Hi, everyone. Let's open the meeting of the. Public Raspberry board of school directors at 633. But we're 17. First order of business is public comments. Have any like none. Great. So we can move on to the consent agenda. Do I have a motion to approve the consent agenda? Do we need to take roll, Jim? Oh, we do need to take roll. There's a new zoom thing. Jill. Here. Emma. Here. Jerry. Here. Atticate. Here. Brian. Here. Nia. Here. Andrew. And Amanda. Great. Thanks for reminding me of that. Now to have a motion to approve the consent agenda. I'll make a motion to approve the consent agenda. I drive a second. I'll second it. Any discussion. Great. Jill. Hi. Emma. Hi. Gary. Hi. Atticate. Hi. Brian. Hi. Yeah. Hi. Andrew. Hi. And I'm on that. Yeah. Great. So now we have. Penny Chamberlain. Scott Griggs. Mike. Dewey's. Glad to see back. Not only. I'm glad to see you again. I'm glad to see you again. Grant cut his teeth, but also help us find Libby. It's good to see you again. And is Calhap with on as well. I see him on the agenda, but I'm not sure I see his. Square. It may be. Clifton long. He's coming. Instructor. Okay. Yeah. Talk about the. Central Vermont. Career center vision. So I will turn it over to all of you. And thank you. And if you need to. Share a screen or anything. I think Libby is. Libby or Anna. The keeper. Okay. Well, thank you. Sorry. Sorry. I just wanted to apologize. I'm going to have my camera off because my eyes hurt a lot because I've been in zoom all day. So. I am paying attention, but I am. I need to not be in the screen right now. No worries. That's perfectly understandable. Can everyone hear me? Okay. Yep. All right. Well, I appreciate your time this evening. On your agenda. You know, you've got a full agenda here. This evening. The state law. Requires that if a career center is looking at a change. And potential governance that we need to. Present. To each of our sending school district boards. And review why we would like to go into a study to look at this. And then. Have some Q and a time as well with you folks tonight. And then actually take some action. And what I'd like to do is first, I want to know, have folks been able to review the documents that were sent ahead of time in the board faculty. And most importantly is the packet that had a cover memo from me that have the board. The CDCC governance report. And then a chart that followed that. There was a chart that went along with that. Yeah. I won't necessarily do it. If you're in good shape with that. Okay. Yeah. Appreciate how thorough that was. Thank you. It's, it's been, uh, we've been doing this looking at this for. Probably two years, two and a half years now. And we started to look at governance and our re-envisioning process at the same time. They were side by side. And we were talking about the future of CDCC. Where were we going to go? And, and what. What would we want to do? Um, include for programming to serve our, our region. And we were looking at all of these things. And then we realized that governance and re-envisioning or the future of CBCC can run side by side. They can, one can exist without the other or both exist together. So it's not something that has to happen. Governance does not have, has to have, that have to happen in order to have a center in another location or to do a renovation to the current location. And nor would we have to have a new governance model or different different governance model to be in a different location. So they do run parallel to each other. Um, What we were looking at in the governance model. The main driver at, at this juncture in our, our investigation and why we're coming to all of you to have this conversation. We're headed into a budget vote in March. And our region. All of you and our other five schools pay a tuition for students to attend the central Vermont career center, but only Barry town and Barry city vote or whatever. And in order to move away from that and become our own governance structure, which would mean that all of our sending schools, all of our sending districts would have equal voice. And vote on that budget and input. Um, which would mean that all of our schools pay a tuition for students to attend the central Vermont career center, but only Barry town and Barry city voters. Have the authority to approve that budget, which then sets that tuition. Uh, because they are our governing board. That's the way it's set up in, in law at this time. Um, so, um, if we were to move away from that budget and input, um, we would need to actually go through this formal process to request to, um, Move into a study and then that study committee would, uh, work toward the end of this school year with, um, Mike Dewey's and I both working with them and looking at all aspects of governance. And looking at the pros and cons of governance and looking at what does that mean. And then coming up with a proposal. Uh, to work with the state board of education. So what we found as our biggest challenges with the career center is that the regional advisory board is required in state statuette as well for career centers. And that's a board that Libby serves on as a representative of the Montpelier school district, Montpelier Rocksbury. And we have other superintendent and school board members who are members of that regional advisory board as well. advisory board only has advisory capacity and can make a recommendation to the very unified union and school district governing board but that board does not have to accept that recommendation. So right now the voice is advisory and we would prefer to have that voice be equal for the career center across all our entire region. So in our process with boards at this time, we've met with and received approval from the very unified union school district to move forward with a study. Union 32 district also Washington Central has approved that and it is just a study. It's just a chance to investigate what this means and what this could mean for our center. So we're presenting to you folks tonight and then we will be presenting to Cabot, Twinfield and Harwood in March. So sometime around the end of March, early part of April, if three out of the five boards, I'd prefer five out of five but if three out of the five boards agreed to move forward with the study committee, then we would start on that as soon as possible and begin to dissect and look into these issues or concerns and pros and cons of being our own governing board. The chart that's at the back of the packet that was sent in your board packet which was attached to the governance report, governance white paper is a chart where we got some feedback from the current, the three current technical centers that are there on governing board. And that's River Valley and Bennington and Middlebury. And it more so than not, it works out very well for them for the reasons that I was just describing but there's also other reasons behind having your own governing board. And that would be to have a board that's purely focused on technical education and tech ed rules and regs. What we find and what we know is that technical education regulation and pre-K-12 regulation and law tends to run side by side within the state of Vermont. They all have their own set of books, if you will, from everything from finance to staffing to program development, it's all slightly separate. It's slightly different between the two different systems. The only time that those systems converge typically is within underneath that governing board. With Act 46 now coming through to fruition for everyone, districts are larger. So now there is less time at that governing board level to be providing more guidance and support for career and tech ed because now they're a larger district, smaller board and more students in schools to oversee. So basically what we would propose with looking into the governance system here or a potential change, it would give your voice, your equal voice with the career center. You'd have voice with program approval admissions, program design, curriculum, policy development and implementation, determining the center budget in detail in those program needs, recruitment and retention of qualified staff, marketing and recruitment for students, grades nine through 12, outreach across all sectors of our region. We would still continue to serve this region. Middle school career awareness for all sending regions is another big area that we would really like to spend more time and get into and maybe divert some resources toward that as well. Establishing perhaps board committees that could take on some focused charges and allow for full decision making authority as a board versus being in an advisory capacity as the regional advisory board is today. So I'd like to ask Clifton and or Scott if they would like to chime in with anything they'd like to add to that before we opened for questions and answers on that particular topic. Well, I would like to add something if I may. So thank you very much for having us. So I'm Cliff Long, I teach plumbing and heating and I'm a former member of the Washington Village School Board and a former chair of the Orange North Supervisor Union board before they merged with Northfield. And to me, one of the things of great value in Vermont is the close connection between community and public education. I mean, to me, community and public education are inseparable in Vermont. So I feel like the fact that we're governed by Barry Bork by the Barry Bork kind of denies us the full involvement of the other communities that we serve. So to me, this is absolutely worth some investigation. And I think that we have a lot to gain from a board's full involvement. And so, we're a relatively small part of Barry and they understandably, as they should, focus more on the pre-K-12 regular education system. So I think we would really value a dedicated board that where we could invite the members in, have them get to know us, get to know our teachers, our students, our curriculum. And board membership tends to change rather slowly and that continuity is really valuable to the administration, to the teachers. So I feel like if I were in your position, I would definitely support this study. And then there are many questions to be answered that can be, if it's pursued. Thank you. This is Scott speaking and Penny, I wouldn't know, you might not have noticed that Cal has joined us as well. So I'll hop, what is it? Yeah. I would just mention it's, this is gonna age me a little bit, but it's my 23rd year in Barry and 20th at the Career Center. And I say that because I would say we've enjoyed the good graces of Barry District all these years, but by the same token, it's clearly a stretch for them to, in all aspects of operation to truly understand us and support us. So when we look at this opportunity as really in the decision point tonight being really just, do you think about this enough that it's worth the study? Then I would strongly suggest it's worth the study. And to me, it's lost, Barry has already approved it and given some good thought into that. And not because they don't wanna support us, but in fact, because they wanna continue to support us in a different way.  And I would suggest at least worth, at least worth going forward with a study. Thank you, Scott. Cal, would you like to chime in on this? Hey everybody, my name is Cal Hopwood. I teach the second year digital media arts program. And not much else to say, I guess I would just strongly suggest that you all consider the study here. This is only my third year teaching full-time here. So I'll kind of speak as the new person. But from what I'm seeing in career and technical education, it's been very eye-opening. And I think this process of governing ourselves would allow for more transparency with all of the schools that send students to us. So I think this would really just benefit everybody. So hopefully you'll consider it. Thank you, Cal. I think if you wanna stay with this topic, we could move through this topic. And then I could move into answering any questions around this topic, then into enrollment, the historical enrollment data that you received, which shows some really nice growth for Montpelier. I do have some post-secondary data for you're on your students that I could share as well. And as well as some co-op work-based learning information, if that's of interest of this board. Would you like to continue with this particular topic before we move into something else? I'm just really interested. Is anyone wanna move into something else? Andrew has his hand raised. Does he? Andrew, yeah, sorry, I didn't do that. However you wanna do this is fine, but as you move through this, can you contextualize how this study fits into this larger process of moving to a governance committee, like what does that entire process look like? And you might have sent that, and I might have overlooked it in the materials. And a general question that will probably get answered during that explanation is, other than us voting on this study committee, would there be, say, the districts wanted to proceed with this? Would the districts be voting again on these issues? I just don't understand what the entire process looks like. I haven't given much thought to this, so thank you. Surely, I'll talk about the timeline component. Once the study committee is done, which is gonna be a relatively short period of time, about six weeks or so, six to eight weeks with one meeting a week. And we hope that by June and July, somewhere in that window that we would have the results of that study committee available to come back to the boards and inform the boards where we are. The next step would be to move that on to Secretary Dan French. If there's support from him to move forward and actually put that on the State Board of Education agenda, that could move into roughly September, October. How long it stays on that agenda, depending on what they ask for additional questions would be another piece with the State Board of Ed. Conceptually, if we were to move into our own governance model, it could be as late as FY23, it would take some time. So this is the first initial stages of just looking into and investigating this possibility for the Central Vermont Career Center. I will say that, yeah, go ahead. So is this the only item in the process that this board would be? I'm just trying to figure out where our role is in this process. So obviously I understand with regard to the study committee, but I'm just thinking, clearly you guys have thought a lot about this. The study committee will be helpful to inform how you proceed with this, but it seems like you're kind of on that track already. So I'm just wondering, and I really don't know, I'm asking, what is our role in this process moving through those different tiers? Clearly the Board of Education and Secretary of Education have a role as you've outlined it. Correct, they have the role to say whether or not we could actually put this in front of all 16 towns to vote. So there has to be a town vote on this process as well. Your role right now has to hopefully grant us to move forward into the study committee process, a point, a board member, who would be willing to be part of that process, who then could come back and inform you as you go and keep you in the loop there. And then our results would have to go back to our current governing board, which is the very Unified Union School District and the Regional Advisory Board and in the Regional Advisory Board who have Libby as a representative as well there. So you'll still get information as to where we are in the committee. The committee comes forward with a positive proposal saying this is something we should look at proposing as a change in a governance structure for Central Vermont Career Center II, Secretary French, then it goes into his hands and moves through his process along with the State Board of Education. If the State Board of Education decides that, yes, that's agreeable to them, this sounds like this would work for our center and our region, then we embark on the process of outreach and communicating with all 16 towns and getting this onto a town vote to move into that new governance structure. So the process is quite involved, quite lengthy, and the study itself is the smaller component at the beginning to hopefully answer some questions. I did have a question from a couple of questions from the Washington Central Board wanting to know what is the impact of something like this on their school board? What might they expect and is there a financial impact? And there isn't a financial impact nor would the school board need to take on additional business. Hence the new governing board would be the one to take on the governing business of the Career Center much like you do for the Montpelier-Roxbury District. And there is no additional financial cost only that you're gonna have a voice from this point forward or that point forward on what the Career Center offers and how it functions and which makes sense if we're gonna be a regional Career Center. So that's the length of the timeline. I think it will clarify more for me as I get further into this process because I haven't gone through a process like this yet myself either. Thank you so much and also thank you for all the hard work you all are doing. I know a lot of kids and families and people who have really benefited from the Career Center, so thank you. Oh, you're welcome, thank you for that. Emma. Yeah, I'll just echo the thanks and praise of the Career Center. We're very lucky to have it as part of our community and the students are very lucky to have that as an option. To me, it looks like there's so much great thought and effort put into this proposal. And since there's already support from Barry and U32, I feel like, I mean, I'm still interested in hearing more but I mean, I'm not ready to make a motion. I don't know if that's, if now is an appropriate time. I think for your board, it's fine. Everybody would love to do that when we can continue the conversation and answer questions. There are two actions. One would be to the motion to begin this, to join the study committee. And then the second would be to appoint a board member to represent your district on that committee. Do we feel we're ready for that or do we want to hear more from the presenters? So we've got Amanda and Jill with their hands up. Amanda? Yeah, I was looking at the enrollment. And again, thank you so much. I echo what everybody's praises of all of that you did and all of that you do. But I'm curious about the enrollment. I was looking at the charts. Do you guys have this integration of data in terms of race and ethnicity of who's attending as a whole? Gender, like what kind of data are you collecting around demographics? We actually have all of that data in our state database. We enter that into the state database twice a year, October and again in March. I don't have those reports at hand, but yes, we do have that. And we look at that frequently. We definitely look at gender. There's a measure and benchmark that we're held to all career centers or held to actually, that's related to non-traditional participation where females are participating in a typical male focused career path and vice versa. And some of our funding through Perkins is actually attached to that, improving those percentages within the program. And we have a data team that focuses on this information as well. So we do have the ability to pull that information. So I'm glad you're asking that because not many people ask us that question. And is that data that you can share with us that we can access or as that? Well, we can pull reports from that state database. I will say the state database is a bit antiquated. So what we do is pull that information into our own access database. And if you wanted to send Libby or you could send it directly to me, but if you wanted to send her an email with the field that you're interested in, we'd be glad to pull that together for you. That would be great. Thank you so much. And thank you so much for all the work that you're doing. With the check that the insights made you very small. And so it may not be public data because it's very small N sizes. That would be a lot to that data. So does that mean that the school board members can have access to data like that either? It depends on what the question is that we're answering just because we can't give identifiable data to a public entity, yeah. For the, and I'm not just asking for Montpelier, but for Washington, like central. So it's like more than just our district. You mean Washington County? Washington County, yeah. Oh, that would be different. The inside would be much larger. Yeah. Yeah. Thank you so much. Jill. Thank you. Thank you all for the presentation. I'm excited to hear what you guys are saying. I am definitely ready to make a motion and I'm hopeful to know. And I don't know if it's a foregone conclusion, but if we need a board member to volunteer to be on the study committee, I'm happy to do that. Knowing that maybe someone else was already in mind, but. And I was just wondering to you folks, what sort of criteria do you think the AOE and the state board will be looking for? Is it purely formality or are they concerned or are they sort of checking for financial stability? And I'm just wondering what would be an example of an successful pitch? Thank you. The last center that has gone through this was 2004. It's been a while, yeah. So I don't think that they're looking for anything in particular, only that the districts are willing to have a start looking to the study committee. And I think as long as it looks to benefit students, it needs to be a benefit to our students and far as I'm concerned, a broader more equal voice across the region is a direct benefit for our students. Having a board that would be able to focus purely on CTE and the programming and the connections we need to have with industry and post-secondary, I think is a direct impact for students. So I think as long as we're able to show that that makes sense to make a move like that, the board may be in support, that's the first leg actually, because the next one, the bigger one is the actual vote by the towns. And we'd go through that vote every year. It's quite a big undertaking. And I try not to think of how big it is because I'd like to just continue these more intimate conversations instead of trying to project so far out. But I don't think they have any preconceived notions about what they think this should or shouldn't be. They just want to make sure that everybody has a voice and has been well informed and understands what this means. Eva, is your hand up again or do you just not take it down? I just forgot to lower it. Okay. Excellent, are we at the point where we want to make a motion? Sure, I moved to approve the Central Vermont Career Center Request to establish a governance study committee to determine if a governance change is appropriate for the Central Vermont Career Center. Great, do we have a second? Second. I second. Got to have a tie there. Anna, you can choose. Any discussion? Jill. I. I. Anakit. I. Ryan. I. Andrew. Mia. Jerry. And Amanda. See, yeah. So I have a question actually, Jim, before we go on to the second motion, do we need, because that we're going to be talking probably in the next month or so about another committee and I don't want to get too far ahead of myself right now. But would we be able to, do we have to appoint this person tonight is my question because if we're going to be talking about some other committee things in the next month, I'm wondering if we might want to just save this appointment for then. Jill's excited, Andrew. I don't know. All right, all right. I know she's gonna be excited about another committee too. Because a committee she was on was suspended. So. Let's leave that up to Jill. Jill, do you want me to move ahead with the motion? Yeah, I'm not reading between the lines. Yeah, I'm confused as well. I don't want to get too. Fantastic on this committee, I think. Yeah, you'd be amazing. Of course. It would be great for Kenny to have. Yeah, I think we should, I think we should go with an enthusiastic volunteer while we have one. Sounds good. I move to elect Jill Remick to serve as the Montpelier Rocksbury School District representative on the CBCC Governance Study Committee. Second. Second. Second. I think that was Via, great. Any discussion? Jill. Hi, and thank you. Emma. Hi. Anakit. Hi. Ryan. Hi. Andrew. Hi. Mia. Hi. Jerry. Hi. And Amanda. Yes. Great. Well, thank you so much for the presentation. This is great work you're doing and we really appreciate taking time out of your evening to educate us more about this. And we look forward to having Jill serve and be part of the process going forward. That's great, Jim, and the rest of the board. I appreciate all of you participating in this process. If I can make sure that your motion to approve us moving into the study is actually in your minutes, I'll be asking for a copy of those minutes as part of our record and our documents moving through this process. It sounds like it all went smoothly and worked really well. So I don't know if anyone wants to ask any other questions about other topics or things that you're interested or curious about. We do have a re-envisioning process that's moving forward and tomorrow night we're hosting many of our major employers in the region in a conversation about what programs should be at the center, what type of things that we might be able to consider in changing in programs, delivery, how to best meet the needs of our employers and our post-secondary partners. So that's happening tomorrow night, which is exciting. So all of this is kind of running side-by-side as we move forward into re-envisioning the career center for our region. If there's other questions, I'd be glad. I've got a group of folks here who could help answer some questions. If anyone is curious about any of that. Yeah, it was like, Elana has a question. I don't have a question, I guess more. Well, yes, there's a question with a comment, I guess. Because I think a lot about racial equity and just thinking about that there's a grow movement around BIPOC businesses in this state. There was a survey that was sent out by Diversitive Partnership Group, Curtis Reid. And I'm just wondering about partnership with BIPOC employers as well as offering a multilingual for our multilingual families that are coming in or that are in our state. And so just like thinking about that or about resources around that and how that is in your re-envisioning and how that is included around the racial equity. And Susana Davis also, the Racial Equity Director also came out with a equity impact assessment tool that is really great to think about when we are building new policies and new governing structures that I can share with you, Penny. But as I say, there's just a move to be thinking about how we're incorporated equity in every level of our work and the push to support the BIPOC businesses that are as proud in right now is so important to give our students that are, you know, from different racial ethnic backgrounds a space where they can feel at home as well when they are, you know, entering into this career choices. So we'll have to talk more about it too so that in any other time. That would be wonderful. I think if you could give some of those resources to Jill and have her bring those to the table as well with our governance work, because that, you know, we're kind of going back and forth between these two groups, governance and re-envisioning and I would appreciate those resources myself and so I can bring that directly to the re-envisioning table and know that there are gonna be many, many more conversations about the Career Center and its future as we start to look at where are we gonna go within our region. We're so far right now from Harwood and Cabot and Twinfield, we're on the other side of our region and we need to move somewhere centrally which is obviously closer to where you folks are but in that process of looking at something as grand as a move of the Career Center just for access alone we need to be looking at everything that encompasses and a full service career center that has post-secondary industry and all the partners. So it's a complex thing and we're just starting really in that process. So I would love to have any and all resources that you would like to share. Great, thank you. Thank you. Andrea has his hand up as well. Yeah, this is just like a 5,000 foot question in terms of keeping abreast of developments at the Career Center both in terms of this initiative as well as the programming that you all work on and any events that you guys have. I know you guys have a calendar on your website but are there any, are there any newsletters or social media handles that you'd suggest that members of the public or the board could follow or subscribe to to stay abreast of these developments, events, initiatives, et cetera. Yes, and I'm gonna ask our media direct which is Cal Hopwood, can you ask if you would like to chime in on that question? Yeah, we do have a bit of a social media presence. We've been trying to bolster that as a part of my second year media arts program kind of allowing the students to take charge of that. And unfortunately we were kind of very invested in that process and with COVID and everything it's been a little bit more difficult in terms of just having access towards other programs and getting all that information out there. However, if you look at our website we have lots of new videos that are coming out actually all new program videos for each one of our programs have been coming out and the last two I believe should be out this week. So if you look at our website which is CBTC.org you'll be able to see all of our new content but also we are the central Vermont Career Center on Instagram. We have some posts that we do there and also on Facebook as well. If you look up the central Vermont Career Center you should be able to find us fairly easily. Those new videos are awesome. The ones that I've seen so far are so well done. Great. So I have to say Libby that the rough cut footage that's created in all the photography is through Cal's program. His students. I don't doubt it. Cal, I don't know. I'm gonna sing your praises a little bit. I've never met you. However, nice to see you. The two years ago there was a student who spoke at our graduation when we could have graduation and she spoke all about what must have been your program and she credited you and your program to being who she was as a high school senior and a graduate. So you really influenced this young lady quite a bit and I believe she went into digital media. So you're doing some good things over there. Great. Thank you so much. I can't take all the credit. Matthew Benjano teaches the first year program and he's phenomenal. So he sets the stage and foundation there but thank you so much Libby. I appreciate that. In our line of work, you take credit where credit is due. So thank you so much, Matthew. Thank you. Thank you, Cal. Great. Any other questions for Penny, Scott, Cal and... No, thank you again. Again, this is great work you're doing. We're very excited and Jill will represent us moving forward and we look forward to hearing more about how the process goes and how the study committee concludes and what the next steps are. And I wanna thank Michael Duviz for helping us with our work so far and building to continue with us, which is a big, big help for us.  Check out our websites and the connections that Cal just mentioned. I wish you all the best and I hope you have a great break next week and we can start looking at the end of this COVID pandemic year. It would be nice to see some sort of normalcy and everyone stay well. But feel free to reach out to us anytime and as soon as we're able to bring visitors in, we welcome folks to stop by and see kids in action because the kids love talking about their work and showcasing their work. So we would be really excited to do that when the pandemic allows us to do that. Great, thank you. Yes, we are looking forward in person as well. So thanks everyone. Thank you, have a good evening. Have a good night. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Amanda, did you see the comment in the chat? What? Yes, I did. Okay. Thank you. Thank you so much, Christian. Me encanta que hablan español ahí. So before we move to policy, there are a couple of things I've neglected to add at the agenda. One is, it was of help from Andrew and review by Livia, put together a letter to the governor that the Anderson around, I think yesterday, just expressing concern over the move to go to full in person in April and some of the concerns that we talked about last time. I just wanted to give some chance for feedback on that before we send it. Folks have edits or questions about it. Mia. Did we receive any clarification about what they mean by going to in person? I'm wondering if what we've already put in place would qualify as in person. I'm gonna say it does. I don't know if the secretary would say the same thing. Yeah. Okay. So we don't have, so I guess that's a, we don't have clarification by what they mean as in person. We don't, no. Okay. The reason I was asking the question is that if what we're doing meets the in-person standard, then I don't know how hard we need to advocate for them to not have the standard, knowing that there are districts doing all much different versions of school than we are and that in some of those districts, they might benefit from the nudge, but since we don't have that clarity and since what we are doing definitely works. Yeah, then I guess that's it. I think we can speak from MRPS perspective. Right, this is our perspective. When it's for any other district, we're speaking for our district and what we've put in place and what we can and cannot do. I think as long as we do that, it goes a long way for our educators that the people in leadership who they're looking to lead them are speaking up for them and the good work they're doing. Yeah, and especially with the combination of going to in-person, whatever they mean by that and not prioritizing teachers with vaccines are definitely second to that. Yeah. Amanda, Jill, you had your hand up and put it down. You question and answer? Amanda? Yeah, I mean, I think the letter is, how can I say this? I think it needs a little bit of a tweaking so it doesn't seem like we're speaking for our district alone, but that we are speaking to the second paragraph of saying for why many districts have in-person assistance are effectively achieving. I would like to see more of showing who we are and what we're doing and say how effective we have been at it. I think more proactive and say, this has worked for us. And it seems to me how I read it is a little bit passive aggressive, to be honest with you. But if you want to send it like that, that's fine, but I would highlight more of how effective we have been and how great a job the district has done, Levy and all the administrators and that our concerns are based in that we have built a system that works and that has been proven effective in that and then the hardship, what it means, which is in that as far as I know, I appreciate the vaccine piece for the educators. And I can after the meeting send you track changes if that is helpful, but we could also just, I also won't not approve if that, you wanna just go with what you have. Okay, I mean, if others share those concerns, definitely have it to get a run at it. I'm okay either way. Emma? Yeah, as I'm reading over it, I'm sort of thinking it might be, we might be better served or more effective by just speaking more directly like Libby said to our district in those first four paragraphs, like just saying, we believe in what we've created and we don't wanna change what we're doing this late into the year and just being very clear and giving some, you've given a couple of examples but just highlighting those and just being a little bit more like direct to the point and not speaking broadly to other schools because I sense that maybe Mia might be right in terms of like, this could be a little bit of overkill for what they actually are talking about in terms of in-person instruction. And so it may be that we are already offering that and I think that we can just speak to what's working in our district and be a little more short and sweet succinct about it. Well, I guess there's a question like, do we need it at all? I mean, if we feel, yeah, because we wrote it, it sounded like there was going to be a harder call for in-person that would be difficult for many districts, including ours to comply with. I go back to- I mean, I'm okay not, I'm okay, yeah, not saying if we feel we're in compliance and we don't need to raise the issue. I go back to the larger issue, I'm sorry to interrupt you, Jim. I go back to the larger issue of, it matters to our educators that you wrote this and it will matter to our educators that you wrote this. And it's an added stress that I have told them that I will fight tooth and nails to not happen because of the work they're doing. And so I think if they're bored, they're school bored and whether it's a political statement or not from the state piece, I think it goes a long way for the educators who are working hard for our students. So I would advocate you do write it or you do send it. You can make, you couldn't take that feedback and make it more specific to MRPS because that's the system we know, right? And we can't speak for other systems. However, I think most educators in other systems probably feel the same way. Don't put extra stress on us, but at the same time we know MRPS. So you could take that feedback and put, we can work on some really specific pieces that MRPS has in place and some specific challenges to changing our system and with six weeks left to school, left for school. But yeah, I think it matters to the educators at MRPS. Yeah, I agree. And I think that was there, you're right, that was part of having it written. Andrew. Yeah, I had two things I wanted to say and one was exactly what Libby just said, which is we are an employer of a lot of talented people and a lot of talented people who are putting a lot of energy and they're putting themselves in a very difficult position, let's be real. And I think we need to advocate for them. That's what we, as a board, as an administration, we are a major employer and we need to be a good employer. And that means going to bat at a higher policy level for them from time to time. So I think it's important that we do write this, but at the same time, I really love the points that I've heard from Emma, Amanda, Mia. From my perspective, and I think Libby has articulated this well in the past, MRPS can essentially serve as an example for the state on this. We have achieved some excellent results. We do have pretty frequent, comparatively, in-person learning opportunities in our district. And I think we can actually serve as kind of maybe, we don't know exactly what the governor meant by that statement. It was in his inaugural address. I don't believe there's been any clarity since then, is that correct Libby? And he's our state's leader on this issue. And I think some of it is visionary what he's putting out there in an inaugural address, I'm certain some of it is. So, maybe we help, I feel like we have an opportunity to say, hey, governor, we appreciate what you're saying. And we think that what we're doing could serve as a model for the state. That's one approach. Jill? Yeah, I'll try to be quick because I don't wanna be redundant. I echo everything everyone said. I really appreciate you writing it. I have no edits. I think because we're writing it from a place of success and from, you know, here we are, we're coming up on February break, it's still going. Kids are going to school every day. I think it's that much more powerful, frankly. I think it's really unfortunate that they put a lot of districts in the position of even having to articulate that when the squall was like, well, every district's different. So everyone gets to figure out their own. And I think, frankly, what Libby and our team created is a pretty elegant and frankly, as a parent, I'm finding it a pretty successful, incredibly successful structure for this year. So I think coming from that place to Andrew's point about being actually an example, and also that being said, and also can we finish this year strong and supporting our teachers and not creating yet another wave of change at this point in the year? So I'm glad you're doing it. And I once again think it's fantastic what we've accomplished this year. I totally agree. So how do we want to go forward? I'm happy to give another round of changes. The acknowledgement that we probably wouldn't be able to set it off until after break in March. I mean, if there's small changes, we could, I don't want to draft right now, but I guess either we can do another round of changes of edits, people can redline it, send it on, and we can look again at March 3rd, or if we feel that it's generally there, I could add a little more, a few more examples, work with Libby on that, make a little more district specific and set it off the next few days. Well, have people had an opportunity to provide comments other than just in this setting right now, cause like Amanda said, she would be happy to send along track changes. I know Mia was really, really helpful for my perspective writing the op-ed for the budget. So that's something that we need to do. I think if it's tweaks, like a few things here, people can send that separately. The problem is we can't work on a Google doc out of the session or becomes an unwarranted meeting. So if people feel there's kind of like tweaks they can provide, they can send them to me individually and I can incorporate it into a different letter and add a few examples of Libby. If people feel it needs a major rewrite, then I feel we probably need to come back and discuss it as a group before we send it off. And I heard, some people say largely okay with it, few tweaks, like change the thing a bit and I also heard maybe a larger rewrite was necessary. Amanda, your hand's up. Yeah, for me, like I said, I think it needs changes but I'm okay with just sending it in as is. If it's the case of waiting until March, I'd rather just send it as is. Yeah. Ryan? Sure, I was just gonna say I would offer a motion that we essentially appoint Jim as Board Chair Authority to finish the letter based on the feedback that we've just had in this discussion and when he as chair feels comfortable with that to submit it to the governor's office at that point in time, I think time was a bit important in this topic. We don't wanna send this out after we get back for March break or what, a few weeks away from that April deadline in a sense. So I think we'll probably be better off just to kind of move along and allow Jim the authority to kind of continue it and wrap it up. A second? Yeah, I just wanna say I think essentially there's two paragraphs early on that can just be kind of overhauled and we could add some more examples and make it a little bit more MRPS specific but I think the general thrust of it doesn't need to be changed very much. That's my two cents. And Jim, I'm happy to work with you and Libby or if you're really tied up, I'm happy to spend a little bit of time this weekend on it. Yeah, I think we can likely get out on and appreciate that. Did that count as a second? Yeah, so with that in mind, I second Ryan's motion. Any discussion and I am not, I'm not sure if you put your hand up again. Or is that from, is that from last time? Same here. Discussion? Jill? Hi. Emma? Hi. Anakit? Hi. Ryan? Hi. Andrew? Hi. Mia? Hi. Amanda? Yes. Jerry? Hi. Great, thanks. And yeah, I'll work on it this weekend. So, you know, feel free to send suggested edits beforehand and I'll try to incorporate as many as possible. And yeah, Andrew, I definitely will take you up in your offer to help with that. Great, and the other matter I wanted to bring up, which is super important is this is Ryan has sadly informed us that he is not going to seek another term. And I just want to acknowledge his great service and this is going to be, I believe your last meeting. So, Ryan has been on the Roxbury board for several years before being a real leader in that community in terms of making the merger happen. He served on the merger committee and very thoughtfully led that community through that process and then joined the newly formed Montpelier Roxbury board and has been a super thoughtful and super dedicated board member on this board. And I know he was serving with him on the Roxbury board but I know he was for several years there as well. So I just wanted to acknowledge all your great work. It's been fantastic working with him. Really gonna kind of miss having your thoughtful voice on the board, but I also know you've put in your time. And as you said, your wife said she was no longer willing to vote for you. So that's probably the signal you need that you've done your time. But a huge thanks for all you've done and we really appreciate the fantastic, fantastic work you've put in over many years. Well, thank you, Jim. I appreciate all those kind words. And I think it's probably public at this point in time in Roxbury as well, since the ballot is out there with no name on it. I could say at this point in time also that the person that had been kind of recruited to replace me has ended up not being able to do so. And next potential recruitment was gonna be joining us this evening, which I'm not seeing in the audience list. So that might not be as promising as had been hoped for. So, yes, any raw experience out there watching the meeting tonight, please reach out. There's gonna be an open spot on the board that I'm gonna be looking for a great person to fill. And now it's really it's been some of my wife after dinner tonight coming down to the meeting. It's been eight years I've been doing this board work.  And I'm gonna have to make sure that I find some good stuff to fill up with so I don't have a big void. And I truly hope that at some point in time I've been able to make some contributions that have provided some good things for some of our students' lives. And best of luck to all of you and your future work. And I'll come to the informational meeting just for the heck of it, right? So squeeze one more in before fully retire. Great. But you say, Ryan, I value your opinion too much and there's plenty of committees for you to join on to. And I can say from the Roxbury side that he is very much appreciated in our community for all of the work he's done.  So you've definitely done your time, Ryan. We really appreciate it. Thank you. I appreciate everything. Yeah. And if you need any help recruiting in Roxbury, I think we're all happy to help. Yep. Couple more weeks for a writing candidate. Yeah. Nope. I hope it's not you. All right. Great idea. Close that. That's a great idea. Yeah, no, thank you again. And yeah, you're willing to join us, of course, anytime and resume with all of you to be in the audience. I know Tina makes guest appearances relatively frequently, so. Jim, I've got a question. Yeah. First of all, Ryan, thanks for it. Thanks for serving all these years. I haven't had a chance to work with you closely for as much as I wanted, but thanks for all your service. My question is now that Ryan's leaving about committees on the negotiation side. Do we appoint somebody now? Do we appoint somebody after the election, assuming somebody will replace Ryan? Yeah, so we'll appoint, we have to actually reappoint everything on March 3rd. We have to reorganize. That will not be a huge task because I mean, the only real unknown is Ryan Seath. But we have three open positions and three uncontested races. So I'm guessing given the early ballots out there that Emma, Mia and Amanda probably already have what they need to get over the finish line. So we will reappoint. I think the big question will be Ryan. And if we may not have, we may have an open seat depending on what happens with Roxbury. It sounds like there's not someone currently on the ballot, so we may have to do some outreach. So they just be keeping some vacancies. But I think on negotiations in particular, we would probably want to move someone onto that seat on March 3rd because that's- Anakit, Anakit, are you particularly worried about the negotiations that you and Ryan have been involved in? Yeah, especially Ryan's been leading that. So now, within the- After your performance the other night, Anakit, you got- No, you're fine. Ryan, you would have been proud of him. It was spreadsheet wizardry. I'm always proud of him. Yeah, but we won't find someone to help you, Anakit. You can- We don't have to do it now, but you may want to start privately lobbying. All right, policy monitor. We have the prevention of harassment, tasing and bullying, F20, and the F28 Federal Child Nutrition Act wellness policy. Do you have any question or discussion around those? I have a question. Yep. So when we're monitoring the policy, we're just looking at what the policy is, just trying to understand, and is there data that can support some of the policies that come with it? And what can the board access in terms of data around the haze and bullying harassment policy to look at what's working and what's not working? What data are you interested in? In bullying harassment and being desegregated by disability and race and all of that. Everything that you collect basically, what can we have? So I think for me, it's important to be able to be data-driven to if we need to change a policy that's not working, how do I know if it's not working? And what kind of data back that up? So in terms of the bullying harassment, for example, what kind of data are you collecting and what are we allowed to see or not see? So the HHB policy, they're pretty specific parameters as to when that type of investigation is initiated. And so for instance, this year, we've probably initiated like three. So that's too small of a size to be able to bring to the board in terms of any type of specific data. And we don't have a significant amount of HHB investigations throughout a school year to be able to desegregate it by special education or by racial ethnicity. It's just not a big enough number for us. We don't do that many investigations. And that policy is very specific as to when an investigation is started. Is there any way to look at like a tenure, like what has happened in the district, just like to inform anything? And where does that data go? Does that data go straight to the AOE? No, it doesn't go to the agency of education. So if the board, the full board would like me to try to gather that, I can see what's available. I don't think we could get 10 years of data because I just don't know what kind of systems we had before my tenure as superintendent to collect it and keep it. But I can see what we can gather if the board would like me to gather that kind of information. Mia? I guess one of the questions for me is that this policy addresses like when we have, when someone reports an incident, we have to follow through on it. But the policy doesn't address or set any sort of benchmark for like prevention of it or like any sort of way of measuring whether or not we're being successful at limiting bullying or harassment from happening. So just to me, it makes me think we probably need a follow-up policy or an update. This is one of the ones that's mandated, right? From the state, we have to have this. So maybe what we need is an additional policy that is like a following up on it. We have these values that we hold as a district. And so to follow through on those values, this is what we would like to see in the district in terms of preventing harassment and bullying in the first place or something like that. You can add, the board can add to the policy, the language that's in this, but there's some policies that are written by lawyers and this is one of them. And so basically the BSBA will say, this is your policy. You can add to it, but you can't change it. Can't take anything out of it. Right, exactly. So you could, the policy committee and the board could look at this policy and say, could we add to this policy for expectations around monitoring? Absolutely, that's your prerogative to do just what you were saying. But yeah, you can't change what the policy actually says because it was probably written by lawyers for the BSBA. Yep, okay. Emma? This policy has become a sort of topic of interest during the School Safety and Police Relations Committee work. And one of the main reasons is because in all of our surveying of stakeholders in that work that we did and that data that we collected, bullying was the number one concern among different stakeholder groups. I think in particular guardians and community members. And so we've heard several stories in some of that qualitative feedback around bullying and how it was handled or not handled. And so it does seem like a concern in our community, bullying in particular. And so I kind of agree. My wheels are spinning a little bit as a member of the policy committee and now not having Ryan on that committee to help us navigate these conversations. But you're right, Emma. Well, we'll have to recruit another person, right? So in the implementation section of the actual policy, the language, this is one of the things that kind of comes to mind in terms of what Amanda brought up to was the, I think it's number four under implementation. It says we will respond to notifications of possible violations of this policy. In order to promptly and effectively address all complaints of hazing, harassment or bullying. So I'm wondering like just in your analysis of whether we were in compliance, the word effective, that's the one that sort of pops out as what is our measure of success in terms of effectively handling a bullying complaint from the time that it's filed to the time that it's resolved? From, so from my perspective, here's one of the rubs for this policy is that a parent or a guardian will call something bullying that doesn't fit the definition according to the law. So the law is that a child is targeted repeatedly over and over and that's what qualifies as bullying. And oftentimes what happens with parents that I've seen is that if their child is picked on at any point in time, that it's called, it's named bullying. And that very well could be true in the layman's term of what bullying means. But according to the law, that's not what bullying means. It's the same kid picking on the same kid consistently over time that equals bullying. And that's a hard bar to prove. Harassment is actually easier to prove from a school's point of view from the definitions. What do we, so the language is just that it's repeated over time. Does it- Yeah, it's like an intent to ridicule something. But so do two incidences count as being repeated or are you reading, I mean, what's the read on that? It depends on the situation. Like there's no one right answer to that, right? So I had a parent write to me the other day that said, my kid has been bullied because she was pushed. Like they were at recess and she was pushed over at recess and my kid's bullying and they're not doing anything about it. And it's like, no, that wouldn't even, that wouldn't even start an investigation. That's what happens on the playground sometimes, you know? So it's really tricky with this policy because of the definitions. And so if you, if we really dug into the data based on the definitions of this law and this policy that is mandated, there's not a lot of data to dig into. We do investigate quite a few throughout the year but not as many as parents would like us to. So that's one big challenge. If a kid is called a name, that's not bullying necessarily. But something that would fall under harassment, right?  That's why we investigate actually more harassment cases than we do bullying cases. So since this is like the bullying, harassment and hazing policy. Yeah. When you went, you know, I'm curious to Amanda's point about data. Like if we could know how many cases of harassment are, how many complaints are filed of harassment and then how many of those cases are investigated and then how many of those, you know, what is our measure of success? Is there like a some sort of process where the complainant like fills out a form and says, yes, I'm satisfied with the outcome or how do we measure, you know? There's no like satisfaction. As a board, you could certainly put that into your policy that the superintendent will report out and then on the number of HHB investigations that are conducted in a square. Absolutely. You are more than welcome to add that to your policy. Again, you can add things to this policy. You just can't take anything out of this policy. In terms of contentment of the outcome, it's a people's perception. Are there reality in this situation, right? And so there's a couple of things that compete with that. Because of FERPO, we're not allowed to talk about consequences of other people's children, right? So I'll just use you as an example. If Soren picks on Fiona, right? Then we find Soren guilty of harassing Fiona, Jim's child, which I don't think he would do, but if that were true, we couldn't tell Jim what consequences Soren had. Jim will demand it. Jim, believe me, he will demand it and say, I want to know what kind of discipline this child has. But we want to be able to tell him that because of FERPO rights. And so often parents are not satisfied with the outcome because we're not allowed to talk about the outcome with other people's children to them. So that would be a hard burden of proof for us as a district or the board. Like, I don't know what kind of evidence I would bring in terms of satisfaction. Does it make sense? Yeah, I guess I'm just interested in the language that you used in your compliance report in terms of evidence. And a lot of it was just like, yes, we have these people in place and these systems in place. But I guess I was more interested in, we've successfully and promptly and effectively resolved, 80% of our cases or something like that. Yeah, then put that language into the policy. Then the next year's policy monitoring will have that inside of it. Absolutely, that's your prerogative as a policy committee and as a board. But so what was it? Was it more, I'm sorry, I'll just say one more thing and then I can move on. But so was it more of like a qualitative, like a conversation with the equity coordinator around like, do you feel like we've effectively, so the language again in the policy is promptly and effectively addressed all complaints? Yeah, I would say we have because that is regulated for us. So if you look at the procedural document, when a legitimate complaint is made, then we have to immediately start certain steps. Does that make sense? Like, I mean, parents could sue us if we don't, right? So we immediately start that and that's what the procedure is there for. And so our view of effective may be a different definition of a parent's view of effective. Mia? I think Andrew might've actually had his hand up for me. Okay, you're on. Oh, really? Yeah. I'll take it. Yeah, what this is making me realize is that this policy feels like the floor and what we could be reaching for is a higher standard of if we wanna center that around the effectiveness of the investigation or whatever, that seems good. And I think we could also look at what is it like, if bullying is a pretty high bar legally in this definition then maybe we as a community, when we think about what are our values around the social and emotional learning that bullying has a really detrimental effect on. Like maybe we could be saying, yes, this is what the legal definition of bullying is. And in our community, while it doesn't necessarily trigger this like deep investigation, we do have a process that we follow when there is something like a push on the playground or two incidences instead of 12 or whatever. So anyway, that's the wheels that are turning in my head. And whatever process it is that we need to start to ask the policy committee to start to do that work, I'd like to start that. So I think it would start with the policy committee, right? Yeah, it would definitely start with the policy. Has Amanda and Emma, now that Ryan is not. It would definitely start with the policy committee. Andrew. So a couple of things. One is I think this conversation around, what data are we collecting? How are we measuring success? Those types of discussions are really, really important. I think something that we need to keep in mind too, I'm just adding this as one other just consideration that we need to keep in mind as a board. There's a lot of laws and a lot of really great laws at the federal and state level that are in place to protect individuals' privacy and confidentiality. And we will bump into those because we have a small, I was looking at the data even from central, from the central Vermont Career Center and for Montpelier and certain programs, there's only one or two people and it would be very easy to identify people that way. So however we're doing this, we do need to keep in mind, however we're measuring success, doing it in ways that we can collect meaningful data, but that won't come in conflict with those laws. That's something that we're gonna have to consider. And I think it's gonna be, some of what you were proposing just before, I think would work. But that's just something that I think we're gonna have to consider. And then the other thing is just the policy committee in general, this whole conversation, I've been thinking about this lately, our policies when we merged as a district were completely overhauled. And the two main people who have worked on, or who worked on the policy committee for the past what, like three to five years, Jim, were Ryan and Bridget. They did most of the heavy lifting and they're gone. And we do need to have, the policy committee is a really, really important committee and I do think we need three people on that committee. So that's just something to think about heading into next month, but it's a really important committee and it's one that has lost two people who were doing a very, very heavy lift for a long time. There was a lot, a lot of work being done. And frankly, there's still a lot of work that needs to be done and we're talking about it right now. So, and this new configuration of the board hasn't really dealt with new policies because it's an iterative process where the policy committee takes something, provides something, provides a justification for it and then board members will propose different ideas. Sometimes policies have come, since I've been my short time on the board, policies have come to us and the board says, this isn't gonna work for X, Y and Z, this isn't gonna work. And it goes back to the drawing board and then comes back again. So this is, it can be a very iterative process and it's an important committee and these are important issues. So thanks everyone. The other thing to consider with that, Andrew, is that policy should be rewritten or revisited every three years. And we're at that point. So next year the policies will need to be re-voted on, I guess. So it's a big bulk of work that the board will need to do in the next school year. Yeah, no, definitely. That should be something we definitely look at on March 3rd. Yeah, and I'll get to you in a second, Amanda. Yeah, is making sure we've got a good policy today. Amanda. Yeah, so I mean, part of it is, I hear you, Andrew, around like the number of BIPOC folks that we have in our district and like, well, there has to be a way for us to like think, like, so is it that Levy then takes that or like the district as a whole, like the staff is looking at that data because to be able to inform policy, like we need to really see what's happening, right? Like, so if, let's say that it's in literacy, we as a board don't know that BIPOC students have lower rates and I'm just making this up. Then everything else, how do we continue those conversations and how do we make policies? If we don't know, if what we're using as desegregated data is like, you can't look at it because of privacy, but the district can look at it. Teachers are looking at it, principals are looking at it. So how do we inform our policies so that we're not blind about what's actually happening on the ground? So I think it's important because we know that our rates for people with disability, graduation rates for people with disability were not high. Like, those are things that we should be informed around like the data that's happening in the district. And just making this up, let's say that all BIPOC students have the lower literacy rates and kids with disability, like suspension rates, all of that really makes us, like it's important to look at the data, but how do we get better at things if we don't know what the numbers are, right? So I think that it's not a yes or no, it's about like just dreaming about what procedures we can do to, if we can look at it, then like what are the ways that we can be informed and that it's attached to that equity policy that we have and it's attached to that, you know, this framework that we are really moving to supporting BIPOC students, students with disabilities and students from the LGBTIQA communities. I think it's important for us to like, to like dream big about what we can get and not put like the blocks already. If we cannot get it, well, what are the ways around it that we look at that? So I think that I want to just make a motion that you will look at this policy in the policy committee and like start thinking about questions that we have and whatnot. And I agree all these policies from ESDA are the floor in their own words, the floor and we can add a lot of things to it. So here we are. Yeah, and I just want to clarify when I was talking about the numbers, I was talking about the Central Vermont Career Center and looking just within programs for Montpelier and some of those programs, you only have one student or two students. And if we receive data as a board in a public space about those students and there's only one student in this one program, we probably can't receive information about one student in a public sphere like that. It's probably going to be in violation of FERPA, I have to imagine. So I mean, yeah, I don't want to get too far down this road right now, but I hear what you're saying, Amanda, and I do think that there are ways that we can get meaningful information from the district, but I don't think publicly sharing information about one or two students is going to be something that we're going to be able to do at any point. And that's definitely not what I'm asking, Andrew. I don't think that's what I'm asking around, getting one student or two. I think that there are ways to do this that we can look at the impact, is an impact assessment, right? Like any policy that we do, we need to think about what are the impacts that is going to have in marginalized communities or not. No, no. Well, it sounds like there's a strong desire for the policy. I don't think we need a motion on it. I think we can just set it on the policy committee's agenda for the policy committee to revisit this policy. I strongly suggest that that work be done in consultation with the VSBA, which has legal services on this and our district lawyers because I agree that we want as much data as we can to inform both the policy and then also kind of the reporting requirements of Libby. But we do have to respect the rules because not doing so would subject the district to potential enormous liability. And I think we can thread that needle, but let's make that kind of a top priority of the policy committee moving forward. I think we had a motion, let's make sure we had a motion to approve that the two policy reports, I don't think we ever got to the motion stage. And are there questions on the child nutrition act wellness policy? All right, so a motion to approve F-20 prevention of harassment, hazing and bullying and also the report on F-28 federal child nutrition act wellness policy. All right, Jim, to approve what? The two policy monitoring reports. And what am I approving? That we're looking at it. We're just basically saying that Libby gave them to us and we received them and they're acceptable. Oh, but I would like to go and check the bullying and harassment policy and make changes. So is that approving this? And then- When we're not acting on the policy, we're just acting on the report. Like Libby is reporting on the existing policy. Okay. So we're not, the discussion was that the existing policy needed revision, but we're not acting on the policy. We're just acting on her monitoring report on the existing policy. So she's just telling us about compliance with existing policy. Oh, can you rephrase that then? So we're not, that we are approving the monitoring piece away. Accepting? Yeah, no, I'm asking for a motion to do that from Jill, do you want to make it? Sure, I'll take a stab at it. So I move that we accept the submitted policy monitoring reports for, let's see, can we do them both together? Yes. Policy F20 and F28. Second. Any discussion? Jill? Emma? Hi. Anacet? Hi. Ryan? Hi. Andrew? Hi. Mia? Hi. Amanda? Hi. And Jared? Great, thank you. I think we're on to superintendent evaluation and Libby, I think you can go enjoy your family. And now, do we need a motion to go into the executive session? We need a motion to go to executive session. We also need, Libby doesn't have to be around to do this unless she does. It can Anna put us into a breakout room that's not publicly accessible. I've already got you in breakout rooms. Jim, I'm gonna make you the host. Okay. So you can... Jim, do you know how to do that? Should we make somebody else the host? I mean... Do not have to... No, but seriously. Emma, do you wanna be the host? I teach with Zoom. I do breakout rooms all the time. I can definitely do it. Okay, okay. I can not do it if I'm not the host, but... I've already made the breakout room, but I'm gonna move you to the host, Jim. And you may... I would assume the breakout room transfers to you, but if it doesn't, you may have to make the breakout room. Okay, I would make it a breakout room. And I do not blame Andrew for his lack of patience. That was just mean. You also might wanna make me or somebody co-host just best practice if you accidentally end the meeting. It will end for everybody unless there's a co-host. I think Anna is the co-host, but... Oh, I didn't realize she was still on. Yep, but Jim, nah, I've given you my hosting duties. So now you can make Emma a co-host if you want. It's a good idea, Jim. Has it transferred? I'm not seeing... It's a good idea. Okay, now I've got the breakout room function. Okay, cool. Hey, Jim, sorry. Before we go, I sent you an email around it waiting pupil study. And so we can't give just like a one minute question that I have around that. Like, I don't know if you saw that email that I sent you. I did not see it. I'm sorry. I guess I just send an email to everybody. Then after. Yeah, if you wanna ask it quickly. Well, there is a coalition of school boards in the state that is currently working on the waiting pupil study.  They just hire a lobbying. So I'm part of their Google group just because I was kind of monitoring some for Act One. But so I don't know, like I think that information is very interesting. Like lots of things are happening in the legislation that are going to affect us. And if people are interested in, I don't know how it will work. But I think it's really important that we are looking into that. And I don't know who would like to do that. If anybody is interested in doing that, I think a lot of great things are happening. And I think eventually we will have to make decisions about whether we'll give testimony as a board or what around what is happening and how that's not at our district. And I think we should all be informed of what that means for us. And I did send forward an email to Andrew around like that they just had a press conference and there's all kinds of reports and testimonies from Secretary French and from all kinds of things that will impact us quite a lot actually. Yeah, now I'm sorry, I'm just seeing that now. It was a forward from Maggie Lems. Yeah, now I completely agree. Maybe we can add that as an agenda item on the third to talk about it and see who wants to monitor because it is going to have major impacts on the district. And probably quite a bit unpopular because it will I think currently affect our, I mean, I think it's a fantastic thing for the state. But it may make some of our budgeting more difficult in the next couple of years because of the way it's weighted right now and we're in a, we're a community that probably will lose pupils as a result. Right now the models are suggesting that we'll lose 6% of our pupils, of our equalized pupils. And I know the legislature is talking about ways to make it come in over time. So it's not an immediate impact. But those legislative reports that you get from the VSBA and I get from the VSA are similar. They're pretty much the same kind of legislative. I think they write them together. So those are things to really pay attention to for the weighting study in particular. And that's like the equivalent of losing a grade. Yeah, it's a big, it's not small. Your son is big. It will most definitely influence us. Yeah, yeah, no. Sorry, I missed that email and thank you for bringing that up. Let's put that on the third and talk a little more deeply about how we want to engage that process. All right, so I have breakout room authority. We now need a motion to go into breakout rooms. We don't need magic language for this. We just need a motion to move into executive session for the purpose of personnel evaluation. So move. Second? Second. Gentle? Hi. Emma? Hi. Anakit? Hi. Ryan? Hi. Andrew? Hi. Mia? Hi. Alanda? Yes. And Jerry? Hi. Let's see. So, so Libby and Anna can leave now? Is that right? Jim's the host. Yes. Back control. I'm the host. Well, we'll have to come back to adjourn for Anna's minutes, right? We'll just, one of us will just email Anna to tell her when we do that. She does not need to stick around. Yeah. I'll email Anna. You got it, Jim? I got it. We had another co-host, right? Huh? Everybody obviously has total faith in you. Absolutely. Okay, do I have a motion to adjourn? Moved. Second? Second. Everyone just say I, because I don't think anyone's gonna... Hi. Hi. Hi. Okay, great. Hi. Thanks. Bye, goodnight. And Ryan, feel free to join us next time. But again, thanks so much for all you've done. Wish we could have you a proper, give you a proper in-person send-off, but... Sad to see you, go, Ryan. Bye. Bye, Ryan. All right, thanks all. Thank you, Ryan. Thank you. Bye.