I saw Bridget, Mara, Jill, Anakit, Ryan, Jerry. Who am I missing? I'm trying to... Andrew. Andrew here. Yep, I see Andrew. Okay. There he is. So, I'm going to ask, but I'm guessing it's the impossible. Is it any way we can arrange the gallery so the board members are together? If the board members speak, that brings their picture forward. So, when you take attendance, I think it should bring their picture forward. Okay. It seems like the best we can do. So, call to order of the Montpellier-Roxbury school-burned directors meeting at 632 on September 16th. Since we are doing it virtually, we will have to do a roll, which should hopefully bring the board members to the front of the gallery. So, let's start with Emma. Here. Didn't work, but that's okay. Anakit. Here. Ryan. Here. Jill. Here. Bridget. Here. Mara. Here. Andrew. Here. Jerry. Here. Did I miss anyone? I don't think so. Okay, first order is public comment. I see we have in expectedly robust attendance. I do, we obviously have a very important matter that we want to take up tonight. I just want to preface public comment by saying we have received and read your very thoughtful emails. So, we are taking all the information, the emails, obviously, into consideration in our discussion tonight. So, if you have sent us an email, expect that we have read it and it would be fantastic. I don't want to shut anyone out, but for the purposes of allowing us to get to business and have time while people are still awake and alert and in good decision-making frames of mind to not extend the evening to far into the night, we have read your public comment and they were very thoughtful and they will be taken into consideration. So, in deciding whether or not to speak, obviously your choice, but please keep that in mind. And I know we have, I believe some people who want to speak on matters other than the SRO as well. So, why don't we just do a quick, if people could do the raise hand function, that will give me a sense of how many people want to speak and then I will see if we need to put any sort of time allotments on speaking or not. So, if you could do the raise hand function, if you don't know the raise hand function or can't see it for some reason, please send me an email at Jim Murphy, one word at MRPSVT.org. So, I'm going to... Jim, do you mind if I give instructions on how to raise hand? Yes, it's in the, if you hit, well I can give it, if you hit participants in your, that appears on my bottom bar, there is a little button, a little box appears with all the participants listed at the bottom of that. There is a button that says raise hand and if you press that, your hand will appear as raised in the screen. I am going to give... So, here's what I'm going to do to make sure this doesn't get unruly. I'm going to allow another 30 seconds and anyone who wants to raise hand, please put it in the screen and I'm only going to allow the people who raise hand to speak because right now we have a manageable amount. So, if you want to speak, please hit the raise hand function, otherwise please email me or if you're in a panic, you can unmute yourself and just shout. Okay, so to speak, I'm just going to read out the people who raise their hands.  I have Hunter Dutton. I'm sorry if I mispronounce any of these. Abby German, Jacqueline Denison. Oops, my thing just scrolled way too fast. Jacqueline Denison, Kaya Santana, Vivacan, Noel, Robbie Williams, Nate, and Peter Kelman, just schools. So, please shout if you didn't hear your name, I want to speak. All right, perfect. That's a fairly manageable amount. If folks could try to keep their statements to a minute or less, that would help move us along.  So why don't we start with Hunter, please, and just unmute yourself and start talking. Sorry, make sure Hunter that you state your name too before you say it. Yeah, exactly. Please state your name as well, even though I will say it too. All right. Hello. My name is Hunter Dutton. I'm here. I was part of the MHS graduating class of 2020. During that time at the high school, especially in my senior year, I was an active and proud, very proud member of the Racial Justice Alliance. The community in Montpelier, as you all know, can be and very much usually is very accepting of people from all different walks of life. However, the recent increasing implementation of school resource officers has been very troubling for me to watch outside of the community now. And I can only imagine how troubling it is for those still living within the Montpelier district. As a white male in Vermont, there have not been many times where I have felt directly threatened on school property. However, I know that my privilege is the sole reason for this. I have known many multiple students of color within the Montpelier Roxbury public school system who have felt uncomfortable by the very idea of armed police officers allowed to enter, let alone working for the school system that they are trying to build an education off of. When I see images of police officers walking the perimeter of an elementary school, the elementary school in my hometown, there's no justification in my mind for that response. Students, especially younger ones in that elementary school, are struggling with this pandemic even more than us as adults are. Kids of that age need social interaction, which even with the recent reopening of school districts, they are still not getting enough of day to day. Students of color obviously have these same struggles, but now when they have to look outside the window of their classrooms, they don't get to see their friends congregating for recess anymore.  I know we all want the best for the children in our system. I know the collaborative skills of the Montpelier community from everyone on the school board to the students and everyone in between. I know what the people in our city can get done when we come together. In an age when our children are facing the most widespread and radical changes in society in recent years, where they're growing up in a world influenced solely by disease and death, where people of color are 2.6 times more likely to be hospitalized due to COVID-19 cases than white people, why would we further put our students of color one of the most at risk groups in additional danger by employing and allowing armed officers on our campuses. Thank you very much. Great. Thank you Hunter. Abby, Abby German, please and again please state your name for the camera especially if I mispronounced it. Can you hear me? Yes. Amazing. My name is Abby German and I was a graduate of the 2014 class of MHS. In 2018 when Montpelier High School raised the Black Lives Matter flag on their campus principal, Mike McGrath said, and I quote, we are committed to improvement and to work for equity and racial justice in our school system. We can and we must improve our educational system to be more culturally competent and ever more inclusive to the historically marginalized and oppressed, end quote. While these are lovely sentiments and words, they're empty promises without follow-through with policy change and action. According to the most recent data collected by the Civil Rights Office of the federal government in 2015, out of 12 out-of-school suspensions that happened in that year, 66% or eight of them were for Black students. Additionally, while only 10.9% of students at Montpelier High School are disabled, 20 to 25% of disabled students received out-of-school suspensions. Our students of color and students with disabilities are being policed disproportionately at school, a place that should be safe and supportive for all students regardless of race or disability. Vermont likes to think of itself as an outlier when it comes to racism and other forms of oppression. But Vermont is not immune to the movement towards criminalization, militarization, and incarceration. We need to follow through on our promise to improve our educational system to be more culturally competent and ever more inclusive to the historically marginalized and oppressed. This starts by removing armed police officers from our schools and reinvesting the savings into systems of transformative justice, mental health resources, and social services that create a nurturing and positive school climate for all students. Thank you. Thank you, Abby. Jacqueline Denison, and again please restate your name. My name is Jacqueline Denison. I want to begin by saying that I don't usually make a habit of speaking publicly about much of anything, and I don't usually participate in these kinds of conversations. But I am a mother of three children in the district, two at Main Street Middle School and one at Union Elementary. And I feel strongly that an armed police officer in full uniform does not need to have a regular presence in either of their schools. Our family moved here from Chicago, where I grew up attending schools that had police officers in the building. I took for granted that this was normal if unsettling. More than once I saw incidents escalate due to the presence of a police officer who had ostensibly been called to help. We moved from Chicago to Montpelier in part because of the strong sense of community that Montpelier provides, and because we had heard excellent things about the schools, particularly in regards to their incorporation of restorative justice practices. I cannot express what a relief it's been to feel confident that my children are part of a close knit, thriving community and not being subject to outdated ineffective methods of schooling, which is why when it was brought to my attention that there is currently still an SRO position in the district, I was surprised and disappointed. To me, the presence of an officer in my children's school is the last bastion of a problematic and now outdated way of thinking about discipline and safety. However, well-intentioned the community building efforts on the part of the Montpelier police might be. To me and my children, it begs the question from whom am I being protected? And for some that question maybe does someone feel they need protection from me? It does not build the feeling of safety, community and growth that is so important to children in order to thrive in school. Montpelier is an exceptional community and its schools are often on the vanguard of effective practices. It's one of the main reasons we've chosen to live here. Many school boards around the country have voted to remove their school resource officers, including my own alma mater, the largest high school in Chicago. Districts are choosing to replace this position with more investment in mental health care providers and social workers, methods that have been proven to be effective time and time again. I would ask this school board to consider following suit. In addition to sharing my own story, I am here representing the Just Schools Initiative, a collective of local residents who live in Montpelier-Rosberg School District and are committed to advancing justice, equity and safety within our schools. Prior to the meeting, you received a petition with the signature numbering nearly 350, showing broad community support for a school board policy ending school resource officer position within our district and reinvesting resources into mental health supports. And a restorative model where policies, personnel and disciplinary practices create a nurturing and positive school climate for students. To support you in this process, we have pulled together a targeted list of demands for how this policy should be implemented and what the transition should look like. You have received these via email as well, but they include a commitment to make a policy decision about policing in our schools by January 1, 2021, a withdrawal of police presence for the 20 to 21 school year, a transparent process and collaborative relationship with the community that includes Just School Initiative members, and a reinvestment of school resources. Many of the community members who support this effort are on the call tonight. Based on our understanding that this is an initial discussion and the beginning of a more deliberative process that will allow multiple venues for public input, we will stop public comment recognizing that only 15 minutes were scheduled for testimony. However, if the board is planning to make any decisions tonight, we ask that public comment period be extended so that everyone who wants to speak is allowed to. Thank you for your consideration. Thank you, Jacqueline. Kaya Santana, please. Again, please say your name. Yes, hi. My name is Kaya Santana. Good evening, Chairman, board members, parents, and community members. My position here tonight, like other parents, is about a position and not a person. I personally have not met or spoken to the current SRO, and those who share my position wish to dissolve the SRO position and have funds allocated to where it would be most beneficial for all of our children. We are all aware that our schools have students that at times require extra attention and such situations call for compassion and an understanding of child development, not force and control. As a retired Air Force veteran, I understand training and the benefit of instincts as a result of said training. And for the past four years as a volunteer, site council, and parent group member, as well as a former employee and a parent to three children, I know nothing compares to the strength and wisdom of an educator to calm and de-escalate 10 situations within the halls of these schools. Just today, a familiar situation of a child making a huge commotion, not wanting to go to school, occurred. The child was screaming and running around in the streets as her dad tried to coax her for over 10 minutes. Finally, he gave up and led her kicking and screaming to the entryway, where administrator quickly spoke to both he and the child to calm her. And within two minutes, by the time I made it to the corner of School Street and looked back, that child, thanks to the calm resolve of these educators, was calmly walking towards her class line, holding the hands of another administrator. I have seen Mr. Heridy, teachers, aides, and aides respond to disruptive situations in a way that makes me very proud and comfortable to leave them in the care of my children in any situation. The skills of trauma-informed practices, connection, social-emotional learning is why educators, not officers, should be the ones teaching, training, and caring for our kids. Social interactions with the police department can take place in appropriate situations, such as classroom and outdoor visits with officers and K-9 units, and field trips to the precincts, so it can be very clear to kids that school is a place for learning, and police officers are who we go to to stop criminals. I humbly ask the board to vote no to an SRO, and yes, to hire in more social workers, psychologists, therapists, and educators for our children. Thank you. Thank you, Kaya. The Buchan. Hi, my name is The Buchan. I am a parent of a second grader. I am a mainstream middle school teacher, and I am the 2020 Vermont teacher of the year. I had some more things written out, but I think I'm going to condense it for time. Really, I think that this issue comes down to a concept that I learned as a faculty member here in Empowering PS at one of the many equity trainings that we've attended, and that is the issue of intent versus impact. I think that the SRO program, while it's intense, the intent of the program may be valid and lofty. That is clearly not the impact it's having on our community. I think we need to act according to what that impact is and prioritize mental health resources and social workers for our students. Thank you. Thanks, Pippa. Noel, Roger Williams, and please stay next. Sorry. I am Noel, Roger Williams. I am alumni of Montpelier High School. I graduated in 2018, and I'm also a graduate member of the RJA and was there when we raised the Black Lives Matter flag. I think I paid back off the rest of what everybody has said about the SRO. My time there, I had Matt nicely. I didn't have very many interactions with him, but I do recall some racial experiences that happened when I was in high school. My brother, Leo, Roger Williams, was there. I was a senior and he was a freshman, and one boy called him a calfer boy. I was like, whoa, what? I thought that Montpelier High School would have more restorative justice practices to deal with racial slurs and racial incidents that happened, but the incident happened and it just went under the table. I don't think the SRO necessarily needs to be in that building. I think that we should have more social workers and resources to deal with restorative practices and scenarios that happen in our school without SRO. Peter Kelman. I'm Peter Kelman. I'm a resident of Montpelier. I'm a retired lifelong educator. I taught in East Harlem in New York City. I trained teachers in Vermont, New Hampshire, Connecticut, Massachusetts, and New York, and in my 50 years of experience as an educator, I have never seen a police presence in school be a positive factor. I have seen many times which it has been a negative factor, and I think it's very important that Montpelier lead in this removal of uniformed officers from our schools. There's just no place for them, and I have been in some very tough schools in Baltimore, in Chicago, around the country, and in the schools that I saw where the best control was, there were no uniformed officers. Thank you. Thanks, Peter, and thanks for being brief as well. Mariah Boy Bafa, you are last in queue. So again, please state your name and... Hi. My name is Caitlin Brower Moore. I'm on Mariah's Zoom. That's why I asked you to state your name. So I really, I won't keep this brief. I just want to say as my own personal experience, I witnessed the officer on the playground the other day, and it made me very uncomfortable to see someone armed on the playground. I think it's extremely unnecessary in our community. I'm not saying that we're not immune to bad things happening, but I do not think an armed guard serves a purpose on our campus in any way, shape or form. I feel very strongly about that. I also have a kid who is biracial. So according to statistics, it makes me even more uneasy having someone armed on the campus. And I also just want to stand behind everything that everyone else has said. I really think that everyone has stated all the reasons why it's unsafe and unnecessary. So I just want to support everyone else's statements. Great. Thank you. I close this public comment. I want to thank everyone for... One more hand, Jim. And there's one more. I accidentally put my hand up and I'm glad he put it back up. I thought he had already spoken. Oh, sorry. Nate, that's my fault.  Hello. I'm Nate and I'm from East Roxbury, and this is my wife, May, and you've spent a little bit. I'm not going to speak to probably anything that has the weight or the gravity that you just heard from all the other participants. And it's definitely not going to be as articulate as some of the former graduates. And I'm not really a participant. So I'm really just looking for an equitable transportation situation. Last year, there was, depending on how you count it, 33 stops in the AM, 33 stops in the PM out in the Roxbury area. This year, there's around 10 in the AM and 10 in the PM, and that's for the village school and middle school. Basically, only after about two years into this merger, transportation is already an issue from Roxbury to Montfayre. It's like 25 miles from Roxbury to Montfayre. It's a fair distance travel. And so I would argue that there's a greater need in Roxbury than there is in Montfayre. There's lots of different options in Montfayre. And you're not going to walk to school from Roxbury. Ms. Cohn actually said it fairly well when talking about something else, the intent versus the impact. I know the intent of maybe saving a few dollars or dealing with COVID protocols or whatever is there, but sometimes the impact you don't feel until later on. And that's pretty much it. Thank you. Thanks, and sorry. Sorry, I missed you. Again, thanks to everyone for the very thoughtful input. It's very helpful. And I know that these are important matters. And also now it takes time and some courage to speak and write on these things. So we appreciate all the feedback we've gotten, not just tonight, but over the last several weeks. I just want to make a little comment about the agenda. I know some people, I know most of the people here for the SRO. We do have a few matters in front of the SRO, especially because a couple of these involve some outside people who are going to speak briefly. I do not want to hold them around while we have the SRO conversation, which I think will be far lengthier than any of these. So we are going to try to move through the couple agenda items before the SRO quickly so we can get to that discussion and let these people resume their evenings if they choose to do so. Jim, I have a question on the agenda. With regard to the negotiations committees that we were going to talk about in tandem with a committee to address policing in schools, is now the appropriate time to add that to the agenda or can that be added later? Why do we add that to the agenda? Just assignments on negotiation committee because it may affect the results tonight. Okay. So I move that we add to the agenda and this should be a five-minute matter. I move that we add to the agenda a discussion about or appointing and finalizing the appointments of the negotiations committee members. I don't think we need a movement. I think we just can do it. Okay, let's do it. Right, Bridget. You go ahead, Jim. Okay. So we've added that. We'll tack that on after the SRO conversation and it will blend with that as well. Okay, so let's move quickly here. Consent agenda, do I have a motion to approve the consent agenda? I move that we approve the consent agenda. I go second. I second it. I second that with the additions of co-curriculars. You want to add the addition of co-curriculars? Right, and I think there's one new or the warrants that came across today. Okay, with the additions of the co-curriculars and the warrants that came across, why do you make that motion Ryan so it's clear on the record that we added those? Sure. So I would make a motion that we approve the consent agenda with the additions of the warrants as well as the co-curricular appointments. Great. Do I have a second to that agenda? I'll second it. Anakit? Yes. Okay, great. Any discussion? No? Okay. Emma? Aye. Anakit? Aye. Jill? Aye. Laura? Aye. Ryan? Aye. Bridget? Aye. Andrew? Aye. Barry? Aye. Great. Consent agenda passes. So now on to Mike Barry and the virtual learning update. Mike and Libby? Yeah, so we just wanted to give the board a little update about what's happening with VTVLC and I'll give the grand scheme overview and then Mike can give any particulars and answer any questions.  My family's trying to take care of her, but never know. She might start trying to participate in the school board meeting. The VTVLC has been in business for the last 12 years and we were encouraged to go through them with the state of Vermont as were every district pretty much in the state and most of us did. And as a result, they are pretty overwhelmed with the capacity that has been forced upon them. And so there's been, it has not been smooth, let's say, in terms of getting our students who are signed up for VTVLC in grade seven through 12. Mike has been largely taking the load on with that and been doing a very good job of talking with parents individually to get their questions answered as best he can. However, he's not in charge of that program. He's just the liaison for MRPS to VTVLC. So we just wanted to give the board an update around that. Mike, you want to give a, just an overview of what's happening currently with VTVLC? Sure. So this past Monday, they rolled out their course content for grade seven through 12. So people began to get their connections with teachers and schedules and all of those components came fast and furious. It was a lot of information to really take in. And so this week, Sue Monmony is also assisting with directing a program. So the two of us have been connecting with families and students individually to work through schedules, technology glitches, communication with VTVLC, things like that. We're hopeful that after this week and next week, things will get established and a routine will be going for folks. We've had some positive feedback as well that people really connected with their teachers and felt good about it. And once we kind of got through the initial confusion around enrollment and the technology systems that VTVLC uses and logins and things like that, people are starting to get settled down. So I'm hopeful that it will be good. The teachers, the parents and the kids have been awesome. They've been very resilient and patient and supportive. So that's been great. And just a reminder of the board, just in case you're asked, the reason for going with VTVLC at seven through 12 is mainly because of licensure. Because we can't put kids in like just nobody can just teach science. A person who's licensed has to teach kids science. And so in order, because we're so small, in order to have that happen in a virtual capacity internally, we would have had to take multiple teachers out of the scenario for in-person instruction. And our numbers were not justifying that. So just so the board is really clear as to why we didn't do a homegrown seven through 12, that's why we just couldn't do it with licensure and with the demand for in-person without hiring a considerable amount more or attempting to hire a considerable amount more teachers. So I just want to make sure the board is clear on that. But I know Mike is more than happy and I'm more than happy to answer any questions. If you have any around that virtual learning, we just wanted to give you an update on that piece. Because that seems to be the one piece that really isn't going smoothly in terms of school opening in regards to in-person versus virtual instruction. Great. Thanks. Thanks, Mike Libby. Any questions for Mike or Libby on virtual learning? Yeah, I have a question. Mike, I've heard that and I think there was a BT Dagger piece about this. I've heard that there are teacher shortages for BTVLC, which that means access to remote learning is limited. Are we experiencing that in our district? I know other districts are. Yeah, it's a great question. It's a debate between is it a teacher shortage or a student slot shortage? So what they're doing right now is trying to either increase the amount of students that a particular teacher has or hire additional staff in. Really, it was in very particular areas. So for example, in middle school, most districts weren't able to form a partnership with their local specials or electives. And so they were relying on BTVLC to provide electives. And now there's not enough elective slots for students in middle school. Luckily, you know, and you could see this in the blog, if you go back early on, I was like, we're going to wait and see what we have for elective options. We're not sure. And it was very quickly clear that it was not an advantage for our students to take a part of that because there weren't enough slots. So we're lucky that we have our amazing essential arts crew at Main Street Middle School able to provide those elective opportunities for our students because there's not enough of them to go around at BTVLC for middle school students. They had a few other spots like I think middle school science, they had one section that was a little short. And then I think a few maybe one or two at the high school level, but they weren't really impacting us in particular. We did have to go to other places for some advanced language courses, just simply because they weren't offered at BTVLC, but not because of any shortage. We also have, Andrew, we do have a waiting list. It's a small one, but we have one for a few families who for different reasons, but we do have about four or five families who are on our waiting list currently that Mike is closely talking with because they want in person and they wanted it after the first day of school happened for the large part or very close to the first day of school. And there just simply weren't any slots because of the staffing that we were able to give BTVLC and the slots that that gave us. Thank you, Mike. I was asked, sorry, I had a quick question. Go for it, Ron. Mike, I was asked just then I didn't have the answer. Are students who are enrolled in the remote virtual option able to access any school meal throughout the school week? Yes. So we have sign up information on our website. And we also Anna's been kind of leading the charge on this too. We have some folks that are working out how to deliver in the cases of dire need. But we do have opportunities both at our MHS location and Roxbury for virtual families to access meals. Ryan, I'm glad you asked that question. Any child to the age of 18 can access a free meal from us. The information is all on our website. And we're we have meals out there pinkies out there every day around 10, 15 for MHS pickup. And we Anna's worked with Montpelier, the PI organization to get volunteer drivers to to volunteer to drop meals off to families, which we're doing with a few families as well. I just had a question about what you just said. Does that include student kids who live within our district but are not students of our district? Yes, any child through the age of 18 right now can get a free meal from our schools through December 31st. Thank you. Further questions for Mike or Libby? Next up is the busing challenges at RVS. Stacey Emerson with us. There are way too many squares. Stacey, you here? I am. Good evening. All right, great. So let me introduce you Stacey. Stacey works for our busing company. I work closely with her on routes and all kinds of things. And she looks like she is still in her office, which she'll probably be there till late hours tonight because she's been working very hard. She wanted to give the board an update on what was happening in Roxbury and why things were happening. So take it away, Stacey. I feel like I'm not as prepared as everybody else was earlier. So good evening. I'd like to thank your communities for your continued support over the many years that we have provided transportation to the Montpelier Roxbury Public Schools. Prior to the collaboration, we served each of you individually and I have been the operations manager for your communities for the past 13 years. I actually am happy that I have not ever had to do this. So this is very unusual because we have not had any problems prior to this year. I will just speak openly and starting out by saying that COVID was not something that any of us could have predicted. It has greatly impact your communities, our line of business, and our state and home. What I will say is closing down in March was not expected for us or yourself. And the initial closure was for two weeks and then it continued on. And I would like to commend Libby because she reached out to us in June with the concerns of what August might bring. So with that being said, Libby and I met and had a conversation in regards to what next year 2021 might look like. And during that conversation it was explained that I did have concerns in regards to staffing, as I'm sure that your building did with staff and principals and so on and so forth. It added a little bit more of a detail for me because the State of Vermont Department of Motor Vehicles office was closed. And the reason that that office is so important to our company is because if I lost five drivers from March to August, that meant that anybody that put an application in was unable to be trained, tested, or all of the above. So that put our company in a difficult situation. And by saying that, Libby quickly started to do the bus surveys based on how we determined we would utilize your buses in your district where they were necessary. We then did the final survey and I was submitted a list of where your ridership was needed to its fullest capacity. And with that documentation, I looked at it and developed the routes. I can't give you exact numbers for every route, but what I can say is when you're managing a business and you have to provide service to communities, you look at who you serve as a whole and not individually. When I reviewed the list for Roxbury Village School for the elementary portion only, there were eight students that needed transportation. We had four drivers get done from July 13th to August 26th. All drivers of the Montpelier were Roxbury Public Schools. So that's four out of seven drivers that I did not predict. And so it took some quick, quick managing skills and route developments and bringing out the other 46 routes that we currently serve and provide to other districts to say, how am I going to fix this for Montpelier? And not start for drivers short. So I did quickly do what I needed to do and adjusted other driver schedules to compensate and provide service to all the districts that were necessary. And I covered the Roxbury Village School afternoon run without any problems, but I was struggling with the morning run with the eight students. So I communicated my concerns with Libby as I knew that it was a possibility that Roxbury was not going to utilize the bus. However, we were preparing a route just in case that did occur. But what I didn't predict was the driver shortage to its fullest capacity anyway. So I am aware that there is a concern and we were able to start off the school year with two days serving the Roxbury Village School. And that was because you did not provide transportation to Union Elementary and Main Street on those first two days. But I did quickly respond to the community to let them know that we were struggling and that there would not be drivers on Thursday and Friday. Now, an update as far as the State of Vermont Department of Motor Vehicles is they opened two weeks ago. The closest appointment at this point is October 28th. We do have two applicants. We're doing our best to get our applicants trained and put into service. But we obviously can't rush that process if you have someone that's never driven a school bus and we do pride ourselves in the safety that we provide for training. Your children are on that bus and we feel that it's necessary and to not move it along. The other concern that we have is we do background checks on all of them aside from the individual printing that is a fingerprinting that is provided within your supervisory union. And it's about a three week process. The only saving grace was last Friday night. I received a call from a past employee that was already licensed. I immediately sent a text message to Libby saying I think my prayers have been answered basically in that I have a licensed driver that's going to be good to go as soon as we can get everything done. It wasn't about a disservice to your company, your school district, excuse me, it was that we suffer from the ramifications of COVID. And I do apologize for that. And as I said I've served your districts for 13 years and I've never missed a school bus route and I do take that quite personally. So we're doing our best. I am sorry. I will continue to serve your district the best I can during these times. And until then we did provide an alternate form of transportation to Roxbury. And it doesn't necessarily meet parent satisfaction and I do wholeheartedly understand that. But we're doing the best that we can and we have abided by a contract up until this point and I wouldn't say that we're not trying to live to the standards that we have always lived to. We just simply can't during these times with the way that state affairs are running and I'm not going to lie. I think that unemployment is really impacting people getting out and accepting positions. So I basically asked Libby if I could join to explain ourselves because I've never been placed in this situation and missing a route and it does sting me a little that it's happening because I do feel very badly about it. But I am doing the best I can given the situation and I will continue to do that. And as soon as we can get all of the training done for the already licensed driver that stepped back through our doors they will be on that Roxbury run in the morning for the students or any additional students that are needing transportation. But I do want to state that during over our year serving Roxbury that we have in fact provided three buses to Roxbury because of the fact that the community is stretched out and it's a two hour bus ride for the high school students and the middle school students coming from Montpelier. So we have provided three buses over the past several years with no additional cost to your districts and I think it's fair to state that because we do appreciate your business and so basically that's all I have to say but I'm willing to take any questions if anybody has any. Great thank you Stacey that was very helpful and really appreciate the explanation of the detail and all the work you're putting in to try to get the kids to school safely under very unique and challenging circumstances. Joel is going to have your hand up. Yeah thank you I just wanted to thank Stacey for coming tonight to explain that. There were things that would never have occurred to me that have impacted your work and I know that you guys are working as hard as you can. I was glad to hear Nate and we've heard from other Roxbury families at passport meetings and continue to about that concern and so having that explanation of these factors that are beyond your control but that you're working the hardest you can to get the service back up is really reassuring and I can it's obvious how much you care and you want this to be done right so I just that meant a lot to you came and said that and and I appreciate that and I appreciate your your explanation of those factors so thank you. Thank you. Great thank you Jill. Jim go ahead sorry. No I was just going to ask for anyone else want to have a question or comment. I just have a brief comment which is to our Roxbury families who are impacted by this a couple of meetings ago and I don't expect people to necessarily tune in regularly to these meetings so we certainly welcome it. The board did affirm that it is committed to providing busing services to Roxbury even if the bus is less full than usual we believe the board from what I took away from that conversation was the board confirmed that that is a valuable service to the community and that we don't want to remove that service as a cost cutting measure during these difficult economic times and so I just think it's important for those Roxbury families to know we are committed as a board to continuing to provide busing services to Roxbury and I welcome any other board members if I might have misspoken there but that was my takeaway from that conversation. Thanks Andrew. Ryan did you have your hand up? I did I just wanted to say thanks Stacey I understand you're in a really tough position right now um maybe one question on the specific side of things there has been a big change this year in the fact that the middle school high school bus isn't picking kids up on a route it's just picking kids up at the village school which for the folks on the west side of the mountain it's not a big deal but for the folks on the east side on the 12th side it's a bit of a challenge because they have to come all the way over around to the village school to get their kids in the bus are there any options route wise for those kids who live in East Roxbury to be able to be picked up on the east side? So the reason that that was implemented was due to the health questions and the temperature checks for the COVID procedures that was something that your district is doing and so it was a district's decision because it was difficult to find a monitor to ride that bus every day it actually has been difficult for the past two years for your staff your district to find a monitor to ride those buses so that that was implemented by your district so that all students could have the health checks performed prior to loading on the school bus and collaborating with one another if you know I if you could find a monitor we'd be happy to do the full route you know that that's really something that would come from your individual schools but yeah that that really was just based on the health questionnaire responses you know thanks for clarifying that helps us understand what the situation is I've got a question does that mean that if the health checks are not mandatory if the health department says that health checks on the buses are not mandatory because for whatever reason is that does that mean that that could change? I can take that one Stacey right now we do have a choice as to whether to do the health checks before the getting on the bus or at the school building in collaboration with our teachers union in particular we were both pretty adamant that those kids are on the bus for over a half hour over 30 minutes every morning and to have them on a bus without that health check happening we were we did not want that to happen that was my decision my final decision to make we don't we it's a long time on the bus they're in relatively close proximity and we wanted the health check to happen before the bus ride. I would also say I appreciate that because we do have our staff on there as well and with the driver shortage if you had a student that entered that did have COVID that sat closely to the driver that staff member would be out for the period necessary if there was a quarantine so you know every most districts that I am serving are providing a monitor within the central Vermont area and you know I can say that I think that the change was a little bit more specific because of the fact that people were struggling to find a monitor to ride the bus more on the northwestern side of the state because I do manage for mountain transit as well and they they were struggling to get monitors and I know that Libby has struggled as well but she was able to provide some and it's just it's a tough area to get someone if you you know if Libby reached out to someone in the local community at Roxbury that was fingerprinted and wanted to ride then we'd be happy to go back to a full-time route if there was someone there to provide those temperature checks and the health check. Libby um who do um can you help me understand who does it now like does the does the bus driver have to do it now or do we have like a teacher who's there that takes care of the staff at Roxbury Village School so it's either the new nurse at Roxbury Village School or I would imagine it's Beth okay yeah so the so the idea is that if we had a monitor on the bus the monitor could do the checking at any stop along the way the monitor would do it on the way yes so then the kid wouldn't be transported ill to Montpelier where a parent would have to come pick them up. Thank you. Any other uh questions or comments? Um one last question aside from um fingerprinting and background check are there any other uh qualifications that a person has to have in order to be a bus monitor? They have to be able to use the thermometer and be good with kids. All right thank you. Well thanks again um Stacey really appreciate the explanation and and your hard work and and the time. Thank you. Thank you all. Next on the agenda is planning community outreach for budget development um I'm tempted to kick it till October 2nd um unless others feel differently um I also understand yeah right now outreach is going to be a little more challenging given that meeting a person is difficult um do we want to have this discussion do we want to table it for next time um I think if we start in earnest after the next meeting we should be able to get input back by the middle of October which I think will will that still be timely Libby um how about this yeah I mean I agree with tabling the overall discussion perhaps but we have a lot of members of the public here so this is an opportunity to explain what it is that we're trying to have outreach on to a large number of people interested in yes in what we're doing so maybe we should talk about a little bit more what we're thinking about yeah no good point um Jim no yeah Emma do you think we could just push that conversation like switch the is it too late to switch the agenda so that we discuss SRO first and then budget outreach second um I think we could um some of the benefit of having the public available is that they're here and I feel like they're less likely to be here after the SRO discussion so if if we were going to keep it brief if we're if we're taking up people's whole evenings I don't know how long um this conversation would take but if it's just kind of a briefing to let people know what we're even outreaching about that seems useful for doing respectful of people who showed up tonight solely to discuss SRO and have already waited a while to discuss that and um they're welcome to stay on and now that they know how important that budget outreach discussion will be maybe they'll stay hopefully they'll stay but I feel um bad about making assumptions about people's timeline tonight yeah I know I kind of agree I I do agree with Virginia I will just give an overview of kind of what it is um so basically what we try to do each year is we try to uh meet with as many uh community members as possible um usually we don't have meetings in September with this number of public um participants which I think is both the product of what's on the agenda but also zoom um we've usually tackled it by having you know various board members just reach out to you know constituencies whether it's like the senior center or you know some of the business groups or the friends of popular schools um yeah and similar similar places where we know that there's kind of large audiences who are particularly tuned into the needs of the school and try to listen and get as many as much feedback as we can from the public about what the priorities for the budget are um so I guess I will take this opportunity to say that if you go to the MRPS website uh under school board we have all of our all of our emails are listed and we certainly and we're both welcome and appreciate feedback on areas where you feel there are budgetary needs uh between uh now and um you know we're shaping the budget in the next you know month and a half to two months so please feel free to give either direct suggestions or suggestions of convenience that we can have on a smaller scale to listen um you know we we do have problems if too many board members meet outside of of informal meeting in terms of open meeting laws um but we can certainly meet uh you know one or two of us can meet with various groups uh in a listening mode and bring that information back to the board so um that is the type of outreach that we try to do uh and and we very much welcome it so um you know members of the public please be cognizant of that and um let's see how the SRO discussion goes my uh my it's my my I think my preference would be to um hopefully get some feedback from folks over the next few weeks as a result of of what I just said uh thank you Bridget and um then kind of more formally see where we at on the second and do some coordinated research then rather than try to have a rushed discussion after what's probably gonna be a long and pretty evolved discussion now. Jim one one thought I have while we do have so many community members here though is if there are members of the community that think it would be helpful to talk with a board member um about a budget issue or about the budget in general uh and you're part of a group and you can think of groups that you know one or two board members should meet with it would be helpful to gather input from it might be helpful to meet with some new groups than just you know the usual suspects that we generally meet but this might be a good opportunity to gather that input so and we'd be very willing to do it on Zoom I think in some ways um you know a Zoom call like you know what some of the things we've done in the past is organized you know sessions and you know worked with community members and had people come to the library and meet and you know in some way with Zoom and screen share I think we could probably do a lot of that virtually um maybe uh easier than we can do it uh in person so um you know please do think creatively about you know groups interests you know some you know including the the parents groups associated with each school uh we really want to do uh we really do want to hear uh your thoughts and your priorities on budget especially when we're going into a budgetary year that is going to be potentially unpredictable and difficult so so we appreciate that feedback and welcome it with that emails yes but with that I do want to thank everyone for their patience um and move into the SRO conversation because I know that that is where most of you are uh why most of you are here um so the SRO conversation um start with Libby giving us a kind of an overview of uh the position and the history and then uh the board is going to discuss next steps to um likely put in place a process that that addresses your concerns in a more long-term fashion and also talk about some immediate steps we can take to address concerns in the interim can I ask one quick question who's sorry this is Caitlin can I ask one quick question Caitlin who for our more I spoke earlier that I mean I do want to at the time for public comment is over um and we are not opening it up for public comment now we will probably have a process that allows for public comment but this is this um we we don't have open public comment meetings which I know can be frustrating but um it's it's not how we structure meetings but we will um we will almost certainly have further opportunities for public input in a setting like this um as well obviously as um you know through further you know email and other correspondence so um I don't mean to to shut anyone down but if I open it up to but I'm gonna to one person I'm gonna open it up to everyone and um that that's just unfortunately how fortunately or for unfortunately how we structure a meeting so um so Libby sure uh so we're gonna start with just a brief overview of the history of the SRO um talk about the purpose what the current work is what we've heard so far from public comment from other emails some desired outcomes from multiple sources and then my recommendation of the board of possible avenues to continue so that's what I have for the board tonight just to start with the history of the SRO um I did some digging on this MRPS has had a school resource officer on duty for 12 years it started as a partnership in the DARE program way back when in 1992 in regards to substance abuse the program um at that time I'm told didn't show any influence whatsoever on on substance abuse so they looked into other models and decided to go with the SRO at that point according to old risk youth be sort behavior survey data because the newest data that kids took last year is still not available to us although it was supposed to be available in April still not available to us um drug and alcohol use has shown a significant decline in the past 12 years but this also mirrors national data for teens um so it's not just MRPS specific over those years we've had three people who have held this position uh the SRO is housed at MHS uh and has worked in all three of the Montpelier schools it's a halftime duty police officer and halftime at our schools the majority of their time has been spent at MHS uh with MSMS in a very close second to the time spent however there are there have been significant needs at UES on a case by case basis typically this school year because of COVID guidelines and all the restrictions we have and things we need um there simply isn't a space for the SRO the SRO is working completely out of the police department currently over 12 years two students have been taken out of MHS in handcuffs uh both of those students went through the restorative justice practice one ended up going through the courts the other didn't the MOU that was put in the board packet for the SRO position was written and signed several years ago um prior to anyone who is currently working for either organization the Montpelier police department or Montpelier Roxbury it's not updated yearly but it needs to be and it's not a complete representative of what the current role is I believe that was probably written when the SRO was instituted in 12 years ago the district budgeted and has committed to pay the Montpelier police department which I'll call NPD at certain points 45,490 dollars this year for the SRO position for this fiscal year uh this is the first time in the past 10 years that concerns regarding the SRO have come up this is understandable given the national context that we find ourselves in but I did check with my predecessor and he had never heard any um concerns about the SRO in his seven years at MRPS so uh the purpose of the SRO uh from my position is that the district and school administrators have a responsibility to keep all kids safe while they're in our care we rely on the Montpelier police department to be the expert in school safety and lead us in a direction that best supports this responsibility in addition we rely on NPD to provide support to students families and staff as we collectively navigate potential significant safety facts the SRO is the main point of contact between the district and the NPD and that's been the model for this goal for the past 12 years having said that that doesn't mean the model can't change or shouldn't change it's just been the model for the past 12 years the current work between MRPS and MBD in regards to SRO they do do traffic control upon request for school entry and exit of students people saw that at UES last week and see an SMS sometimes this week whenever there's a special event we they do safety for us so good examples of that are the Black Lives Matter flag raising and student climate protests that happened last year the mandatory we have mandatory monthly safety team meetings at both the district level and the school level the SRO is a member of that team in both areas they are responsible for safety planning active shooter drills emergency evacuation lockdown situations all of these things are mandatory for the district for Vermont statue they do a lot of the safety training for staff or they provide expertise in that in that area they're the liaison between the district and the police department it's a point of communication when significant safety events are occurring in Montpelier resulting in the lockdown of schools good example of that is when the breadcropper was on campus and just for the board's information the SRO was actually the first person to respond and point that person away from the building it's my understanding the person was in the moving towards the building armed the SRO saw them came out of the building and pushed them towards the the soccer field conducting threat assessments when a threat's made to a school building staff member or student so examples are bomb threats weapons threats school shooting threat etc that in my tenure the SRO has done and that's so I'm in my third year so that's approximately 10 to 15 threat assessments have been conducted by the SRO those are only the ones I'm a made aware of I've not always made aware of them I'm a made I'm made aware of the more significant ones but oftentimes that happens when I'm not I'm not I'm not aware of it they're often the first point of contact and for students and to see something say something campaign that's national regarding threats they also monitor our social media accounts for threats made against the school students and staff which is also happened a few times they work with the school team outside organizations and families regarding extreme behaviors some some examples in my tenure have been one student stalking another in a inappropriate way sexual harassment or abuse etc they do residency checks for us they do well person checks they accompany the social workers and other school staff on home visits went necessary they provide guidance and support in extreme safety situations so for example my first year we had a significant child custody situation that was that we were worried about potential kidnapping and the SRO was on UAS's campus quite a bit during that time in order to make sure those kids were safe they participate when there's runaways from school or home and that has happened a few times in my tenure as well they investigate crimes committed by students on school grounds they refer students to appropriate justice outcomes the courts are sort of justice that kind of thing they serve as the district truancy officer and make home visits to students who have been truant for lengths of time they serve as the liaison between the district dcf and family court they work with student or with schools and drug and alcohol violations they're the member of the child protection team in each school building they provide preventative control so examples of that are vandalism or drug pairing a paraphernalia on school grounds homeless encampments on school grounds and they do provide de-escalation and support of adults mainly overly angry parents or guardians so that's primarily the list of ways we have used the SRO in the past i did want to highlight in the first week and a half of school the SRO has done traffic control they've done residency checks they've done well person checks they have dealt with a runaway situation and they dealt with homeless encampments that are currently on the high school grounds and vandalism at the middle school and also drug paraphernalia that's been found on the on the high school grounds so those things have happened this school year already in the first week and half of school that the SRO has assisted the school district in um so far we've heard a lot from the public and i really appreciate i think the zoom meeting allows for easier public comment which i appreciate um and in the public comments to the school board thus far just as a recap and i won't capture what was said tonight uh police shootings of unarmed black men at nationwide have placed a significant lens on police behaviors understandably so and rightfully so uh armed police officers significantly impact young people's of color in a negative way vermont data shows that police stop people of color more than white people so for instance traffic stops it's also been commented on that there's there have been media reports across the nation regarding police in schools and classrooms interacting with students negatively that was also brought up tonight there's mentioned there's been mention of seeking opportunities for community engagement and needing to put more weight to community members of colors comments as compared to others there's um specific SROs in our schools uh have been stated in public comment that that shouldn't be considered uh this is a larger issue than the people who have done the job at MRPS um some people have commented that they would like the money budgeted for the SRO to be spent on more mental health experts people do not see the need for a police officer to de-escalate students in in classrooms and just to be clear that doesn't happen in classrooms but that's some of this the public comments that have happened so far in the in the public comment section of board meetings and I'm sure I did not capture all of them but those were the main themes that I that were standing out to me other comments that I received or the board has received or we've noticed through social media the community at large who have contributed to this conversation um are mixed in their opinions of the SRO we have heard quite a bit in public comment and some emails around um uh negative reactions the SRO and there have been other other people who are in support of the SRO there are people who have had very positive experiences individually with their children in the SRO people in the Montpelier community largely support the Black Lives Matter movement and as well as people of color in our community um people in support of the SRO view it as a positive example of community policing and or have had positive experiences with the program in Montpelier schools officials for the city of Montpelier view the school SRO as a positive aspect of the Montpelier community would like to see a continued and people are concerned with an armed officer on the school grounds that's kind of just a summary of what has happened outside of board meetings just so everybody's on the the same page there so as we were talking thinking about desired outcomes I want to just stress to the board and the community that this is incredibly complicated matter it's not it's not an either or but an and and issue there's a continuum of support that needs to happen and it's not get rid of it or not get rid of it there is a role for Montpelier police department and the Montpelier Roxbury public schools to work together collaboratively be it as an SRO or not but there is a need for that this is very very complicated and needs a lot of conversation around it so that we we can get through all that complication together the district needs a responsive collaborative relationship with the Montpelier police department the district relies on the SRO as an expert in school safety who knows our system students and many of the families who are quite honestly harder for school employees to build relationships with the district can look at other ways to structure a relationship with the police department however it needs to be recognized that this relationship is imperative for overall student and staff safety and is something another school mental health supports personnel would not be able to handle there are other responsibilities that we need the police that the police department fills the city has stressed that it wants to prevent problems before they happen support young people who are struggling to find a different path and play an active and positive role in the community the city believes that when there is a healthy relationship between NPD and MRPS then this relationship results in more of the types of corrective measures that we want to see than it would if we did not have that relationship there are many community members who have expressed that they want no armed police officer to be on the school grounds and are adamant about that and there are many community members who have expressed that they want their children to learn that police are helpers and view police officers on school grounds as a way to do this so I just represent all those opinions not as my own but just as that there are many truths to this story and that as we work through the complicated issue that that those everybody needs to be heard in those conversations I also wanted to take a moment to outline what the district has done in the past past couple years I can only speak for my tenure but in the past two years in regards to mental health and SEL the investments that been made in response to some of the comments around we just need more mental health people in order to and then problems go away so in the past two years the school board has added a licensed social worker to be a district-wide SEL coach in fiscal year 19 and with that social emotional learning coach significant work has been done in clarifying district-wide SEL goals work is currently underway and developing capacity and working with students with some social emotional learning with all staff we've added a behaviorist at the teacher level for MSMS in fiscal year 20 we have had that position at UES for quite a while we've hired a BCBA in fiscal year 20 that's more qualified than the teacher she replaced so a BCBA is a board certified behavior analyst currently we're currently negotiating to rework the instructional assistant contract to purposely build internal capacity regarding social emotional learning we've done significant professional development with Joel Van Lent who's the doctor of psychology and Dave Melnick who's a licensed independent clinical social worker regarding building resiliency in school for kids who have experienced trauma across k-12 and we're developing an understanding of how to use restorative practices in the school building at MSMS and MHS admittedly we have a lot longer to go there but we have put i shouldn't put i shouldn't say but and we have put significant resources into social emotional learning and mental health across the district and the board should be commended for that the district currently employs four licensed social workers four and a half FTE and guidance counselors two behavior specialists under the teacher contract one behavior coach and one BCBA that's a significant amount of support for mental health services internally for such a small district our internal mental health and SEL supports are significant and we have plans to continue to build our capacity in each budget so far that i have brought to the board with my team we have increased our SEL capacity and our mental health supports for students we are continuing to strategically build our internal mental health capacity out of necessity as washington county mental health does not have a business model or the capacity to support our district but and there are roles that the SRO or the police department play that our mental health staff need staffing do not play and will not play in the future so as the board thinks about potential pathways forward for for um for us i can think of a few uh one the board tells tells me superintendent they will not support a budget that includes expenses for an SRO and the administration will problem solve on alternative ways forward the another way we could go is board directs the superintendent to revise the outdated SRO MOU which needs to happen anyway with the city of montpellier to reflect current practice and potential limitations for this particular school year another way we could go is the board appoints a board committee of board members the superintendent faculty city and community members with the goal of defining a pathway forward in regards to the police department's role with montpellier rocksbury public schools or for the the board could go with policy um that creates a you could create a policy that details the guidelines for the district's relationship with the montpellier police department um or you could do a combination of those kind of things or something other than that but those were to be the forward areas that i would i would recommend the board to choose so i'm happy to take any questions i have my administrators here who have been working very hard um and if anybody has any questions for them as well i know we do um thank you liby that was i think a an excellent overview um i mean i again want to thank uh all the input we've gotten on this i i agree it's a complicated matter i think there's uh you know two concerns that we really need to navigate um i think thoughtfully uh and carefully uh one obviously um is our commitment to diversity equity inclusion and ensuring that uh that our students from groups that have been disproportionately impacted by police uh feel safe in our schools and have a welcoming environment um but i do also believe that there is a a big role in terms of ensuring the safety of our students and staff and i think part of that is a relationship with the police department um and figuring out what the what that relationship should be and and what the the functions um the the format functions of the police department's relationship with the school should be uh and having that clearly delineated and delineated in a way that meets safety needs uh but also uh does not have disproportionate impact um intentionally or or unintentionally on students of color um and other historically marginalized students uh really should be our goal um so i'm i'm just gonna say that i like i think a combination of uh liby's three and four which is a committee to look at this and uh look at it through i think both a budget and a policy lens it may be a new policy it may be just deciding what sort of relationship is consistent with our current policy um and asking for procedures to be structured around that um and i also think in in the interim there needs to be you know some sort of measures put in place and i think instruction from the board on on how to deal with the current position in a way that that provides uh that provides um some some immediate attention to the concerns that have been raised about you know the the presence of particularly armed officers on campus so those are kind of my high level thoughts and uh i obviously want to hear from all the other board members because i know you all have have lots of things and then we will uh decide which course is best and take action. Emma um so i i tend to like to organize my thoughts in writing so i i wrote something um that i'll just read so it may not sound off the cuff because it's not um i want to thank our many many community members who have reached out over the past few months to share their thoughts on having a police presence in our schools the overwhelming majority of the emails letters and personal communications that i have received have been calling for the removal of the school resource officer position we also received a petition today that was signed by almost 350 community members including teachers students caregivers and alums of our schools as a board we need to listen to these concerns and take them seriously our constituents are raising valid and very alarming points on the negative impact that the presence of armed police officers has on our schools and the community some of our families of color have shared their important perspective on how the presence of police officers impact their children and their families it's critical that the voices of people from marginalized groups are amplified and that we do not dismiss these experiences in addition to our own constituents vermont legal aid vermont racial justice alliance the vermont human rights commission the american civil liberties union the n double a cp the advancement project and other organizations are calling for the removal of law enforcement in our schools and a shift of resources to establish restorative justice practices and provide mental health and support services these organizations have been consolidating and presenting very compelling data that shows that school resource officers have not been as effective as we would hope in making schools more safe and that their work disproportionately impacts our students of color students with disabilities and lgbtq plus students one compelling data point that is that black students comprise 15 percent of the nationwide k-12 student population but represent 31 percent of referrals to law enforcement school referrals to law enforcement and 36 percent of school-based arrests arrests as a board we need to take a hard look at the research behind the calls that these organizations are making to remove sros and shift funding i want to point out that the majority of our neighboring school districts do not employ a school resource officer this includes u 32 harwood northfield williams town and stow high schools it is clear to me based on testimony from our community national data on efficacy of sros and statewide data around disciplinary actions in schools that the regular presence of armed police officers in our schools is in violation of our own districts f 22 diversity equity and inclusion policy in that policy we take a firm stand on equity and inclusion which i hope that the board will consider as we make decisions tonight in accordance with that policy i think that it's the right thing to do to temporarily suspend our contract with the montpellier police department until we have the time to thoroughly consider whether having an armed uniformed police officer in our schools is in line with the values of our community so i do have ideas for motions but i want to allow other people to speak yep yeah thanks emma that was um very well said um others jill thanks i'll try to be quick i don't want to be redundant um i have come a long way on responding to this cry from our community over the last few months obviously as you can tell from some of the other topics the board has talked about tonight we're dealing with educating children in a global pandemic which brings with it incredibly real and challenging um obstacles that i've been really blown away by how we've actually been able to get our kids in education however it looks and um the the joy that my daughter feels every day when she comes home because she actually gets to go to school um is because of the work of folks like liby and stacey and all the principals and teachers and the custodial staff and everyone who's worked so hard to make that happen so i was hesitant to tackle or participate um but i do feel like it has been made very clear to me um that this is not a moment that can wait any longer um i also want to respect the opinion of some of the folks who have rightly said that simply removing the school resource officer from the school will not solve the problems that we need to address this would be a first step in a very long long road of hard work but it is a strong first signal to do that um i have to say i as a state employee i've had a couple of really scary some real some false alarm experiences with armed individuals and so uh for me what really um jarred me this week was the photos i got from parents of an armed police officer at the clinic ground of the elementary school after all of the concerns then and experiences we've been hearing i found that uh toned at best and um pretty uh pretty deliberately sending a signal that works i sure hope it was just tone deaf um they were not in the they were not in the street directing traffic they were on the playground at union which we've all worked so hard to get that playground put up and i very clearly my i went right to the handgun on her hip and and had a very um i felt that that was a really big slap in the face to the folks who have been talking to us about this for a month um i just want to add that this does not in any way undo the incredibly good intentions of the school resource officers i'm not clear that the experience that families have had the experiences we've been told about from families of some of the positive influences this does not undo the work that they've done and it does not undo those positive experiences we need to involve our community in not just a conversation or a committee or a study or a policy we need to have the really hard conversations and maybe drag some folks to the table who aren't here tonight who may feel differently about this and the majority of folks in the call to make sure that we're really representing Montpelier but i think if any place can do it Montpelier can i also just wanted to add from a very pragmatic perspective as someone who's a bit of an education policy wonk that um as we are also tackling the very real challenges of our school budget and we're talking about very real in our face black and white challenges about getting food to children and getting children on school buses to come to school that i have no interest in spending our very limited resources going forward on a paid um school resource officer position i love biba's articulation of intent versus impact that's become very clear i think the goals are admirable uh but the reality um is is something we cannot normally need to do something about um and then just i'm sorry i'm talking so long i'll try to be quick and i should have done what emma did and write it out um would be listed a lot of things that the police officer does that are very real challenges it's not all rosy and montpelier we do need an experienced law enforcement or some sort of community support i sure hope if we needed help from the montpelier police department for traffic for a major event for a protest for wellness checks for runaway students for crimes on campus for dcf issues or guardianship or custody scares knowing how close they are i sure hope they'd still show up even if we didn't have a school resource officer um i'll close with i was looking back on my notes from some of the other parents we've heard from the school resource officer seems to be there for the adults and not the children so um i've come a long way on this thought and i just i support emma's um uh sentiment that we need to take action immediately but then also obviously come up with doing the hard work of moving forward thank you hey gel um others uh i would like to weigh in but emma and gel have been so eloquent and i really don't have much to add except to say that um i agree that we need to do something now that the overwhelming um response from the community has been really extraordinary um this is a tense night i think probably for most of us um it always is when we've heard a lot from the public and we've gotten and i try to reframe that in my mind as this is our community showing that they care it's our community showing up and that's extraordinary to see um and particularly in times like this it's really it's really wonderful to see that we can show up for each other show up for other people in our community by um organizing around the issue and i do um i do think that we should take take some action to um limit the presence of the um sro in our buildings uh going forward but also um i do not want to lose sight that there are very practical and real concerns where the district and the police department need to have a good solid cooperative working relationship to to maintain um safety for our students and um achieve some of what liby was describing and so i would also very much support some kind of a study a committee a task force that includes many community members to try to understand how we can have a liaison or some other kind of relationship that's a little bit more you know where we have some good understanding around some of these topics with the mpd but without the the um this particular role that's all i have to say thank you virgin um i i want to i want to second um what has pretty much been said here and i'll try not to be redundant but one thing that i do feel strongly about um is that we are we live in an empowering community and community action is the only way that real reforms of this nature can take effect and um clearly our schools need to begin taking greater action on some of these issues and i think we will have lost an opportunity if we just say liby go work with the police department on this or um the board will take care of this this is a great opportunity to come together as a community because this is a community issue and so i think we need a process in place where katelyn can voice her concerns and make her comments not just in this public comment box at the beginning of the meeting i think we need a space and i think the school board is a great can create a great platform and a great space to have this conversation not just about the SRO but the rule of police in and around Montpelier schools and how they conduct themselves in those settings you know if that police officer was on the playground was not armed and was maybe interacting differently with the public you know it might have been a different situation um i'm not certain but um i do think we need a public process in place to gather input in a productive manner and to work through this as a community i think we need to clearly define our aims responsibilities and expectations when it comes to school safety we need to give extra thought and care um for how the impact how this impacts marginalized students and families because i just don't think that the status quo is tenable like and i don't think it can wait for the what FY 22 budget where you know this is an issue before us right now and i think we have a great opportunity for us so that's all i have to say on that good thank you andrew i'd like to make comment i don't want to belittle the point that we've all made our um people before me have made um i think i'm in agreement with pretty much what's been said in terms of the need to take the action uh now because uh the the impact that we've heard that the i'm having an armed police officer on the um on the on the kids and on the community is pretty evident so um i'd be lying if i said that you know the majority of the people are that i've heard from are against uh having a police officer present at the school but at the same time i don't want to marginalize what libya said and i appreciate libya appreciate you giving us an overview of summary um i do appreciate having that um input from the city as well and knowing you know what the at least having a little bit of idea of what what the intent of the SRO is or that program is um so i don't definitely don't want to marginalize that but the need to take the action now um there's got to be some uh uh a different way to approach this because this is definitely um affecting uh some members of the community uh adversely and you know i'm i'm um one of the fortunate i'm a person of color i'm a family of color um i'm fortunate to say that uh me or my family haven't experienced it but i'm not naive to say that you know that's not happening so um i'm i'm positive that you know the people in the community have experienced it and so you know even a few if that few have experienced it that's a reason enough for us as a community to come together and say that let's do something about it um but i you know i i lean i'm leaning towards you know obviously uh not taking a knee jerk reaction and say let's let's stop everything and do that so i want to be sensible so that's i agree that we need to have a informed decision a discussion where not just a 10 minute public open session where people you know expressing their thoughts but having a committee of some sort form where there is a real conversation there is a real input from all sides that that we take into account and make an informed decision but again you know i want to close it out by saying that that shouldn't stop us from taking a real action right now um in the meantime thanks. Thanks Erika. Mara. I just want to raise that lots of folks have also mentioned very specifically exclusionary disciplinary actions like suspensions and expulsions and they're relevant to the discussion of restorative justice of how we are together in community how we help people who are struggling or help people who have um you know made a mistake to come back into community and to be back in relationship and so i just want to point out that the SRO discussion is part of a larger constellation of discussions community engagements um when we talk about the disproportionate impacts on marginalized communities we're talking about everything right i mean we're talking about disproportionate COVID in the same way that we're also talking about disproportionate ways that um socioeconomic circumstances land so it's i think important for the board and for the district to continue to make a commitment that the diversity equity and inclusion statement gets applied to every single solitary question issue program policy procedure that we ever consider and the SRO um discussion i i absolutely agree needs to be a process in a community uh engagement topic but i don't want us to forget that there are lots of things that are related to equity community agreements being in covenant together that are not the SRO and um we can't solve them all with one discussion so i i just want to remind people that um we aren't going to solve all of the inequity issues by just um you know saying well let me let's just i don't know get rid of the SRO because things seem hard right now and that would be an action to take um that uh wouldn't be responsible and it wouldn't be responsive so just clarifying that and mara just because you started with the expulsion and and suspension i know you went to a different place but i just want to be clear the SRO has no role in expulsions or sort of the suspension yeah i i said a lot of words and not i just want to be clear with that and and we haven't in my tenure we haven't had any expulsions and the board would actually be the veteran members of the board would actually be a better person for people to talk to that data because expulsions have to come to the board in order to happen so yeah there's never been an expulsion when i've since i've been on the board which is almost this year i think so that's been that's been brought up also in public comment in regards the SRO and those two things should not be connected liby i just want to point out that one of the reasons why it might be connected in people's minds is because of that outdated memorandum of understanding that you spoke about earlier um to me it looked pretty clear in that memorandum that the SRO would partake in school regular school discipline stuff so i think you know the the idea that we have a 12 year old memorandum of understanding is is part of the problem yeah and i want to i want to i'm sorry i mean i want to emphasize that yes i think it's it's very true that the SRO um does not have a a role in yes suspensions or expulsions and in some of the yeah i think some of the other things that maybe have been attributed to the SRO but i do think it's true that that we have a system of quote unquote justice that disproportionately impacts people of color um in ways that that clearly it does not impact uh our white students and white families of color um and i think the need to rethink our our way of of dealing with justices as a whole is is very important and i think rethinking the SRO is part of that but it is part of a much broader conversation um about real systemic change um and uh you know in some ways these things aren't linked in other ways there's underlying ways that they're very linked so i think understanding those systemic biases um that that have disproportionate impact and are by no means intentional um you know we need to be very conscious that that is there and always apply um other questions or comments uh jim this is jerry can you hear me i can hear you yep okay um so i feel like we do need to take some action tonight because um the community has a sense of urgency that um i think it's important to acknowledge with with action however and i whole heartedly agree with what others have said i think andrew made a crucial point about um continuing to engage on this topic and um so i think we have to do two things because there there are certain um activities that we have to address that lily brought up um and i think without the ability to have these ongoing conversations about keeping the kids safe and safety threats and assessments and that kind of thing we are by just cutting it off we address the symptoms and not the root causes so i i do those the ongoing study of this subject is critical um but uh i do think we need to take some action to address the immediate needs and i was just going to say um there are others some other potential solutions were coming to mind liby when you were talking about some of the things they do um i was at a data science conference and i know there's a excuse me vermont company that does monitor social media um threat assessments they do some of that so there i know there are possibly other ways we could um meet some of these needs i do believe though that an ongoing relationship with the mpd is critical and um i just think it's a two-step thing so we need to address the immediate need we also have to do something to keep that ongoing um conversation about solutions so maybe you said uh number three was appointing a committee a committee to figure out a path forward but maybe we also have some something we can do tonight to address the um the more urgent request we're getting from the community and that's all i had to say yeah jerry we partner with that the the information around the social media monitoring goes to rsro okay i see what you're saying yeah do you know what i mean we already we use that software okay great uh bridge did you have your head up i did but is there any one on the border didn't get a chance to speak yet because i don't want to jump the uh i think we've heard from everyone but perhaps ryan and i don't want to put right on the spot if he doesn't want to be on the spot but no you're fine i can jump in here at the tail end of the roster um no i would at this point in the conversation just simply say that we would be crazy not to move forward with the full study and solid community engagement and to really explore the complex vast topic that's been discussed amongst the board and community members over the past few months however i am a little bit reluctant to think that we would quickly come up not quickly but be able to come up with a solution or a really clear path forward that would be the best um so i'm a little bit hesitant to really jump forward with making a bunch of changes tonight or immediately just simply because we are talking about a lot of very complex interconnected topics that is going to take exploration and time to really sort out so um so i guess i i should i'm sorry ryan i should clarify but about taking action what i mean is um make a decision for right now instead of just saying we're going to figure out a committee can we take some more precise um action in terms of saying this is our next step specifically to address the immediate request we're getting we don't have to say yes we're we're we're going to move something out of the budget but just say specifically what the step is going to be to address them immediately what i don't want to do is just kick feel like we're kicking the can yeah i think there are two issues jerry jerry i think there are two issues one is establishing a process um and i think we should create a committee to do that that's one action item the second action item is what do we do in the interim while this committee of board members administrators community members however we form it social workers while while they're exploring these issues um and providing our recommendation to the board because that will take time and we need to take action on this in the meantime motion on precise for the second part of what you just brought up andrew and then we could talk about forming the committee if you want to introduce a motion um yeah please do i make a motion to suspend the sRO position until a committee is formed and completes a thorough evidence-based analysis of the intended and unintended impacts of the sRO position that the sRO position has on our community and in our schools do you have a second to the motion i'll second that um any discussion i'm going to need clear guidance then on what to do when we have a runaway student a safety threat uh bomb scare i'm just going to be clear guidance with the board if i'm not to use my sRO who am i supposed to use i think you can do what i mean personally it seems like only 50 percent of the districts um have sROs in vermont and so the point that jill brought up earlier about it's the same type of thing that you would do if you were in some of those other districts that don't have an sRO you can still utilize the police department and maybe it's still the same person that you have built a connection with um but the montpellier police department is a two-minute drive down the road from any of our three schools so i i think that they can still respond to all of the needs that you listed she's already not on campus so we already don't have that that's already in place jill well i would i thought that too but it was very clear that there was an sRO on campus with a gun i'm not trying to be obstinate but we're operating school budget and school board action over zoom like we have for months i'm not clear why the individual who provides that service while we work this out can be providing that to you remotely um you know that we basically have that resource at the police department but but it's it's the physical presence that is really the crux of the thing that i think we really are being charged with dealing with today and i think i personally felt like i had been kind of um misled about where this literal person with their gun was going to be and the fact that they were at the school when there wasn't an active threat i felt like that was really um undoing a lot of trust so i realized the position this funded there's a person who has it it's their livelihood this has nothing to do with that individual i would say the minimum i would like us to not have them on campus on any of the campuses unless there's some reason that the montpellier police department needs to be there and that they can provide this support to you over zoom i'm also just wondering like in the event that rocks berry needs any of these things how do we how do we supply rocks berry village school with the services that the mpd provides to the three schools in montpellier rocks berry works with the state police department so anything we need is through the state um is it the sheriff ryan and jerry but we haven't needed anything there so that's so i wouldn't need to call on them um did you would probably you'd have to call the state police then and get any of the services that way if we did i would call the montpellier police department and say who do i call or who can you call that's what that's what i would do if rocks berry needed anybody because they're connected to everything my my question is what does the suspension look like because we're talking about suspending the sro position um does this mean that suspending disbursements from the school district to the um city for that position does and if that is the case does that then mean that the police wouldn't respond when the schools need assistance because it seems like they have an obligation to do that um so i i don't my question is what does it look like i don't i haven't i haven't fully flushed this out myself yeah i have the i have the same question what does suspension mean in this case whatever you know the motion was about suspending it what does that mean i mean it's not it's some level it's not our job right we could suspend our funding for it but we don't employ the sro no but we pay half of that position no i know but i mean we're not the employer in the situation so i'm not just this is very much the linguistic thing if we say we're what are what are we suspending it's kind of your point are we suspending funding i feel like we we should probably be a little bit more directive are we directing what are we directing the superintendent to do and not do um i mean we suspend the services or just the payments or yeah we're talking about having the the the presence of the sro um are changing that not having that you know clear direction that you you shouldn't be having a police officer with gun on campus um is that what we're saying that suspension or we're saying that nobody you know the position goes away and we're not um the the mo u i read it and it has that you know the contract can be uh are we suspending that contract is that what we're doing or is that is that what the motion is saying it might be better um if we had if we had an understanding of what what we were trying to accomplish and then you know worked backwards to the word um my intent was to suspend the formal school resource officer relationship with the montpellier rocksbury school district between now and the time that we can have have the time to form a committee and complete a thorough investigation of what this position means to our district and our community so to me it feels like an all-stop i mean to andrew's point we are in the montpellier police department jurisdiction and anything that should happen of an emergency nature or any of the types of things that liby listed at the beginning of her introduction um you know should we have a big school event uh raising a flag you know needing needing to be able to talk to a police officer having liby being able to call the police department and talk to somebody um conducting threat assessments bomb scares right all of those things i would imagine would still be covered just under the normal um services that the police department provides our town so that the intent of my motion was to suspend the position as it relates to our school until we can form a committee and discuss it more thoroughly the the emma from a practical matter the mo u isn't active technically right now is that correct may never have been active it doesn't appear to have been signed or dated so there's no contractual issue there that we're aware of correct is that true liby doing we don't have any paperwork or contractual arrangement around our obligation to pay our half of that person i just want to get clear on that because like i'm not here to like cut off somebody's paycheck tomorrow in the middle of a pandemic so i also want to get some clarity around some of those things the mob failure police department is counting on us to pay 45 000 whatever that is 45 490 of this position for this school year so if the if the board decides to suspend that payment and break that commitment no we do not have a signed contract however we have a commitment with them that has been going on for years and i would imagine any lawyer would say that we are responsible for paying that we would be in breach of contract because it's their precedent precedent set but i could be wrong on that there are other lawyers on the board who may have a different opinion on that um but that is half a person's paycheck the city is respond is is relying on that and had no reason up until tonight to think they weren't getting that money and i ultimately think that because now we can have a discussion about the sro emma and and and jill based on this motion i think we should have that with regard to the money piece of this though the community ultimately voted for you know the the city council has expanded the police department since i've been here i've written to them numerous times about this because not that i don't appreciate our police but i felt like that money could go to more top to other productive ends and um the the community has time and again voted for that those those budgets with those police department expansions and so i do feel like cutting off this spending in the middle of the year would be incongruous with the way that voters have voted in the past um so i i have some concerns about cutting off funding but if it's just to the Montpelier police department um but we're working on another arrangement i i think that is i think that's reasonable that's my general thought i'm just thinking about this off the cut well i mean i mean my thought is the the real concern here seems to be the presence of the officer on campus um and the impact that has um i mean i do agree that this is a budget that was approved by the voters this was part of the budget i also want to point out that Winooski which took similar actions to um and its SRO relationship is continuing to build obligation through the current budget year um and to my knowledge there is not not another source of revenue to support half of this person's income um yeah couldn't we um couldn't that person continue to do some of the work and there's a transition period also that you know we shouldn't dismiss and we continue to uh meet our obligations from a budget standpoint but we just say let's get rid of the physical presence of that person because if you look at some of the things they're doing this can be done in other more creative ways without that person being on site there are no big events happening at this time so i don't think that's going to be an issue but at least we could vote on the physical presence the change to that and in the meantime we'll form the committee and work out the other details i don't think we can make a budget decision based on what we know right now i think i think we have to kind of cross the T's and dot the T's and dot the I's and have further conversations about how we do that transition but i think we could vote on the physical presence i think there does need to be a recognition that however that there is a place for the police officers to come on campus at times that we can't that because of confidentiality and things with students won't necessarily be public knowledge it was actually just what i was about to raise because as you mentioned Libby the person the SRO already isn't currently stationed in any of the buildings because we don't have the space and so for me the question would be under what circumstances does an officer come on to one of the campuses and i imagine that's a place where i don't know if you're looking for specific direction or if we are collectively saying well we'll let the MPD figure out when they need to be there and when they don't but that that's my main question because the the stationing of the they don't have an office anywhere but the police station right now that's where that person is but questions about the um you know the playground or the hallways or even um you know reporting to that like adjacent streets for sort of for traffic things i don't know if we're being clear enough here about what um what people can and cannot do just seems like i know it's that's a it sounds really granular but like because of the way that this is baked in and embedded um we've just been taking for granted as a kind of community for a long time that the police come and go wherever they determine that they need to and if we're gonna shift that um i don't know if if we need to specify as the board when um that happens or if the police are the ones with the legal obligation to decide when they need to show up in person or not so i just have questions around that i would not want to take away the school's ability to respond to an emergency you know i do not want liby to feel like she has to read a memorandum of understanding or reference a policy when she feels like she needs to call the police for something as a as a matter of safety within the schools so that's not my intent my intent is you know there are 50% of school districts operating currently safely without the presence of an SRO i have worked as a teacher in a couple of those buildings you know you always know that if something escalates to the level of needing a police officer that you can call them so i don't see how why we would need to get granular or start start writing language about when or if liby or any of the teachers um you know Susan Koch had testified at one of our last meetings about being on a field trip with her students in Hubbard Park and that for one reason or another she ended up meeting to call the police to help with with something the SRO was not the police officer to respond to that call but somebody did respond and i trust mrs. Koch's um you know authority to make the decision of when to make that call and when not to make that call so i would i would be really hesitant to get into any detail about you know trying trying as a board to write when and when not but just that to call this a school resource officer and you know to to be monitoring playgrounds where i mean the other day the picture that was shared with us was my daughter's class that was my daughter's teacher so i i do not personally feel the need for an armed police officer wearing a bulletproof vest to be standing on the playground while my daughter is trying on her second day of school in a global pandemic to play on the playground with her friends so to me it's it's not complicated it doesn't feel complicated to me it feels like a simple you know you can consult with other districts u 32 um you know our own uh bill dies comes from u 32 he could probably speak to what he would do in an emergency when he needed police presence at the school um he could consult with you about you know when when it's appropriate to call the police but i think your gut will tell you when it's appropriate to call the police i know that there was some incidences um a couple of years ago where crossing guard presence was not at the main intersection on main street and school street near the kello cover library you know that's something that i think the community could get behind our crossing guard did not show up please send somebody to help you know there was actually a student who was hit by a car at that intersection and you know broke her leg i believe or their leg um so i mean i i i don't think this is an unreasonable you know putting any unreasonable barriers up for you you or any of this the teachers or staff at the schools to protect the children if you know if something goes down where police are needed um but just a general you know calling it a school resource officer having somebody on the playground when nothing is happening with a with a loaded gun i'm guessing so that that's where the concern comes from and and it feels it doesn't feel super complicated to me it feels like we could talk about get into the details at future meetings or during this committee that we're talking about forming but i think in the meantime it's important to send a message that we do not want the school resource officer position to be you know the memorandum of understanding that i read we don't want them to have that official relationship with us right now kill is it is it out of order for me to offer like an amended motion or a different motion for us now you can you can make an amended motion you know if i would move to amend the motion or maybe i should just do my own and see if can we choose can't do your own can't you can amend it okay then you could do your own or am i could pull her as well then you could do your own all right so i i would to amend the um the original motion to um to include language that suspends in person presence of a mob pillar police department school resource officer for non-emergency reasons um yeah this is not working sorry it's too late i'm trying to articulate how to suspend in person the school resource officer presence in person for non-emergency reasons while we can um build this longer term conversation because i remember there was a skunk at union like it was like a rapid skunk and the police came and had to shoot it i think things do happen and and i don't appreciate the veiled threat whether i'm being overly sensitive or not that if we don't have a school resource officer we're not going to have that police presence i i find that a little um a little disingenuous and a little threatening um that makes me want to support the position even less frankly um but i guess i i i feel important that realizing we're not gonna i don't think we're gonna change the budget it's in motion it's plugged into the education finance process that's that's understandable and it is someone's livelihood um i do think we should have the authority as the board tonight to at least um request that we not have a school resource officer physical presence on our campuses for non-emergency reasons is there a way we can uh separate the budget part from the from the the presence part um i have the same opinion that i you know i i don't want to be careless and say let's let's stop it because it's somebody's livelihood and i don't want to make that uh a decision without proper discussion and and getting you know uh enough information from all sides and sitting down so but i don't want to you know i i i'm of the opinion that i don't want to see the police officer on on school grounds um and so um is there is there a way to be that we can separate these things two things out and say that you know as jill mentioned that you know not having the police officer present all the time um are for non-emergencies um on the school grounds would it help just i mean so my motion we make a motion to suspend the SRO position we it's not it's not our position to really suspend though i think if you rescind it and we say we while we're deliberating you know something along the lines of what jill said where you know the presence of the of the SRO um should be suspended i don't know the exact language maybe suspended upon word here but i think what i'm gathering the the motion is is that we don't want the SRO on campus in non-emergency situations when the community the board the police teachers the administration are deliberating on the role of police in and around our schools is that right how about if i just add i make a motion to suspend the non-emergency presence of the SRO until a committee is formed and completes a thorough evidence-based analysis of the intended and unintended impacts of the SRO that the SRO position has on our community and in our schools the the only question i have with that is what about large events where there might be a security need but not an emergency there aren't any large events right now there won't be this that's true we're not in large event time okay and that's where this conversation is about forming a committee and giving people like a you know somewhat of a timeline to expect for that process and i would hope that that would be expedited okay so am i it's um do you want to withdraw your previous emotion and and um put forward the one you just stated that um with the with the words non-emergency yeah you word it a little differently though and you mentioned presence so that we're not talking about any budgetary issues that people have already voted on okay i also i want the board to discuss though and these aren't veiled threats jill whatsoever they're realities so does a non-emergency situation involves representing students in truancy situations at court because they do that currently so these are these are real things that are happening that because this is the model we've had not necessarily because it's the model we want but it's the model we've had so things like that um exploring sexual abuse cases and being the liaison between the school and the family and the student that kind of thing happens now so i just need clarity because when when you say the suer because i can see you sir right next to jim orphi and i know your name when nathan suer sees a police officer on campus and said and writes a letter to the board and myself saying you said that person's not supposed to be there they're there now and i can't tell any of you as to why they're there but it's all i should look like i just need direction there what am i what am i to say to that person that is an emergency situation with an individual student who nathan may have saw so now he knows clearly as to why that person was there and who they were there for which is a FERPA violation um so i i just want to be i just want direction there because it's the model that we have currently and it's the model that we have used and it's the model that if you if we don't do that there is not a substitute right now so um so we don't know the system of in the courts in the way that the SRO has played that role so i'm just trying to get clarity i'm not making veiled threats i'm just trying to make clarity as to what i can direct my staff to do and not do because there's serious confidentiality there's serious student issues and there's serious family issues that our SRO currently deals with individually by themselves and they collaborate with us when they need to so i just want to make it clear what they can and cannot do on our campus because people will there are a lot of people here who are hearing the SRO is not to be on campus except in emergency situations when they see like this past week that the SRO was on campus and talking to a student who had run away from a group home they know what the situation is there so i just want to be clear on that what what can and cannot happen and how i am to respond and how the board is to respond when they get when you get emails around why is that SRO there and i can't respond to it because it's a FERPA violation so that's what i'm looking for right now is as you continue to discuss whatever motion you're going to discuss which is very much the board's prerogative i just want to be clear that there it's a complicated issue and i need direction because it's the model currently have this is what i've been by granular like this is this specific thing is what i was saying around the granular nature of needing to decide when people can and can't be there because there are situations where people will need to be there and situations where liby can't disclose why and that's complicated you know especially like let's say liby let's say liby we're a bad actor which i do not believe at all like liby could be like back alley letting anybody come in through and say no really it's just FERPA that i don't think that those things are things that are happening but if we're not clear with liby about um you know how she can continue to adhere to laws protect privacy do the thing that we're directing her to do and be like in faith in spirit doing the best by our students um well it just it could make situations dangerous that we don't want to make unintentionally dangerous by not having clarity around what's supposed to happen so this is why i almost think it's just cleaner to talk about it in terms of ending our relationship with a school resource officer calling it a school resource officer right liby can still utilize um the services of the montpelier police department in any way that she sees fit and and we don't need to get into detail on that you know i'm gonna put is that true i mean yeah i'm not sure don't send this you described i'm not sure that's true i'm not sure the police department would say well we don't do that we we might do that because we have this this relationship with you and are you talking about truancy yeah exactly some of some of the things she mentioned that that might involve a level of involvement that you know the police say well you know if someone breaks in your window and steal stuff will come but um nope they won't do home visits they won't do home visits with our social workers or administrators that won't happen um they won't represent students in court in the same way as an advocate they there are certain things that will not happen that currently happen and have happened thus far in the first week and half of school well let me try to throw something out maybe to modify the motion so it seems like where we're stuck is we want to have a committee that's going to fully explore everything that's been discussed over the last couple months plus some concrete action right now i wonder if we had a motion again this is just me kind of talking out loud thinking if we had a motion that stated we moved to charge a board committee administrative committee to explore all these topics with the anticipation that we will be removing the school resource officer position from the budget the current budget um i mean like the goal of the committee itself might be to have the position gone or had to justify the position um it just to somehow combine those two needs together i'm not sure if that would have accomplished or not but just kind of at the declaration upfront that we don't necessarily want to have the existing position the whole hope of the committee is to make sure that the new scenario is different than our status quo i think i do think though and mara and i think liby we're getting at this that just simply you know removing while mara was getting at this simply removing the sRO position doesn't necessarily solve the problems that the community is viewing right now and liby is saying well if i remove the sRO position and i'm calling the police for the same exact things that i was relying on the sRO for we're not calling it the sRO but i'm still using the police in the same manner and that doesn't really you know respond to the concerns that we're hearing here tonight which are is it's not a complicated situation so it's kind of like a simple solution i understand we're looking for something on the simpler side in the meantime but it's a simple solution for a very complex issue that doesn't have any systems in place it seems like um anyways let's oh i mean it seems to me like the yeah there there's a lot of complicated things to work through and i think things that quite honestly we don't we as a board don't fully understand which makes me somewhat uncomfortable um i think the thing that we do understand is that a physical presence especially an extensive and visible physical presence has a disproportionate impact on people we want to protect right now so what can we do to limit that to limit the instance that i think upset many of us including me which was uh you know an armed officer hanging out of the playground with no you know real purpose um that seemed just like a looming presence uh you know how can we give clear directive that we don't want to see that while we put a process in place that can thoroughly consider the complexities of this from various standpoints and come to i think a solution that um will ensure we don't drop safety functions but also ensure that we don't have a police presence on our schools that uh is is not the police is that is not the presence we want or the relationship we want with the police department Jim with this work while we are deliberating the funding of the SRO position through the creation of a formal committee i move to reduce presence on campus where possible or reduce the SRO's presence on campus where possible i know it's watered down but i just feel like we can't be more specific if you want to if you want to make the motion i um i think we still have Emma's motion out there um do you want to offer that as an amendment to Emma's motion it's it's in some ways substantially different but i don't remember i i don't have the wording exactly of Emma's so um no i didn't write it down sorry so i don't want to cut Jerry off if you're are you no i'm finished i was just saying could we do something a little more uh or less specific reduce the presence for now where possible that leaves it open but also say we are going to create a formal committee and deliberate on this uh on the funding issue which is what we're tasked with right and and argue policies right yeah policy okay so following ryan and jerry's lead i'll i'll just try some things out and see i think we're well past robert's rules of order but i'll try to um i like the idea of combining the two so that and i'd liked ryan's freezing of you know we're um putting together a task force with the intent of removing the school resource officer position and and finding other ways to you know serve meet those meet whatever needs it was serving and meet other needs that um our priority for the district something like that i'm getting that part right and at the same in this interim period um we would be directing the superintendent to limit the physical presence of the s ro on campus to the greatest extent possible consistent with school safety um and you know immediate student needs something along those lines if that was written down i'd second it well i mean i think i don't know i am you know however people want to proceed if if that appeals to people we could try to wordsmith it better if if it's not where people are we could go somewhere else um i know i'm not supposed to offer a motion but just to to wordsmith it um that we form a study committee to examine the replacement of the s ro position with a relationship between the school district and the police department that fulfills our commitment to equity and diversity as well as public safety and in the interim we directly superintendent to limit the presence of police and the s ro on campus to the maximum extent practical um i just want to ask liby if any of the things we like i feel like we're all trying to get at a pretty similar idea and i don't know if any of them feel like they're even possible for you to execute like i don't want to i don't want to give you a directive that like is so vague or so confusing that you can't do the thing anything's possible mara i can i can do anything be uh you're my bosses you direct me to do whatever i will say that when the s ro is on campus you will get emails yeah and and and we will all know that that s ro is now on campus for an emergency situation for a student or a family and because of our small district it will be very obvious as probably who that child is so i just want to make that clear that in those situations i will not be able to give the board or the public any information about that situation are there any ways for them to do that support virtually or do they have to physically be there to provide those supports typically it's a presence i mean so take the runaway situation we had a runaway situation this week that the police were called not by us by somebody else and the kid and another kid were on our campus another kid who doesn't go to our schools were on our campus and the s ro was the one who came to to talk with the students and got the kid to where they need to be um that's a physical presence that needs to happen so there there are issues i mean it's it's really it's usually a presence that it's not me calling saying hey how do i run my my safety drills you know like that's not gonna that's not why we usually call them i will say that i've been working at school districts where we've had kids run off campus and they've had to be retrieved by police officers so i just i go back to the sentiment that these are functions that can continue to happen yeah i'm not saying it can't happen what i'm saying is that um that when that happens going forward the board needs to be aware that that is an emergency situation most likely and a private situation most likely and you will also most likely get emails or comments from the public around i thought we said that we didn't want an armed police officer with our kids and there we go again so i just want to make sure that we're clear that there are instances where that will happen over the i mean they already have been right and so um so the board has to be clear about how they'll respond to those and um and how i will respond to those that i've been it's not a it's not a public information kind of situation yeah i offer another maybe path forward um which is similar but and it's totally up to emma if if maybe if we reverse the order we could get some clarity and so it's totally up to emma if you were willing to temporarily pull the first motion and we hammered out the committee motion the task force however we're going to call it and agreed on the wording of that and got it in place and then came back to the immediate action tonight i'm not in any way suggesting we table it past tonight but just to try to maybe hammer out the that will somewhat easier piece and get wording that everyone is comfortable with to take that action then figure out i am willing to withdraw but i also was taking notes when you were speaking and jim was speaking on your edits to my original motion so um i'll try to read should i i don't know what the process is do i amend my original motion i think you can you can unilaterally withdraw it and we could do another one if we were going to separate them if if folks are comfortable putting them together you could amend your motion to cover both pieces because it would be nice just for the sake of time like you said sure and i did take notes so let me see if this one makes sense or gets to what we need i move that the board form a study committee to complete a thorough analysis of the intended and unintended impacts that the sRO position has in our community and in our schools in the interim we direct the superintendent to limit the physical presence of the school resource office officer whenever possible so my problem with that emma is the sRO is just one position and i view this as a more systemic issue related to police and justice and school safety and by just narrowly focusing on the sRO i'm concerned that we won't address some larger issues and i do agree that we could expand it to such a degree that it would be amorphous but i feel like we should we should look beyond the sRO can be a component of this maybe if if everybody feels very um dead set on focusing on the sRO we could have that as the first part of this but i really think we need to gather public input and use it to define aims responsibilities and expectations for school safety justice and the role and conduct of police in and around schools it's not just the sRO we could get rid of this sRO position and we would still have police interacting in a very similar way that we do with the sRO position and i don't want that to be the case so that's my concern but the current wording did that concern go to the committee piece i think it does yeah okay getting that andrew what's that we're getting at the committee piece yes yeah yeah although it doesn't hurt to throw it into the latter piece as well shall i try another read yes please do yes i move that the board form a study committee to complete a thorough analysis of the intended and unintended impacts that the presence of police officers and the sRO position has on our community and in our schools in the interim we direct the superintendent to limit the physical presence of the school resource officer and other police officers whenever possible wait so is that a combination so but this my concern again i want the study committee not just to explore the sRO i want the study committee to have a charge that gathers public input and uses it to clearly define our goals and expectations for school safety justice and the role and conduct of police in and around schools i want the study committee to focus on that am i missing something well i was just gonna say that sometimes we decide to form the committee and then have the committee work on the specific we can ask in front of it and could we is that possible because i totally agree it might be a lot of work to put together that yeah yeah so that makes sense i'm gonna suggest that andrew you amend emma's motion to include that the study committee focus more broadly on those issues and then i suggest that we have a couple people noodle on the charge and that we formalize the charge and the members on october 2nd so i'll second emma's motion so that andrew can amend it yeah okay so i'm amending emma's motion to add that the community that this committee which is comprised of well that that this committee we won't talk about the composition right now that's next time will be we'll also gather public input and use it to define aims responsibilities and expectations for school safety justice and the role and conduc