carefully social that up a little bit. As I shared last time, the legislature significantly increased the requirement. There was a time you need to show integrated certain concepts into certain classes, but it looks like they're wanting standalone classes. We're getting almost no guidance right now. So, we'll see. >> The other thing I I will point out, I've got a more detailed breakdown
018that I'll share with you. later, but just to give you an idea. Um, but let me wait till we get to that slide. Actually, let's finish this up. We'll get to more staffing stuff in a minute. Make sure we talk about staffing questions concerned. Okay, the next page is just the uh budget a little bit history. When we say 2627, that's simply based on the initial level level staff level service budget that we're starting with in the beginning. We're crossing our fingers on health insurance. >> Where are the dates on that side? >> The dates on what? >> Health insurance, but we'll find out. >> I'll find out by November 10th. >> We do have a meeting on Wednesday, an organization that provides those kinds of services. We're going to reaching out Okay, next page.
019Um, these are just reductions and this is if you look at and Patty Patty prepared this. Um, so she can answer questions if you have them as well. It's pretty self-explanatory. So when when we prepared the 27 26 27 budget, these are the items that came out of the current budget. We have we have an unfilled position sitting in 2526 as you're aware and when we went as you know when we went to the town we went to the vote 25 26 we prepared budget we still had a director teaching and learning that didn't happen until later we just didn't film 2627 the transition counselor is out the director of teaching and learning is uh we reduce the middle school math position so we reduce that position that individual teaching English now high school social
020studies we didn't fill position there high school science we uh again were able to as we talked about before the individual we had hired for the health science program at at 610 of a percent. We ended up using 4/10 of her increase her to 1.0, then use that 410 to support some of the high school science. Then the budget next year does not have a dean of students at the high school in the budget. So there's there's six positions in a chunk of the chunk chain. However, this year current year, um, we we did we did add a behavior specialist at the middle school and we ended up hiring another high school math teacher. So, that reduced the reductions a little bit to the current budget as well as next year's budget. It's still a
021pretty healthy decrease about 400 400 some odd thousand dollars. Steve, going back to the middle school map that's on there, you already that's off this year already, correct? So, you're not reducing what we have this year to make sure. No, everything's the same. >> Okay. >> Yeah. The budget the budget the 26 27 budget we we are presenting is you know with everything in it except for what we show here. So you feel the the reduction for the high school social studies for next year is accurate when we previously mentioned you're not sure for next year state that one. >> Yeah definitely we'll need to be transparent with that surprise anybody >> and transition counselor is that because we have a behavior specialist now. Yeah, that was the trade-off. We didn't we didn't that that
022decided not to even though it's in the budget that that position no longer exists. We went toward paying at least a little bit off 30% or so specialist. So you kind of look at transition counselor unit students together more than the cost of trans behavior specialist for next year. So then we get to the final. Is there anything any question about that before the last page? So leadership team simply asked for and this was anonymous. We did it through thought exchange through our survey program to just put forth some ideas you know as to what we could look at reducing eliminating whatever adjusting. So as you read this, you see like a 1% reduction p non-personnel budgets and that's repeated, you know, for so we did did 5% which is what this really says. We
023did 5% and you're obviously you're you're reducing that that line item by 175,000 or so. Um but and that was kind of the upper end that we talked about as a group doesn't mean it couldn't go higher. Um aa positions if we reduced the building level a couple of those um don't yell at me. >> I won't vote for it. >> I didn't actually yell at me. >> It'll be a deal breaker for me. >> This isn't a ploy. It's just on the list. And these things always come up. I'm not saying it's a good idea. I'm not saying any of this is a good idea, but it was on the list. Um, SAP position, student assistance program position, leadership team's got to do a little more work on that one. It may as we
024do our rankings, but and these are not in any order, by the way. There's no ranking here. Um so each teaching position roughly 88,000 could be a little more be a little less looking at reducing the administrative assistant days a little bit residency maybe the made the list restructure middle school high school administration by 1.0 window reduction. So, you know, I want I want clear here as well as as I was with the leadership team. So, so that would entail basically using what we have, not not hiring someone else, but using what we have to cover the administration of the middle school, high school career check. um something the board did ask for what that number looks like. It's a significant number restructuring SAU staff trying to figure out how to work that needs to
025be done with with less and then of course reducing or sharing the superintendent position. So that list everything on that list that means if you essentially reduce non-personnel budgets by 5% reduce two aas and so on and so on pre-teing positions and so on that would reduce the level service budget by about 1.2 million. uh it reduces the it gets you 8 821,000 uh below condition break even >> and I just want to for the record because we never said it was eliminate middle school sports that would be against we never said that out loud we just read it >> oh yeah >> all all that >> that's what it costes huh >> okay that's for all all coaches >> that's what ites So can just a clarifying question. Thank you for preparing this. So
026Patty, the the numbers on one of the previous slides does show a budget for 267 193 a 2.2 increase over 256. Does that factor in already the 400,000 $430,000 offset by the positions reduced and added? >> Yes. >> Okay. So that 2.2 to then is largely contractual stuff >> from step increases and all that jazz and other anticipated whatever. >> Yeah. Two negotiated two negotiated contracts. >> Does that make assumptions about bad scary healthcare stuff or is that not factor any >> for what? >> Bad scary healthcare stuff. >> Yeah, at 15% is what I put in there. That's in there right now. Transportation contracts that we currently I just wanted to make sure it wasn't zero on the health insurance. >> Oh gosh. >> I thought 15% was on the low side, but I
027>> increase 15%. >> Great. You know, are you thinking we're like we're we're speculating that part of this probably already close to it's going to be >> it's going to be higher than we've ever had. So it's not 30%. >> Yeah. And they need the money now. >> We're hoping. I suspect that's what they're Well, they Yeah, they're they're protein consolid. >> How many um middle school, high school admin are considered do you have now that are considered in this by reducing it by one? So you're going from like four to three or correct to >> four to three. >> Yeah. Actually uh actually three to three to two. Sorry it's three to two >> because we've already taken out de students. >> We've added we've added which I don't really count that position necessarily
028add function that way. >> Uh but yeah basically uh would be you know it could be the same people. It may not be the same people. Maybe maybe they won't. I don't know. I can't speculate. But if we said, "No, we're going to have to make this work with two administrators and not hire replace the high school principal try to restructure what we have." That's the number that that would generate. >> And how many administrative assistants do we have now? >> We have four in this building and two at Lakewood. in one of the same >> and the 50,000 for the move in the high school bus just to operate the building every year. >> Correct. >> Dale mentioned the other day the leadership may be that may be wishful thinking that may be on
029the high side. You know, you done some research on looking at the cost. It seemed to be a number that came up and it may come up at a time. The oil was more expensive too. Although probably to maintain the building, so you got to keep the building. >> Yeah, you have to do some You know, I think people need to understand, anybody listening, I know Robert will will listen to the transcript and do his article and stuff that, you know, you get up and you give it to those higher levels and maybe even then that's not a good choice. But we start, you know, we're trying to reduce, you know, from the budget that we presented initially with a little little over $400,000 increase. And we're the goal is to try to reduce the
030general fund for pay for at least half of the bonding that you're have to do that one point five million range. Candy, additional questions on the budget updates and preparation for our next session budget committee. >> Is this helpful? >> Very helpful. >> Yes. Yes. Thank you. >> Mr. St. >> Very helpful. >> And to your point, maybe by the end of the discussion after we get through nonpublic, we'll decide if we really want to hold the budget pay off until the 17th, if my math works. >> Yeah. My my hunch is that would be appropriate. M >> mine too, Dr. D. >> We'll see. >> Just we want to, you know, make the sausage all together with their help and do a little more work ourselves. >> All right, we'll move on then to
031strategic planning updates. We've had uh two meetings >> and we've sent out a survey and we have a 97 responses to the survey and that went out to staff and community. We have quite a few community people that responded. Unfortunately, the uh the changes in how we can what we can ask students and survey students has made it difficult. So, but we still we we've got and Michelle worked on this today. Uh but we do uh we do have a a process that we're going to use to send out to parents that allow their give permission to their students to do the survey. Um we hope that we can do that through the initial survey. Unfortunately, that link won't allow it to be used more than once and I didn't even think about that possibility
032because that was my hope, but we definitely need to get student uh feedback. Um at our last meeting we we worked u mainly on mission statements and u most of most of the meeting was exactly that. We did look at the survey results a little bit. The nice thing about the uh the uh survey is it's already identified some core key areas four or five which is typically what a strategic plan will have. uh that that again has is is built by what people said. It's not what not what we think but what people are actually saying and you know there there some things there culture being one of them you know that pops up there. So in facilities there's there's several several responses there as well from facilities. So we meet again tomorrow and
033uh you know the plan going forward is we meet now weekly and uh build build on the work we've done so far with the with the mission statement. We'll do a vision statement tomorrow and give it a little more analysis deeper analysis of the survey so far. What the community staff and community seem to be saying right now is really the priority areas we need to focus on. Um and then we'll be splitting into some teams and to work on those different areas and put together a possible structure for the strategic plan. Give some detail into what different priority areas look like. We've had good good participation so far we've done so far. Any questions on that? >> Right circumstance is fun. >> I know there there times you can't. I know that you shouldn't.
034Any further questions on that topic? >> Then we will move on to unfinished business residency program. >> Nothing nothing new there. Um I I do know it'll be it'll be a budget discussion item. Um obviously it's on on the list of possible reductions and so I expect there'll be more discussions going forward about how we wish to proceed with that or if we wish to proceed with that way move on then to committee reports negotiations Goodbye. >> No facilities. >> Okay. Facilities. We met last Friday called 17. Uh we discussed the monitoring system on the floor. Um Dale had explained to us in an email prior to when we we didn't view it again that there was a misunderstanding as far as um Dean King's proposal um the $13,800 that was approved to spend does
035not give us a second floor monitoring system. It only allows pays them to find three different systems that for the proposal on that um their actual cost um that was for the one system Dale correct me if I'm wrong >> there was three >> three systems >> there was three systems >> yeah and the one that they proposed to us by SNR was >> real time >> it was real time and that was to the tune of 48 plus thousand So the 138 is just cost to figure out what kind of system we need and to fully price and spec out. >> So the 13 the 14 grand is to pay for a bid >> essentially. Is that correct? Yeah. So, we discussed that and my recommendation is that at this point we put the
036monitoring program on hold because every engineering study that we have has has told us the same thing that the uh the floor joist or the steel vertice which however you want to describe them have no signs of deterioration. So, we're not overstressing that. Um the problem is it's in the sheet and and the reason the bounce in the lakeway hallway is as bad as it is is because those joists are four feet on center versus two feet on center that day on the classroom. So we meet building code as far as when the building was was built, but that doesn't because of the way it was built, we're also starting. We asked Bo King back in April to to come up with load live load for us so that we can understand better where we're
037at. So we have the live load, but we can't we need to be able to calculate that into what does that look like with live body. So rather than spending Kobe found some money on a live monitoring system, our recommendation is let's find out what it is that our load actually looks like and we could do the calculations but we can't take into consideration all the all the items that are in school. So there's desks um cabinets on all that stuff. that's where their expertise is and they can give us something that is true or practical with that information. Then we could determine whether we need to go forward with the live code or continue with structural. We still it comes up every every structural engineer has looked at it and said we should address
038the problem bring it up to today's codes and it hasn't been done. We don't really know what needs to be done. So, I recommend that we have a structural engineer tell us what our options are. There may only be one option, but if we at least know what it is that we have and get quotes to have that work, now we have something more solid. So, um that's the direction that I would like the board to have agree with as far as trucks going. um doesn't mean that we may not find out that a live load is still going to work, but it's a it's a lot of money to spend that um goes away when we correct the balance. Um and I'd rather see that money put towards correcting that than um use it
039to factf find really. So because we we don't know how how much the floor balances, >> but do we think it would cost money to have a structural engineer evaluate and do the quotes for >> the Well, the evaluation's already done. So yes, they're going to have to determine what can be done to correct this deficiency. >> We don't have a dollar amount associated with analysis yet. >> The most recent proposal >> is okay. It just it came out late. >> So, this is the $30,000 proposal for that. [Music] >> Now, I won't speak to it in detail yet, but some of those things would not necessarily be paid for. So, step five or if that's step, if we never put it out to bid >> the construction, then obviously we wouldn't pay that amount.
040So is this 30,000 part of bills three that you that you're requesting bill? So you're looking so you have this one and you want two more or this is separate from the three that you're requesting or recommending. >> Um I feel uh haven't been able to read through this document. I just barely opened it. Um I couldn't get it opened earlier today for some reason. I don't know why. So I'm not sure of everything it's detailed. I hate to speak on that. Um, but I don't Dale, could you give us a more rundown on this? >> Sure. So, there's five parts of the proposal that they gave. They would require an additional site visit um in additional measurements. They would then um the other thing that came up in the facilities meeting uh was the
041roof load or the snow load capacity if we were going to do the floor um to include that. So that was a portion, I believe it was $5,000 to do the roof load. Um, then they would do the construction or engineering drawings that are required required to go out to a contractor for bid. And then the fourth phase is they would be our liaison between contractors and us when going through the bid process. They'd be present for a site visit for a walk through um with contractors interested in submitting a bid. And then the final phase would would be site visits during construction if we have that. >> Okay. Sorry. So the 14 that we had discussed last meeting is actually 30 and then this is just for the the research and then >> bill.
042No. So no, so sort of we passed evicted either reconsider or vacate or whatever a motion to what we thought was install a monitoring system for 138. >> It's clear that that was not quite correct and the 138 wouldn't get us the installation of that monitoring system. It would get us an evaluation of what monitoring system we might need and want to install, which would then be tens of thousands more. What I hear Bill saying is instead we should procure engineering services to more accurately evaluate the situation with the load and try to give us some sense of how best to remediate whatever issues are concretely inclusively fine. What I hear him saying is that process would include getting multiple bids for fixing the problem. I don't hear him saying we need multiple bids for
043engineering services, >> right? He's looking at 30,000 that's here from Dubois and King Dubo. >> Is that basically right? >> Yes. >> Um and I apologize because I misled and whether I may have misspoke because I wasn't looking for multiple engineering firms to bid on and one firm is good. So that you know that was uh misconstrued by my remarks or whatever. last meeting. So, I don't agree with the roof load rating at this time. Um, it may be something that needs to be addressed. I know that we had engineering studies done on that um quite some time ago and I haven't looked at any of that yet. Um, to the best of my knowledge, we have no indications that there's any going on there. So, I'd rather keep this clean and we're looking at
044a floor that's been a problem for a long time. Let's let's stick with this. Um, so I would carve that out of this and save us a little bit of money there. >> So, B so B and E for sure. >> But, but can I ask a clarifying question? Sorry. Or not clarify question, but maybe to a proposal. When is the next facility submitting? But you could in theory have one sooner, I suppose, if yall were bored. >> Sure. >> Because what I'm thinking is could the board possibly authorize us to move forward with a certain dollar amount of money contingent on the facility committee's approval and evaluation of the the bid because you essentially just got this. >> Haven't had a chance to review it. Haven't had a chance to discuss it. And I
045I I'm gonna guess the board is going to be largely differential to what your recommendations are. So I'm thinking that that is a possible path forward. I also think we need to at some point take up a motion to resend the vote from last meeting because now the facts have changed and we don't have to regular should just to keep things clean. But I wonder if the board members who are not on the facilities committee would be probably supportive of something that would give them authorization to move forward once it meets their their approval. I thought we were getting. >> So I think what we would do first then just to make some forward progress is I think we'd be looking for a motion to resend the vote from the October 6th meeting relative to
046the installation of the floor monitoring system. Before somebody makes that motion, I just want to pause to make sure Dale or other members of the administrative team want to make sure you have an opportunity to air any alternative perspective or do you largely agree with what we've been discussing here? >> I put my comments in the email >> to us. No, internally my only my and I sh I shared this it's in the minutes. So my only concern is if we bypass the monitoring system which I'm going to support the consensus of the board and there was only two people that spoke on Friday, Bill and Henry regarding this. The other members were silent regarding monitoring system. We have a an email in writing from Primex that tells us we must do something if we
047can't get the floor reinforced soon enough. And the concern with the engineering firm was it all depends on our timeline of how quickly we get the bid out. We get quotes back. Can we accept somebody whether or not they'll be able to do it in the summer of 26 or whether or not it'll be the summer of 27. So I just think that's a long time um from that standpoint. But I would only be in favor of a real-time monitoring system, not the cabling system option or the shooting of the laser by the guy independently coming. Those does not seem beneficial to me. So all all my thought process would be is that if nothing has happened ever, okay, I don't have anything to scare, but if something does happen, I'm pretty sure our insurance
048company is going to make us 100% responsible for any liability because they have told us to act and we're choosing, which is fine. We're choosing to do so. But sorry, is it is it is it not the case that speculatively speaking is entering into a contractual relationship with D boy and King to do this engineering analysis. >> Is that not doing something? That's a we have to go back to the the the wording of the thing was that if >> it can't be done immediately that the monitoring system should be done in >> and what the monitoring system may or may not do is actually make us more liable and make them less liable. They are insurance company. So we are doing something um I don't feel that they have the right to dictate to
049us what we do. It's not that we have thrown out their idea. It's just that there are other steps that we can do sequentially at less cost to try to find out where we can land this. So, um I'm dealing with an insurance issue right now at work where we had one little spot on one of my boilers that might be a leak. So, that boiler has remained open. I'm waiting for tests to be done. They told me I had to respond to them by this Friday. My response to them this Friday is I'm still waiting for the test to be done. I have no control over you taking the test and they can't turn around and find me or do anything else other than accept the fact that I'm doing something. And right now
050what I'm doing is waiting because I can't get the test done. I don't see any difference here which we are factf finding because we we since we don't know what it's going to take we don't know how long it's going to take nor do we know how much it's going to cost so we're we would be potentially throwing away money because we may find out oh all we've got to do is this this and this. So we really need to go through the steps to find out everything and not jump to their conclusions. We do have a fact that there's a history here but I also don't want to rely on that history. Um we so I feel we do need to move forward but monitoring system should be our last ditch effort if we
051have to because of timing and everything. So, I'm looking at Greg and Patty and Dr. Nas. I suppose you're not required to say anything. >> I wasn't at I wasn't at Friday's meeting. >> I'm curious with respect. >> I mean, Greg forwarded us had his summation of the discussion with Michael Ricker at the last meeting. the first four bullets. Well, the first four bullets after bullet one, beef up the support beams. Get a quote to improve the support beams may not be as bad as you think and I'll probably fix if not install the monitoring systems. To me, the engineering study is in service to that effort, right? I mean, get a quote to improve exactly what we're talking about, right? Um and that would be in service to of course beefing up the support
052beams and figuring out can the problem be fixed, how like and to what expense. He does mention the second and last the first report study should have triggered improvement to support. >> What I'm just trying to reconcile that with what Bill said at the top that everything we have suggests that there's there's no deterioration in the columns. So what is he referring to? >> Reports that we shared with primex which I think stem from 2016 but we have reports that go back to 2001 that said the same. >> So my my only the next thing down Matt >> from the top that you read which is what I'm stuck on is if improvement will happen but not until next year summer install a monitoring system. Again, they can't tell us what to do. But, um,
053that was the that's the one phrase from the the legal team that that I'm stuck on. We know we can't do it till next summer at a minimum, >> but until we find out what needs to be done and what the costs are and everything else, we don't know. >> So, we work through the process >> how long till we can know. So once the special engineer gets done doing his his work >> and how we can make it in. >> So you know one of the the two things in in every report that we've had um says that there's no deterioration and we don't meet today's code which we know that because it was built to code when that when that was done. So the codes have changed. So that's that's the the thread
054that goes through every one of these reports. >> How soon can we get another structural engineer in here to look at it? So is that waiting six months or is that waiting a year? Is that something we can do in two weeks? Is that >> we don't I don't think we need another structural engineer. I think they have the information. They they wouldn't be able to come in for their site visit until the next day where we don't have students which right now is the day before Thanksgiving. Then they would have to develop the drawings. My guess from the conversation I had with them on Friday would be early to mid January before we have drawings to then submit out to a bid >> for for the for the monitoring system. Correct. For the correction,
055>> right? We could probably have three quotes for our monitoring system by early next week because they've given me permission to use their report and floor plan, which is what they provided to SRS to give us one quote, but that's only one. So saying not to >> right to answer Travis's question of how quickly like through the whole bid process I'm just speculating. I'm guessing March before we have numbers and then have to select um a contractor. And then again, we're we're relying on their schedule that they can fit us in between the last week in June and the second week in August to complete the structural analysis next summer or if we have to wait. >> Okay. So, I just want to zoom out for a second and I think we have two options
056that are not mutually exclusive as I understand. One option is some variation on approving maybe with facility committee evaluation and recommendation whatever duan came to come in and do some structural engineering eval of portions and pieces of lakeway to ultimately conclude in setting us up to go out for bid for remediation. Right. >> Yeah. Option two, not mutually exclusive, is to engage the same company, a different company, I forget the names to to do this assessment for a load monitoring system. Is it the same company? >> Same company has provided the engineering analysis to go to actual companies to get those. >> Okay. So, but separates. >> So, but so over here we know it's something less than 30 grand. They might descope the proposal. There's some consideration about which of those parts, but it's
057somewhere in that range. Remind me of what we think the possible range is of the evaluation of a monitoring system is. That's the 138 is that it's going to cost us 138 to figure out what kind of system we need. >> That would be zero. That's $0 because I personally eliminated the other two options of the cable system and I would only request a quote for real time. So they don't have we don't need to give us a report or an analysis. >> So the sorry okay now I'm even more confused. So the 138 was to evaluate between those three options. >> Correct. >> And you're saying the only viable option in your estimation is the the real time monitoring system. So the next step there would be to get bids on that. >> We
058don't necessarily know what the possible price range is of actual installation price. Yes. >> And which is how much? >> Just over 48,000. >> 40 to install the real time. Okay. So, not mutually exclusive options because it could well be both, right? Install monitoring system while doing initial evaluation and remediation. >> Thank you. >> No one yell at me. But last meeting I was somewhat opposed to sending this back to the facilities committee because it felt like at the time as the facts were in front of us we didn't we could just make a decision votes but in my opinion facilities we in my opinion not being on the committee I would I would love to see the facilities committee a full compliment with Mr. and everybody come together and have a consensus recommendation on
059how to proceed with either or both of these things and then to go from there. That that's just my perspective because I'm I don't know this stuff. Who else is on the facility? I know who's on from the board. >> Henry Henry >> Henry and Dale from last >> I agree. We're still going I'm still going to call that motion because I think that's that's but what I what I would want to do I don't know how Bill and Greg or Dale feel about this but is to refer this back to facilities committee and have them come back to the board with a consensus recommendation on how to proceed on both of these things. That gives Bill and Greg time to review what they just got today. That gives Greg time to participate in a
060conversation that he wasn't part of the last go round. But I think the goal from my view would be for the committee to really come together and not have a bunch of people sit on the sidelines and just everybody come in and have an opinion and try to arrive at a consensus recommendation. >> I agree. >> Do you good with that? >> I'm good with that. >> All right. So, what I think we're going to do I don't think we need a motion on that. But I would just challenge the superintendent and the board members on the facilities committee to ensure that that is as inclusive and conclusive a conversation as it can be because I think that we need some not everybody has to agree but everybody has to speak right so that there's
061some we can move forward and people can't sit back and say well I didn't want this but I you know nobody listened to me or whatever the case may be. Um, so I do think we need somebody to make a motion to resend the board vote from October 6th relative to the installation of a monitoring system. >> So second. >> Any further discussion? All those in favor? I >> oppose. Stain. Motion carries 5-0. So that vote is expuned. We're sending it. And then I think we're we just have consensus to move this to facilities committee. If I would just mention this to Steve and Dale and Greg and and Bill. If the facilities committee comes to a consensus and wants board action sooner, we can we get together and zoom it and get it done.
062>> Yep. >> Right. >> When we ASAP make sure we get a time and get everybody there. I I mean I guess the only other possible path is if we feel like regardless of how this shakes out, let me ask this question. Do we feel there's any universe in which a consensus of the facilities committee is going to come back and say don't move forward with the structural engineering work? >> I'm not sure that's a fair question. If if the meeting minutes say that two people out of a x number of people spoke, >> I'm not sure it's a fair question either. That's why I'm asking. >> I think you should res answer. >> Yeah, I think you should resend your question. >> I'm allowed to ask bad questions. Good ones do every once in
063a while. >> All right. So, I mean, for me, what I would like to see us go through at least to the point where the we have the structural engineer the prints. So, we're ready to go out to bid, but we don't go that far yet because two things. It's going to tell us what needs to be done. Um, and we'll have prints for if it's not for this year or sometime in the future, that money is going to be money well spent. It's definitely um we can still go back as facilities committee and discuss um and if the facilities committee has a majority says let's do live vote monitoring then we come back to the board and um request those funds again repeating what Patty sent us from her conversation with Mike Richtor from
064Primix get a quote to improve the sport means we're looking at doing may not be a bad Can the problem be fixed? That's what the report's going to tell us. If the improvements will happen this summer and not until this come coming summer, then we move forward. It says move forward with monitoring now. Get them in place. But then it says right here, show intent to mitigate the noted situation andor recommendations. If we're showing intent that we are working to mitigate this, then I think we're not ignoring the legal liability. We're not ignoring we're we're working on this. So I think if we can do that in the coming couple of weeks to get a decision to move forward with getting a quote to what to do to the support teams and then from that
065report determine if monitoring is needed and how long out how far out we are for construction and then we go from there. But we are at least showing intent to mitigate the the noted situation and our recommendations. >> Great. >> Okay. Anything else on that? >> All right. We'll move on then to the policy committee which I don't think we have anything. >> Business. You missed one. >> Oh, did I? >> What? Lakeway playground rubber mulch. >> Yeah. No, I think we still have >> It's all over my house. Can you bring it back? >> That's very funny. >> Dump it right into the >> So, the uh the old the old shed has been torn down by building the trades team and they making preparations to get that all out. Um we do have
066four broken windows at the academy. on the lower floor windows. Dale has reached out to Top-Notch Custom Glass and they're scheduled to be here on October 30th. I believe that is to replace Yeah. to replace those windows. Um Dale has also spoken with the abatement company because we have that first floor hallway going to the gymnasium and the academy uh that has asbestous and they believe that they can do that work um during the February vacation. Um the JLMC conducted building inspections. Uh one of the things that came on that is a lack illumination on the front steps of the uh academy going down towards the street. So they're looking at putting getting some lighting put in there. And we had pretty good discussion on the CIP the process that it goes through. Um, and
067the facility is going to do a little bit more look at ranking some of the stuff on our vehicle. That sums it up quite well. >> Oh yeah, rubber mulch. I didn't say the rubber mulch pricing. >> Excuse me. >> It's been ordered. Yeah. So they got prices on that and that is about missing the rubber mold. >> Yes. Please accept my apologies. All right. Now, we move on, I think, to the policy committee. I think we have nothing. >> Nothing other than just a follow up the board's request um on the uh on the one of the policies that we we passed last time. You know, that's comments about political activities. I did follow up with with the uh presidents of both unions. I did share this and we discuss it in more detail
068with leadership team. as requested by the board. I think we do need to do a little bit more. I I did ask the schoolboard association before we brought that policy forward if they anticipate any updates, upgrades, changes to that policy. It's a few years old and and they indicated not at this time. I do think I want to follow back up on that just to make sure that they don't anticipate any changes on that. So maybe some tweaking, but for now it's still being evaluated. And thank you for that followup. >> Any questions on that? >> We'll move on to the student representative report. >> Um, homecoming was a success. We did have the bonfire through the burn van. It's really sad, but um, we tried to beat the rain, but we couldn't. We got
069stuck in it, so everyone was drenched by the end. Um, it was dark for the rally car, so we're hoping to next year have a different time, maybe earlier, so it won't be as dark. Um, we had a lot of people stay after stay after and like clean up everything, which is really, really good. Um, and then I guess the next event is the haunted walk. Um, uh, um, we have semi large groups of members signed up here. thinking outside the box and creating most of the decorations and reusing some of the past decorations that we had and props. Um, we were able to keep our budget low and focus on how uh to best involve more people. We're still working on finalizing the path of the haunted walk. Um, ideas we have for some
070of the rooms were operating room, nursing, cafeteria, therapy room, and a boardroom. Um, it's forget what the theme is. I can't think of it. I can't think of it right now. But we have a good amount of fundraisers for each grade to raise money for the classes. Um, we had a middle school retreat. Um, Ashton and Kendall went to the student council retreat on Friday the 17th. Um, and they came to one of our retreats and it gave the middle schoolers kind of an idea on how uh high school student council is going to be and like just give them an idea on how it's going to be. And I think that's >> Thank you very much for being with us. >> Any questions? Move on into the superintendent report. Yeah, we I don't have
071a lot tonight other than just to let everybody know we did get communication from the DOE about the building a project. So just read what they said. New Hampshire Department of Education is pleased to inform us that your school building a project application is ranked number five on the fiscal 2026 approved descending rank order list in accordance with RSA 1981 15C2C. Since your project application was not on the November 10th, 2022 ranked order list, it cannot be ranked ahead of the four prior projects remaining from the November 10th, 2022 ranked order list. This means your application was ranked as number one from the group of three new school building aid project applications submitted by April 1st, 2025. As you may be aware, funding for the new school building aid project was not approved by the
072legislature for the fiscal 20 2026 2027 bianium. Lastly, if you wish for your school building aid project application to remain in its current rank order for fiscal 2027, please submit information required by the NHD administrative rule ad 32117 by May 1st, 2026. Please let me know if you have any questions. Best regard, uh, Tim. So, if you want to follow up on anything there, but >> So, we're fifth in line for nothing. Hold on. Can we just summarize what you just said that people ask? >> Okay, let me do that. Let me let me put this in the chat. Never mind. Um, I can I think I can figure it out. We'll see. No, essence of it is that, you know, there's there was there's five projects that you if you had an existing project,
073you're already on the list. you had to notify the the DOE and Dors. So, they had to do quite a little bit, right, to stay on the list, at least at least notify, yes, we want to still be here. Um, a number of them obviously didn't. So, but there were five that were on the list before this last round happened uh that did do what the DOE asked them to do. Reamed they stayed on the list. Okay. And then there were three new applications. the one of which was ours. Um so, uh so we we were at the top of that particular list, but uh so we're best of the best of the new, but we're still behind the ones that were already on the list going into this last, >> right? So, we're sixth
074in line for nothing. >> No, it said I think it was four. >> Yeah. Yeah. Fifth. There was four. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. We're ranked fifth. So, there was >> four and then there was three. We're number one of the second group, but we're fifth in line, but it's not funded at all. >> Right. >> And it sounds like to stay on the list, we have to do something by May, >> which is pretty that's pretty short. >> Is there a cost to that? >> No. >> I I don't think so. >> Unless our project changes, which >> But even even once it's funded, we can't take advantage of the funding until we have a yes vote. >> Correct. That's true. >> And also like what the number one school is was approved for how much?
075>> The total project cost is 176 >> 176 million >> 76 of which I believe is is asking for state or eligible >> and so we don't know the right we don't know the full number but there's something like a hund00 million ahead of us. Let's just ballpark. >> Sure. >> That's probably conservative, >> right? and and that again is no not funded for the bianium. So this year and next, of course, it could change, I suppose, but that's correct, too, right? It's a two years funding cycle. >> It could. >> Okay. And last time they stopped funding building aid, it was a 10-year hiatus, right? >> Correct. >> And we are currently in year one. >> Some of these projects could move forward without building a Right. >> Sure. >> That's why some of
076them fell off the list. >> Yeah. I just want people who are listening or watching or whatever not to get too excited. Yes, we did make the list. Yes, we were one out of three. Now we're five out of whatever. But doesn't there's still no funding. We're still not getting anything. Even though we did our due diligence, we did what they asked us to do. We applied and this is where we're at. >> Very likely, very conservatively. >> At least $100 million. Correct. >> Correct. At least. >> At least. So, we checked the box. >> Thank you. >> We did. >> Yeah. You're not gonna get a Don't cry. >> Any additional question >> for the superintendent relative to this report? >> Okay. Then we're going to move on to public input. >> Do you
077have more report? >> No, that's a big one. >> You think I screwed up again? >> I was good. >> Sometimes you just cut people off. >> Oh my lord. I'm going to I'm going to jump in. >> I hope so. >> Oh my gosh. >> What? We're going to move on to public input then. >> All right. We're going to look for a properly worded motion to enter in the nonpublic session. >> Who Who are you going to want to take with us? Just for my awareness. >> Okay. He's not >> I have a >> I got it. I got it. It's always me. Making a motion to enter section under paragraph 2 section 3 of the RSA 9183 the right to no law for do you want one and three >> three and
078eight correct >> uh the dismissal promotion or compensation of any public employee or the disciplining of such employee or the investigation charges against him or her >> excluding >> uh matters which if discussed public would likely adversely affect the repetition reports and other members of this board and consideration of legal advice provided by legal counsel. >> Second. >> Any discussion? All those in favor? Roll call vote, please. >> The agenda of Greg >> Cook motion cars 5. We're now in non public session.