So, we're not going to do that yet, but I'm leaving it on now, whether I want it to give me a half step like last time. But I'll do that very soon. So, one thing I want to point out, last time I wrote down the series for E to the X wrong. It was sort of morally right, but I divided this by two. So, I'm doing something that should be obvious from the McGoran series. I shouldn't have to do any work. We're almost over. Of course, I can start taking derivatives at zero, logging them in, figure out the series from first principles. But why would I do that? So, what should I do if I do this? Huh? Separate them into two. Think of this as X cubed times e to the X squared over two. Good, and then, I'm sorry? So, nobody knows? Okay, so let's make it be an easier problem. Suppose the problem was the series for U, E to the U. Yeah. All right, this is X cubed times a whole bunch of jump. And a whole bunch of jump. I don't need that much room. I'll just do this. This would be sum n to the zero to the infinity X squared over two. But this is actually right. We just let's clean it up a little bit. This is X to the two n, and that's the two to the n. And this is sum sum out X to the two n. This two to the n is on the bottom. So I'll write it down here. So this would be X squared over two all to the n to the term. And then n times the value. And then this is X cubed times every single quantity. So that'll just raise this power by three. So, I mean, while we can, in principle, figure this out, let's just check it and confirm it by starting the hard way. So this is, so just emphasize this. This is when n is zero, I get X cubed over plus. And then when n is one, I get X to the fifth over two if I'm doing that right. And then what X is, when n is two, I get X to the seventh over two squared, which is four times two that you have right. This is two squared times two, I think so. So let's just, and now let's write it the hard way. So I have X cubed e to the X squared over two, that's my n. That's from zero to zero. And now if I take the derivative, you see it's already awful. So here I'll use the computer to take the derivative. So since I don't want to do all the work, I will just ask if I can do all the work. This stuff is for later, which is my thing for now. Okay. So I want to take the derivative of X cubed over two squared over two with respect to X. So it's that. Now I want the derivative of that with respect to X. Okay. So if we notice that the X, so here's F. You can't see the same thing. Okay. So F is there. This is F prime of zero, but see that's zero because I have an X squared at the end of it. F double prime of zero. This is all zero because of the X's.  So the first non-zero term in the series is non-zero. And then the next term, zero, because there's an X in everything, but when I take the derivative of that and I put out an X here and so that's 60 e to the 1 half X squared. So that's another 60. Not another 60. A 60. So that would be zero, a factorial over 60. I mean 60 over five times four is a half in this term. So you could do this, but it's awful. So it's much easier to take something that you know that's simple and combine it. Okay, well, this is not why I brought the computer here. So, side trips. So what I thought was trying to do last time when the computer fought with me, actually the computer was finding the series for say e to the X. So there's the first part. Can you see this? There's a graph. So forgive my editing here. This is the series for e to the X, just the first five terms. If I want to look at, compare, well, let's see. So here's the series for e to the X, e to the zero. If I change this and I add in the first two terms, well, let's just take for three terms, one plus X. So this is the first quadratic term. This is the constant of one. This is one plus X, which is the tangent line in zero. This parabola here, which is starting to look a lot like e to the X, is one plus X, well, one plus X plus X squared over two. If I go to three terms, that's the purple one. It starts to hug the graph a little more. If I go to, say, 13 terms, get some horrible looking polynomial, let me actually just do the 13. And you can barely tell the difference out to negative five. The green curve, you can't even see the red curve because the green curve is sitting on top of it. Can you see them in the back? We don't care. So we can see, actually, let's just see the convergence here. So each of these colored lines is more and more terms of the Taylor series, and it's starting to hug the graph of e to the X more and more and more. If we play the same game with the sign instead of the exponential, maybe I'll only do five. So this is the graph of the sign. And you can see more and more terms are starting to hook on and get closer and closer to the graph of the exponential if instead of doing five, I'll do 15. It starts to really match up. Maybe there's too many going on. So let's do the last one. So here's the sign curve here. These are, this is the degree 12 Taylor polynomial, the degree 14, the degree... So they start to match more and more on a wider and wider range. So let me do one other case. If you remember, this guy converges, the infinite series converges for all X, for both of these ones that I did. But if we do say the log of 1 plus X, so let me do the same thing here, the log of 1 plus X. The red curve is the log of 1 plus X. The green curve is its tangent line. If we take the polynomial, the second degree Taylor polynomial, it starts to get closer. Again, the green curve is our two terms of the table polynomial, the red curve is the things we want. So let's say five terms of the series. It starts to get closer in here. But notice that it just sort of feels away in here. Let's go a little further away. If I start taking more and more terms, so instead of taking the degree 5, let's take 50 terms of the Taylor series. It matches really well, and then it just falls off. And that's because the Taylor series only converges between here and here. So you can see maybe it matches really well, but then it just falls off. So this bump is the best that the Taylor series can do. And if you try to go beyond 1, even though the graph is defined, the Taylor series is no good because it doesn't work. Even if I take, this is the degree 50 series, let me just show you what I'm doing. This polynomial that I'm trying to approximate the log with, it converges really well when it converges on the outside of the graph. What I wasted, I don't know, quarter of the class, trying to make it work last time. Any questions? Notice that also we don't have to do this stuff as zero. So for example, suppose I wanted to approximate the log of 3 by a series. I could use this same series, but expand it not at zero, expand it at 3. I mean, not to take 50 terms and emphasize that it's based at 3. And notice that, so here I'm taking a Taylor series centered at x equals 3, not at x equals 0. This is a Taylor series, not a Florence series. So the series that I'm doing here is centered at x equals 3 and it looks more like that. So I'm expanding my series here around x equals 3 and the same kind of stuff happens with the log. It still falls off if I take lots of terms, so instead of 5 terms, let's take 50 terms. It still falls off but it falls off here because it converges around x equals 3 with the radius of convergence that reaches all the way out to about 7. So the radius of convergence is important. It's not just some garbage that we may can do if you want to use this. No. So what the radius is really doing is saying something weird happens at the edge where I can convert. Maybe that weird thing in a real number. So the log, for example, this function is going to be log of 1 plus x blows up to x to minus 1. So this series can't converge this way beyond x equals minus 1 because this function is infinite. And just because of the way series works it can't go any further this way even. So it will blow up. Which is 4 away from 3. So the series will also not work well beyond x equals 7. If I move over and generate it at 10 I should get something that's good between minus 1 because something happens at minus 1 that hurts it. Now there are other series where the thing that goes wrong actually happens in a complex plane so the function is nice for all real numbers but the series can't go very far because it's the complex number. Okay, any other questions about this stuff? I'm going to come through the way of this stuff now. Cross track, sorry. For the sine, bar in series for e to the x for the sine of x we know the series for the cosine of x by taking the derivative of the sine when we're writing it again we know the series for the log which is really the scalar series for the log basic. Okay, we also know geometric series but to be able to extend this repertoire a little bit k is some number. So 1 plus x to the fourth power you know this. Maybe xq plus x to the c.  You've all seen this before I think. Has anyone not seen this before? Did you guys actually like go to high school and stuff? It's amazing. Okay, so this is something that you're supposed to have seen but you haven't. This is called the binomial theorem. How we can expand power of binomials a plus b to the f power. So this is also related to something you may have seen called Pascal's triangle. This is just Pascal's triangle. These numbers are the numbers you get out of Pascal's triangle. 1, 1, 1, 2, 1, 1, 3, 3, 1, 1, 4, 6, or just written in a slightly different way. So if I go to the 10th line Pascal's triangle and I want the third entry then that value will be 10 factorial divided by 3 factorial divided by 7 capital. Okay? So this is just a true fact that you should know but I guess you don't. So notice that this looks a lot so let me just write that again in a slightly more compact notation. 1 plus x instead of using n here I'm going to use k. This is n equals 0 to k of n choose k x to the n. I'm just rewriting by a switch from n to k so let's just put it back in case. You don't have to change your notes. This is the same. If I expand this out so this is the same as that. If k is an integer left between 0 and n. Sorry, that's silly. If k is a whole number. Yes, we have that. But what if k is a fraction? And we make sense of this. We can certainly, so this looks a lot like a series. It's not a series because it stops at the k terms. But we can make it still work even if k isn't a whole number. But instead of doing that let's just put it aside. But I want to think about this. It will not be like a polynomial that stops at the k term. It will be an infinite series. But maybe it still works. So let's just make a series for 1 plus x to the k x. And let's see if it works. So f of x is 1 plus x to some power. And as long as the power isn't 1 I'm okay. And then we can take its derivative of 0 1. If we take the derivative of k comes down f prime of 0. If I take the next derivative of k comes down and I evaluate it to 0 times k minus 1. Let's keep going this way. k minus 1 times k minus 2 1 minus x k minus 3. And if I evaluate it to 0 I get k times k minus 1. And this pattern will continue. If k isn't an integer if k is not a positive number this will never stop. If k is a positive number eventually I'll start getting 0s here. Because k minus something is zero. But if k is just like negative 3 or 1 half this process will continue. And in general I'll have what will be nth derivative. But it will start with k and the k minus 1 will still be there. When will I stop? k minus n. Here I stop from k minus n plus 1. I won't use k minus n. k minus n minus 1 is where I stop. And then I have an x. Then I have a 1 plus x to the k minus n power. I take the derivative of 12 times I will have 12 times 11 times 10 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4 until I get down to k minus 11. And then I will be into the k minus 12th power. Oh and I plug in zero here. I just get this jump. So what does this mean? This means we know the series. So my series for 1 plus x to the k power is going to be f of zero f prime of zero times x plus f of the prime of zero divided by 2 means that squared f triple prime of zero divided by three times x squared times x cubed pa-ba-ba-ba But we know the formula for all of these yet. Well it's k minus n minus 1 which is k minus n but then get one back That means that the series in this case is 1 plus k times x plus k times k minus 1 over 2 times the x square plus k times k minus 1 k minus 2 over 3 factorial x cubed plus 0.111 So like this in summation notation 1 plus x to the k is we start at zero we go as long as we need to 1 k k minus 1 k minus 2 stop just before k minus n divided by n factorial n multiplied by x to the n So that's sort of a mouthful so we can use the same notation to write it a little shorter where here we have to change the meaning of k choose n a little bit to allow for fractions So here we're going to take k choose n to be this even if k is a fraction or even if k is negative and if n is bigger than k it's 0. So this agrees with the previous meaning there because what does this n minus k do it kills off all the terms sorry my n's and k's the creative rule makes them match So this k minus n factorial kills off everything here in the case back to earlier the n is still here so this is the same as that if k is a whole number bigger than n if k is a whole number smaller than n it's going to be 0 so we're done and if k is a fraction well this notion of k choose n because choose n things out of a pile of k things doesn't make sense to say choose n things out of a pile of log 5 things I don't even know what log 5 things means 3.5 things means well that makes some amount of sense but we just define it to be this and it agrees completely and as we've seen we get a series and this series allows us to do things so this is called the binomial series this series allows us to do things like write a series for 1 plus x the square root of 1 plus x for the cube root so this captures the series for fractional powers maybe I should do an example so sort of in the same vein as this if we wanted to write a series for 1 over the square root of 9 plus x close what I want a series for this I can do this without having to take all of the derivatives and go through all of the work I can just turn this into something that looks like this by a little bit of algebra so what would I do you're not telling me all of the algebra what k would I use negative 1 half so this is 9 plus x for negative 1 half well this is still not the same as that I need a 1 there but to get a 1 there no problem I can just divide by 9 the same kind of trick we do when we were doing trig substitutions 1 plus x over 9 minus 1 half but then I have a 9 get inside for a minute this is getting closer and now I can take well I know what 9 to the minus 1 half is that's a third square root of 1 over the square root of 9 so this is 1 third to the minus 1 half and now this is in the same form that I can use the binomial series form I think of this as my u and I do 1 plus u there so my series is well should I write it in some notation so it's 1 third of what I get where I use an x over 9 instead of an x there minus 1 half choose n which really means that list of terms which I'll write out in a second x over 9 which would be just to write out a few terms to emphasize so this will be minus 1 half first term then my next term is well here we have minus 1 half minus 1 so this is minus 1 half times minus 3 half divided by 2x okay you can be divided by a piece of motion yes I did sorry but then again 1 minus 1 half x square minus 3 half minus 5 half over 3 factorial x cubed plus ba-ba-ba-ba so we can get a series for this without having to start crashing through this through this through this through you could also just take derivatives through this through this and you should get the same answer I don't want to do that because okay in order to get other series from series that's a little more complicated to get to general terms but suppose I just want for a few terms suppose I want the series for e to the x on the sign of x if I take them they're going to be a horrible mess because I use the product tool but as long as we are in the region where both series converge oh I didn't point it out if you do the ratio test on this this converges for x between plus and minus 1 the endpoints are hard they depend on the value of x and it may or may not include x equals 1 or minus 1 depending on k so suppose I have this these both converge everywhere so it's okay even now or so then if I could multiply these series to this it's a little complicated to multiply these things together because this is like multiplying infinitely long polynomials so let's just write out some terms and see what we get so the first thing to e to the x is 1 plus or 2 x cubed over 3 factorial the sign of x is 3 factorial plus x to the fifth or 5 factorial minus x to the seventh or seventh factorial so what is the first non-zero term of this series is there a constant term? no it's not 1 it's 0 because okay the first non-zero term is not 1 either way if I try to multiply these things together then you FOIL it out instead of it's not FOIL it's sort of like FOIL by the x a power of 2 a 1 times none of these gives me a power of 2 because the next power when I multiply by 1 is a cube but I can kick up a power of 2 by multiplying this x times this x and it gives me an x squared this x times this x cubed gives me an x to the fourth I'm not ready for that yet but I will get an x cubed term 1 times minus x cubed just get this x cubed times this x and so on so let me just go do you want me to do a few more terms or are you okay? do you want me to do a few more terms or are you okay? right so this series is a little hard to write out the general terms so this is uh oh so when I put this this gives me a 6 minus 1 is a 5 so this gives us at least the first few terms by multiplying things down it doesn't give us a general formula because it's a little less yes there's a minus and then the fifth power will be coming from 1 times this x squared times this yep sorry there are two x to the fourth terms I only see x times x oh and the other one you have to write c times this one so I have x times this one and then I also have this one this one times this one you're right so this is gone you have to be a little more careful than I'm being right now okay so just go power by power and notice that eventually it stops right we have to look at all the ways to add up to 3 all the ways to add up to 4 all the ways to add up to 5 and since I missed one I got one wrong but we can multiply you can also divide series in this way but you could I'm not going to go through it but we could figure out the series for the tangent by dividing the series for the sine by the series for the cosine I'll do that in a bit but again it's kind of messy we have to do long division of the polynomial remember they taught me that in 6th grade if you didn't understand it well if you do long division of these infinite polynomials the series happens so we can do a particular series as long as they can work so one of the things that I'm going to mention if you remember like the alternate series we had something that told us how far off would you be in the ten terms or five terms or whatever so our series like this and we want to know what is the error if I take a different center still the same so this is my function and I want to know how far how much off will I be somewhere in ten terms at least two numbers the answer is kind of like the answer in the alternating series test but not quite so this is often called this is called the remainder the answer is if we know a bound we have a number that tells us how big the n plus first derivative is so this is kind of like the other thing that everybody created the error when we did the integral the improper integrals where you needed to know no sorry the Taylor series or the trapezoid rule this is kind of like the k and that that is so what this is saying n plus first derivative of x less than some number m for x between 0 and a the remainder is number a is less than the term you can use but with the derivative of value for this n so this is less than m factorial in fact it's not just a it's at all of the answers less than does that make sense so if we could bound the derivatives so another way that you might see this is that it's the term you can use you can use to evaluate that some number of t is the guy that makes it big


s. So that's been running since well before my time here when I started with the city about six years ago that program was running out of the O'Brien Center. So just as a comparative the first year I was here I believe our after school enrollment was 12 because we had the challenge of getting kids from point A to point B with no consistent transportation and we were doing a lot of vision questing across the community with six kindergartners in tow. So moving up to the school was a huge deal for us and we saw our numbers just about triple in that first year. So that has been a great thing. And then summer as well we base out of the school and that's actually largely been due to our efforts to dovetail services with the summer school program that the school runs. So for many years we ran essentially a competing summer camp program with the free school program and sort of finally decided that we were competing for the same kiddos. So we now run, if you look at our program brochure we run a lot of half day weeks. Reason being that the school is running half day programming in the morning and then we pick up the ball in the afternoon and take kids to 5.30. So that's one of the big pieces with the 21C program and with the school that we've been trying to coordinate better and better year over year. So yeah, thank you. Is that? That's great. Any questions? It's pretty close to 90 seconds too actually. That was awesome. So yeah, any questions on current year stuff before kind of jumping ahead to looking into our crystal ball a little bit? So I guess the 26 from summer 2017 as we transition, do we think that that's going to be a number that's... I think the short answer is no. I think we will rebound some. I don't think we're gonna get back up to 80 to 90 kids. I think we're seeing some different enrollment patterns in that program. I think there's a lot to that but I think we will rebound closer to that 45 or 50 number and our ratios are gonna allow us, we're gonna run... It'll be two classrooms and our max group says is 26 per day. It'll probably be closer to 20 per day, just for health and safety reasons but... So that 40 to 50 range is I think where we're expecting. As I just said, we are gonna actually run this summer two classrooms instead of three. I think that gets us closer to having a maximized ratio of staff to students. I think it's a manageable number. And again, I think it's looking at our daily enrollment versus our total enrollment. It allows us to serve. I think the number of families we've been seeing and keeping our daily numbers comfortably within ratio. That's one of the tricky parts of this is that weekly enrollment and daily enrollment are two different beasts. So you've got to make sure on a given day that you don't have all those kids show up and then you're out of compliance and out of ratio. And of course that's the day that the compliance visit happens and then you get slapped. But also you take some risks and over enroll at times because you know not every kid shows up on every day. So that's sort of the, I think the art of it is figuring out exactly what that looks like and making sure that you've got numbers that cover your bottom line but also keep you within compliance and within health and safety standards. So yeah, it's not unfortunately not a street line calculation. I wish it were, but all right, cool. Onto the future and we can certainly bounce back up questions emerge. So looking ahead, you know, again, just sort of to reflect back to the budgeting process. At that time, the leadership proposal had proposed to bring additional portions of curiosity's position back into the program budget and out of the general fund. So in years past that had been a third in the general fund or two thirds in the general fund, a third in the program budget. With this fiscal year 19 budget that was approved, it moved to a 50-50 split. So it shifted some of the burden of the position financially to the program budget that hadn't been there in years past. So that led to a deficit budget for the coming year which we kind of all knew was gonna be an outcome of that in the short term. So that's that $19,000 number that was there. That was a number that was there during the budget process and that we sort of discussed at that point. On a positive note with the extension of the Promise Communities Grant, we have been able to carry some of that grant funding into the next year. So that's about a little less than 8,000 bucks. So that will help bring that negative number less negative. So we're projecting at this point with that known grant money, about an $11,000 deficit, which is actually a palatable one for us. It cuts about 10% of our program reserves to cover that cost. We're carrying about $100,000 at this point in Thrive Revenues, sorry, reserves. So not a pattern that I think we wanna carry on year over year over year, but I think to kind of kick the tires in year one, that's a palatable dip into the reserves to do that. So I guess questions on that front, certainly I mentioned here some other approaches that we're anticipating taking as we look ahead, but grant funding is as good as your grant approvals and getting that funding awarded. So we will certainly be looking for that opportunity, but that's not hard money that we can guarantee. We are, I think, gonna look a little more closely at our 21C partnership, in particular looking ahead in next summer and what that could do for us in terms of maybe leveraging some grant funding there. That hasn't been part of our, how we've leveraged that funding traditionally, but I think there's some flexibility to look at that. So, and then as I mentioned too, I think summer being a good example of trying to get ratios and staffing sizes down to a point where we're really maximizing that enrollment number versus the number of staff we have on board. And again, that's, we tend to err a little bit lower than maximizing ratio, because I think from a program quality perspective, if you've got two people and 26 kids in both classrooms, it's pretty nuts on a given day. So I think trying to keep that number of students a little bit lower gives a better experience for the kids that we're serving. So. And with Kirstie's upcoming very exciting event that we're all very much of you towards, congratulations. Yes. Is that person selected for late July or so? Nope. So we're in the process of getting interviews set up as we speak. So we've had a few candidates come through, a couple which look pretty good. So we're gonna keep trolling the waters, but right now we're starting interviews. I think next week is the plan. Yeah. So, yeah. And I think, you know, again, that's an additional cost here that I mentioned about 8,500 bucks that we, that's the price of doing business, right? I mean, we have a person who we value who's gonna be out on leave and we feel like to stay in regulatory compliance, we need to backfill those hours in that role. So that's certainly money that we are, they're happy to spend. I do want to mention, and I didn't, I should have perhaps made this more clear in the memo, but one of the things that I did do as I was looking at that $8,500 number is carry that in our part-time salary budget that had been presented back in January. So as I looked over the last couple of years at our staffing levels for part-time staff in particular, we have typically come in below what our budgeted number was. So there was some wiggle room there that I felt pretty comfortable saying we could absorb that $8,500 in the budgeting number that was already there without increasing that $11,000 deficit if that makes sense. And again, I think summers are a great example where we're gonna have one less classroom of staff. So we're adjusting things and I think we'll see dividends financially from doing so. So that's kind of the update from the world of Thrive. And I don't know if there are specific questions or other things folks would like some more details on. Happy to answer what we can. So you had mentioned before that the low enrollment could be in part resulting from short staffing. Are you expecting to see that again then? So that is meeting with the summer reducing summer staffing. So that great question. So that was more to do with the fact that Kirstie's position has been acting in ratio. So when we say short staffing, it means that our director is in ratio working with kids. For the summer, we're gonna staff classrooms, ideally in such a way that the director is not required to be in ratio the entire time. What's been challenging is when Kirstie's in the trenches playing Scrabble and doing the work with kids, those are hours that she's not able to be following up with families, connecting with school guidance counselors. So by having the part-time person not in ratio all the time this summer, we'll be able to have that flexibility again to start doing some of that work. And then also by having those folks, Kirstie and that person overlapping for hopefully a couple weeks, a lot of the prep work for the fall will be done under Kirstie's watch. Well, that new temp person is really sort of managing the ship for summer. So we've got some additional depth with that part-time person coming on late January, July that'll give us a couple weeks of time to do some of that leg work. That's really often where we have our best luck with bringing new families is through connections with the school and kind of getting into those partnership relationships with other service providers. That's a good question. Was this three years ago? Kirstie's position was two, there was a summer thrive and a school thrive for lack of better words. And the decision was made to combine those into the one full-time position because it gave some additional strategic capacity, management capacity and consistency of programming development, quality development. And that's from all the feedback from the public really paid off with Kirstie's hard work and the attaining of the additional star when it comes to the ratings of the program too. I think that would have been really challenging under the previous setup with two different directors, basically for half and half of the year. So. It was great to see that getting built back in to get that capacity for you to do all the things you do that aren't just opening salsa containers for kids and getting, you know, a burn plank scrabble. Congratulations. It's very exciting. Additional questions for Ray and Kirstie and the thrive portion. Any questions from the public in regards to the thrive programming update? You know, one of the items we did is shift some of the thrive responsibility to general fund this year. In the past, it's been a self-sustaining fund and in doing so asked that we get some kind of regular check-ins on how it's going and how that's balancing. So we have a understanding if that's something that's likely to continue into the future or if additional capacity might be needed there, the general fund. So I appreciate you guys keeping that thread and narrative open. Yeah. And we'll look forward to another update. Yeah, anything we can talk about one in the future, that would be a good spot. But yeah, we're just happy to come back and chat about that. Great. Transition into part two. All right. I don't know if you need to do your official transition to the next agenda. I don't know. Oh, any other questions? That's correct. Would you use to run these meetings? Any questions observed from council? Any additional questions from Christian Ray? Okay. So seeing and hearing that, we'll move on to tonight's last agenda item. All right. So again, that program that Kirstie's been really intimately involved in, we've got a memo here for you all just kind of giving a status update which we had talked about coming back to do. Namely in regards to the conversations around trying to get really childhood at the Oblast Center, which as you know, we've kept you I think pretty well in the loop as to progress there or as a lack of progress unfortunately it's been a hard slog. I think there's been a lot of professionals and really dedicated folks around the table trying to make this happen. As mentioned in here, we did get information back from kind of the last operator the childcare operator that we've been working with as a possibility. And at that point felt pretty strongly that we needed as a promise community effort at least to take a step back from trying to land childcare at the O'Brien Center at this point. One thing I do want to reiterate and I think it's mentioned in here is that the group is by no means stepping away from that effort in entirety. I think it's just that we're feeling like at this time through this grant funding trying to get childcare capacity in the center-based approach expanded at the O'Brien Center is just not working for us. And I think given the pressures of the building budget and the need to see some things change there we've kind of I think exhausted our ability to sit and wait for it to happen. It's disappointing. I think as you can see here there's a lot of challenges within the broader system that I think we are falling victim to. My hope was that we'd be able to sort of spearhead some changes there. And unfortunately I think we're finding that the challenges are pretty pervasive and we're needing to take a step back from that at the moment. So is it also fair to say it's not just the need to move forward with the building that's driving a change but the grant period is ending. So if we want to try and make the best use of the grant dollars we have, we have a window to- December. Right, a window to ask for a reallocation rather than sitting and waiting and having the dollars simply run out. Yeah, and so on that front I'm gonna let Kirstie share this update. We had a phone conversation today. We, Kirstie and the two steering committee chairs had a conversation with the state today about that. So I don't know if you wanna give just a quick update on the sort of the executive summary of that conversation with the state. So at the time that we wrote our roadmap which was, so the way this whole grant process worked taking like a real step back was that communities applied based on need. So you basically said like, hey, we're a community with a lot of children and families and we wanna do some cool stuff. And the state said, cool, here's some money. And then from there you were given originally a year we ended up with two years to create the plan of what that was going to be just sort of backwards for a grant process. So at the time that we submitted our roadmap which was the document that was the culmination of two years of work on what we wanted to do for families. We had essentially two plans at OCC. One of them was early childhood. So that was the center we've been trying to pursue. The other one was more of what we were referring to as a hub model, which would be essentially a bunch of services all hosted in one space. So some things that we identified early on are that families are looking for places to meet with social workers and case workers to do visitations. Families are looking for ways to get in contact with WIC and WIC is trying to host clinics with us. So some things like that. And there are other communities in the country that have had success doing these sort of family hubs where all of these services are co-located and then you have one place in your community that you can go. So that was one item that we had in our roadmap and so as childcare has made its own wants and desires known, we are repocusing our efforts on trying to do something under that umbrella at OCC. So the conversation that we had with the state this morning was essentially if we come to you with a proposal for something less childcare related and more hub model related, is this something that you would even be willing to consider and the answer was definitely yes. We have essentially three things that we need to put out there very clearly which was like rationale timeline and something else related to planning. So all things that we would put forward anyway. So I think we have a pretty clear path forward to at least present an idea to them and it sounded like it would have a pretty good chance. And that deadline to the state is the 2028th, I think? 29th. So the end of this month essentially. So our thought at this point would be to go to the state and say, here's a plan, yes or no and then to bring that plan back here to kind of present. I think what we didn't wanna do is bring something to you that hadn't been vetted through the funder yet and then have it fall back to the funder and have them say, no, this isn't gonna work for us. So there was definitely a lot of energy in the group around kind of moving towards this approach. I think the partners at the table, namely the school and the family center were both very excited about it. And again, we've had a lot of conversations over the last year or two years with other service providers who are trying to get into the community. And I think as we've heard this a little bit at the commission meeting with the library, that space actually is becoming in some ways a de facto space where social workers are meeting with clients, supervised visitations are happening and in that environment, that's not looking great. It's not the most dignified way for those service providers to provide their services. And it's not a great experience for other patrons. It's uncomfortable. So I think it could provide some opportunities to bring further partnerships into the city to better opportunities for little ones, which is the whole point of this promise communities journey that we have been on. So I think that's a little bit of the long and short of that. I think we're again, we've continued to do a lot of work with the philanthropic community, namely Permanent Fund and Vermont Birth of Five. They are still squarely at the table. And again, I think we're not giving up on childcare and Winooski. It's just given the timeline and the pressures of this project, it's just now is not the right time. But there's definitely a commitment around the table to keep the ball rolling and try to figure out another opportunity in the future. Which is exciting. So then obviously the spill out into the O'Brien Center budget is there's a short section here, but I think with some of these other conversations getting a little bit more fleshed out over the coming month, again, I expect we'll be back to you early June at the latest with some updates on what that will mean for the building, budget and process potentially. So I'm gonna pause there for a minute before we kind of go into the other work of the grant. So does that mean that you would present this new plan at the end of the month and then like the grants getting extended if they approve it? Grant would not get extended. So we've still got until December to spend the grant money. And then the intention then is you're still looking to use the O'Brien Center so it wouldn't. That's the thinking at the moment. Yeah. There was mention, I don't remember who said this or even when. Someone recently mentioned about the library like bursting at the seams and potentially needing to move. Do you think part of it is this like secondary use that you're seeing? Like if that moved over then maybe the library stays as it is and there's an additional area. So this, no. So right, so let me just tell you. So to raise credit, he is running, I don't know, A through F scenarios right now to try and find something that works at the OCC. So there are multiple different scenarios and one of the challenges with having this conversation publicly is there are only so many, there's only certain things we can share about that. I will tell you, there is an interest in thinking about how the library in this hub would interact. I think there's also a fear that this hub would and I would say a fear for me, not for these guys, is that this library would create a new service delivery system that we have not today discussed or staffed up or budgeted for or whatnot. So is there an opportunity to co-locate the hub with the library? And would there be, if we were to do that, is there a better use of the OCC space to accommodate both of those uses with staffing that could support both? So that's, I don't know, scenario D that you're working out right now. We also have some private tenants who are interested in the spaces as well that were in conversations. I would say like the whole hub situation, talking about waypointing to be involved, it makes sense to me to have it there based on, you already have the doctor's office there and the dental that people are going there for, so it seems aligned. Yeah, we tend to think so too. I mean, there's a lot of early childhood services in those different pockets that are happening in that building. So having the ability to kind of bring that all together and have some glue to hold that would be appealing. Well, not that this conversation's moved forward at this juncture, but in the visioning process regarding the potential relocation some day of city hall and what a functional municipal facility that better supported the community would look like having the space to conduct that type of work was pointed at as a major missing thing in the city from a capacity standpoint. So we had talked about some flexible offices that service providers could come in, but sign out and use. And it sounds like this might create something close to that type of opportunity, which is interesting from that perspective. Here's a question. Oh, I thought I saw a hand, I'm sorry. I'll pause though, any other questions from the public? Okay. So for the repurposing it, you think that's gonna be a quick turnaround in terms of their, okay. Has there been any conversation or coordination with neighboring communities? And do any of the other neighboring communities have this money? I know like Newport does. I know there's another rural community that has ran into the same set of ops schools that we're running into. Yeah, none of the communities in Chippin County were eligible for this grant. So we're the only ones in this area who have that and we were actually accepted into like special conditions because our need was so high. And in terms of coordination with other communities, it's a little sticky because it is such a community-centric grant. There isn't a great interest in serving families outside of Ponieski. So a lot of the partners that we're engaging with we're doing so with the idea that these are partners who serve Ponieski families and often Ponieski families have to go to Burlington to be served and so we're trying to figure out how to bring them here instead. That's sort of been the lens there. But in terms of more regional solutions, this grant is not really geared towards that. Okay. So I have a question about the childcare. I mean, we are moving on but then it sounds like there's still conversations happening. I'm wondering to what extent the strings that were attached with either the grant or the city's RFP around use of the space. I know that the RFP originally required provider to serve Ponieski families first and I don't remember what the percentage requirements were but there were some parameters that were focused on serving this population which is different from some of our neighboring communities and so I'm wondering to what extent that was a barrier that you heard from providers and if the strings attached to the grant and or where we were sort of pointing towards if those conditions are eliminated if we think conditions would be better for a different type of us. Yeah, no, that's a great question. The piece that, so after the RFP was unsuccessful one of the things that we did as a group was reach back out individually to a bunch of providers that who didn't apply basically to kind of ask that question of what was it that kept you from being in the mix for this. We had some requirements around subsidy levels for family surf. So the number of families receiving state subsidy which were well above kind of industry norms but in talking to all of, so we were requiring I believe 40% with the RFP for subsidy families and what we found in talking to providers is that 25% is kind of the sweet spot where programs are still eligible to participate in the state meal program but that number is not so low that it leaves them financially burdened. One of the issues is that the reimbursement rates for the state are well below what's required for operators to operate and that number hasn't changed since 2010. I think the state subsidy rate, it's been a while so it's not keeping up with the market costs. In talking to those providers though and saying so if we move that requirement down to 25% would your name be in the hat and I think the answer we may know the big issue we heard again and again and again was staffing. It was recruitment and retention of quality staff and I think as you saw from the provider kind of know in here I think everybody just feeling a lot of pressure even in their current operations just to sustain what they've got. And I don't think the requirement to serve Whenuski kids was a deal breaker. I mean I think there's ample need in the community to fill slots and I don't think that's ever been what's kept providers away. It's really been that staffing model and how to make that work. So I guess I'm just wondering what about it makes the permanent fund and birth defy think that not having it in this context would be possible feasible down the road. We're all really stubborn. But just, I'm not sure if this is what you're getting at but this second plan, this family hub is not a childcare. No, I understand but Ray sort of put on the table the prospects of we may not be able to achieve our goals through this grant opportunity but there may be other opportunities down the road. I mean, we've learned through this process is there's a need in this community for childcare and it's disappointing that we're not able to do that given the resources that are being put on the table to support that expansion. I was just trying to understand is it the strings that were attached to the grant that were a barrier or is it just a more systemic failure? I think more systemic. Yeah, and again, I think your point is well taken that there's a point at which banging your head against the wall is probably a fruitless exercise but I think again to your earlier point that the need is so pervasive and clear that I think the people around the table are pretty committed to trying to make something happen and there's a breaking point where that stops making sense but I think the interest we're seeing from the philanthropic community and the partners that have remained around the table for this entire duration indicate to me that there's a will. It's just now how do we find the way to make this work? It's just, it's gonna take some time and the right fit. And maybe some of this new development as commercial space comes online in corridors could be an interesting option. So I think we're wanting to just stay in the mix and be thinking about opportunities and not fully moving it off the radar. I do think there's some extent to which the timeline was operative since we only had until December. And I don't think saying to a provider right now you have another year would have changed it but I do think generally speaking if we have, if we can sit around and wait for opportunities a little bit more then I think that changes the picture as opposed to having this hard stop in December. Yeah, we haven't been having this conversation for a long time. This process has been. It's been grueling and frustrating and again I think not reflective of the amount of hard work that's gone into it which is also disappointing but here we are. Well thank you. Yeah, on a positive note and I put this at the end intentionally this grant has done some good work and I don't wanna lose sight of that. So I think this sort of final section here highlights some of the good things that have come to date from this. Some of them very much systems level providing some consistent coordinated training for professionals across different sectors down to individual investments like buying a kid a bed who's been sleeping with their sibling and having a hard time getting to school and being engaged there. So I think we've really tried to look at deploying this funding at different levels of an intervention. And I think objectively going back through this list and seeing to date what we've accomplished it does, it feels good. Like these are things that are gonna make a difference for families and kids. In some cases very immediately and very acutely in some cases years down the road but it feels encouraging that there's some good work happening. It's tough that the main focus of the grant hasn't come to fruition but again I don't wanna lose sight of the hard work and good work that's happened on the edges of that too. So I wanted to make sure to include some of those details here for folks to see. I appreciate that vertically integrated approach like a better word of trying to attack it from everywhere but I think you're right that just the coalescing around the table has been impressive in terms of ensuring there's a coordinated conversation going on between agencies, providers, cities, school on this topic of how we address this moving forward. It's been certainly from a huge visual win from what I can see. So that's great. So the Family Hub model really reminds me of the One Stop Center Department of Labor where it's an effective way, a successful way to get people services. So if you were to go forward and it's wildly successful, what happens after December? Great question. So I think the plan for the grant funding at this point is to really create if we were to go ahead with this approach really to create the space for that work to happen and continue to work through Curiosity's position and my position to sort of leverage the resources and partners that we have, we're not intending to use the grant funding to sort of staff up or kind of invest in those operating costs that are gonna come in year in and year out. I think it's really acknowledging that this is work that again is kind of happening in dark corners around the community and giving it some space to breathe the hope is that we can continue to partner to leverage those other agencies as other resources out there. And then I think look for creative opportunities in the future. I think suddenly you've got a space where you've got a little Petri dish for some cool work to be going on, some grant funded projects, some pilots, you know, I think it becomes a really interesting space to do some of that work. Which again, that space doesn't exist at the moment in the community for those families. So yeah, so we're not looking to invest in any kind of ongoing costs through this grant. That's not the hope. But what I'm not clear about is what's the rent situation in the O'Brien Center and how does that impact our, we've got to, so this is some financial report. Yeah, so yeah. So this is some of the modeling that we're doing now and looking at trying to bring a project forward that would have minimal to negligible impact on that budget. And that's what we're looking at right now, especially with existing partners who are in the building, a library space that is already paying its rent to ourselves. You know, we're looking at some ways that we may move those pieces around the board in a cost neutral way. Yeah, so that's the exercise right now. But I do think Hal's answer your question in a different way with a close question in mind that if we were wildly successful, one of the things we might be coming back to you with or one of the things we may be coming back to you within the next couple of weeks as we flesh out some of these models is to what extent does the city want to subsidize these opportunities for our community? And I think that that's a hard conversation groups of us have had over the last year or two. But I think it's a reality if we're going to continue the O'Brien Community Center with that social community wide value. I have to do it. I have to, and you know, the sales pitch that we've gone off the rails for was always that it would be at least as close to a financially sustainable enterprise as humanly possible. Meaning that the revenues for the building would generally offset there and that the taxpayers wouldn't be subsidizing at least the building. So that's something that was pitched the taxpayers that we have now been honest about and saying that nothing anybody was ever dishonest about it but there was definitely some ambitious penciling that was done in its inception about what the potential revenues on rents looked like. And as such, you know, we made the admission this year that it's just isn't working. Have to integrate it back into the general fund. So each decision that's made now going forward is not just are we gonna borrow more from the reserves it's a dollar for dollar impact to the tax rate conversation. So if we make a decision to forego $40,000, $50,000 of revenue for not that that's realistic revenue from any of the spaces right now but that's a direct tax impact now. Yep, yep. And that's again, I think part of we're really working to make sure that we're doing things cost neutral compared to what we are doing now in the building is definitely at the center of that thinking. That's why if you walk into Ray's office right now you're very likely to hear him on the phone with a realtor. That is true. Yeah.  I mean, we need to generate revenue, I mean, right? So we've lost revenue. So compared to the full build-out. Yes, so compared to the budget that was presented back with April 2nd, I think it was that gets us, I think it's in 2020 fiscal year 2020 back into the black and starting to move the needle up. Okay. So when I say cost, it may not be immediately cost-neutral but on that trajectory that we presented. And I'll just throw out, we have, and just be really blown on about this because it does have to tie into this in some way, shape, form. If we want additional decision-making programming capacity and leeway in the future we need to have a larger conversation about that property and the property itself offers a lot of different opportunities and potential. And at some point you got to look at that and say, what else can we get for this to offset the cost of it? Cause it's not being, the land itself is not being utilized. And that was a discussion we had when we looked at moving city hall there was how do we do that? And that's kind of the conversation that started with renting out the greenhouse, right? So the New Farms for New Americans are there community-oriented projects like that that could also create revenue while also providing a benefit to the community. That might be something that we have to take another stab at, yes. And I would just say these are great conversations to have on June 2nd and I'm retreating. Yes. Yes. It is 9.04, you're sure? Are you worried about people turning into pumpkins? I gotcha. No, not for your drunken. Just don't forget the June 2nd date. What's June 2nd? What is that? I'm just good to greet, guys. Come on. I don't think I should start because I'm a slave either. Other questions or concerns from the council for Ray or Kirstie? We kind of cut you guys off, is there? Nope, we're good. We're here to be done. Other questions, comments from the public? Okay. So seeing and hearing none that completes tonight's formal agenda, I would entertain a motion for adjournment. Motion by Eric, second by Nicole. Any further discussion? Seeing and hearing none, all those in favor, please say aye. Aye. And those opposed, motion carries.


Now, we are coming to the concluding part of the video on unit 2 on business and society. It is a part 3 of the video on unit 2. This is all about business and society. As I have told you, all these videos are based on the learning objectives. So, in this video, we shall mainly take up these two learning objectives and these are the fifth and sixth learning objectives of your unit, SLM, self-learning material. To describe the concept of corporate governance, it is also a very important emerging concept, corporate governance. We shall discuss about this. Then we shall discuss about the various benefits of corporate governance. As I have told you, it is a very important emerging concept in today's concept, context. You know, if you open a newspaper, you will find different malpractices, unfair practices, the companies are violating the disclosure norms, profits are inflated. In the share market, some doubtful practices are conducted, different kinds of practices which basically destroy the image of the good organizations, bad practices. So, this should not be there. And to take care of this corporate governance, how the corporate is governed has come into being. Corporate governance includes the processes through which corporations objectives are set and pursued in the context of the social, regulatory and market and all that. See this definition, we shall try to understand it in some simple language. Say an organization exists in the society, an organization comprises of the shareholders. Suppose the majority of the shareholders will decide about the courses of action of an organization. Now for enabling the majority of the shareholders to decide about the future courses of an corporation, the annual general meetings have to be conducted. The board of directors meetings need to be conducted. And while preparing the board of directors meetings, the organization is supposed to put up the agenda note. And in the agenda note, the organization is supposed to put up all the details in a very transparent and credible manner. So the board of directors going to the agenda note, they can take a decision which needs to be recorded, which needs to be communicated to the other members. That is what transparency is ensured, credibility is ensured, participation is ensured, democratization is ensured and all these are part of corporate governance. So this in, suppose, standarding, procurement of goods, how the tenders were plotted, notices were given or not, whether those notices were processed, which basically includes the processes through which corporations objectives are set and pursued in the context of the social, regulatory and market environment. So currently the vigilance awareness week is going on. At the end of October or beginning of November, that goes on, that is a public sector organizations. So this vigilance is what? So that the good practices prevail in an organization. So it is basically in terms of meeting the requirements of the regulatory environment. It is also to meeting the requirements of the market environment, say tax. Many times we will find some organizations evade taxes. They do not pay the taxes. They do the wrong things in order to avoid taxes, but in a market environment one is supposed to earn profit by paying all the legal dues. At the same time, an organization cannot achieve its objectives without meeting the social obligations. So corporate governance includes the processes through which corporations objectives are set, goals are set and how those goals are pursued in the context of social, regulatory and market environment. So in order to make these things happen, an organization is supposed to cultivate good corporate governance. So in order to cultivate good corporate governance, an organization is supposed to take certain measures. What are those measures? Distribution of rights and responsibilities to participants. Like say board of management. What will be the responsibilities of board of management? They will be responsible for this set of decisions. For the suppliers, they will have to meet the requirements of this, this, this only. Employees also, there could be some code of conducts. Employees also, there could be some rules, some service rules. So these are all part of corporate governance. They will have to have the rights and responsibilities. They will have to have the various rights and responsibilities to the various participants like the members of the board of management, the sharemen come managing director, the general manager, the suppliers, the employees that is basically all about corporate governance. So as it appears, corporate governance is an organization-wide approach. It's not something that the sharemen come managing director only will do. It's an entire organization which will adopt the approach of achieving corporate governance. So it's basically balancing the interest of stakeholders. So who are the stakeholders of an organization? Customers, employees, bankers, immediate community, local community, employees. These are all stakeholders. So corporate governance implies that how to strike the balance, the interest of all the stakeholders so that no interests are compromised. Everyone's interest is taken into account and that's why it encompasses an entire sphere of management. It calls for taking the right kind of action plan. It calls for taking the right kind of internal control mechanism. Many organizations have got their own internal audit systems. Why this internal audit? Why is the maintenance of the accounts in a very transparent and credible manner? This is corporate governance. And after maintaining all these accounts at the end of the year, the balance sheet will be prepared, the profit and loss account will be prepared, the financial statement will be prepared and this should not be kept confidential. It should be disclosed because disclosure will give larger credibility, larger acceptability. So it's basically an organization-wide approach. It will try to balance the interest of the stakeholders and it will encompass every sphere of management including action plan, internal control and corporate disclosure. So benefits, it ensures corporate success. At the same time, it also helps in economic growth because you are doing the things legally. You are not supposed to pay any penalty. You are doing the things legally. You are earning profit legitimately. So it's likely to stimulate your own thinking, stimulate your own activities, sustain your own activities. It also helps in improving, increasing the investor's confidence. They would like to invest more because the organization is managed well. Good practices are there. Reduce cost of capital. They would be interested in investing at a lower rate of interest. It is likely to influence in good practices like, say, reduction of waste stages, corruption will not be there, risk and mismanagement will be less. So that's why corporate governance is emerging as a very desirable practice in today's organizations. So this is all about your unit on business and society. Thank you.


Recent concerns about environmental pollution and escalating energy consumption have led to the electrification of the transportation sector. This has resulted in the installation of electric vehicle, EV, charging stations, which can cause significant disruption to the power system due to their high charging loads. To mitigate this issue, we propose a new methodology called the Voltage Stability, Reliability, and Power Loss. VRP, Index, which takes into account voltage stability, reliability, and power loss metrics when determining the optimal location of EV charging stations. We then use this index to determine the optimal locations of EV charging stations on a standard radial distribution network. Our results show that the VRP index is effective in optimizing the placement of EV charging stations, while minimizing the negative effects they may have on the power system. This article was authored by Sanchari Deb, Keri Tammi, Karuna Kalita, and others. We are article.tv. Links in the description below.


obesity levels in cats are increasing due to excessive calorie consumption relative to energy expended. To combat this, it may be beneficial to increase physical activity through hydrated canned foods or other methods. This article was authored by D. G. Thomas M. Post and G. Bosch.


Welcome back MechanicalEI. Did you know that the elimination of individual marking, positioning and frequent checking enables jigs and fixtures to drastically reduce operation time? This makes us wonder, what are jigs and fixtures? Before we jump in, check out the previous part of this series to learn about what major parts of an IC engine are. Now, a jig is a type of custom made tool used to control the location and or motion of parts or other tools. A jig's primary purpose is to provide repeatability, accuracy and interchangeability in the manufacturing of products. The most common type of jig is a drill jig, which acts as a stencil and guides the drill bit for creating holes at desired locations. Using drill jigs increases production rate drastically by eliminating the time spent using measuring instruments and scales to locate the drill points. Shown here is one such jig made out of cast iron and used for guiding welding operations. Fixtures are work holders designed for applications where the cutting tools cannot be guided as easily as a drill. With fixtures, an edge finder or center finder blocks position of the cutter. It positions the work but doesn't guide, locate or position the cutting tool. The setting of the tool is done by machine adjustment either automatically in case of CNC's or manually in case of employees. It is usually heavy in construction, shown here is a hole boring fixture used in CNC lathe machines. Hence, we first saw what jigs are and then went on to see what fixtures are. So like, subscribe and comment with your feedback to help us make better videos. Thanks for watching. Also, thanks a lot for those constructive comments. You helped the channel grow.  In the next episode of Mechanical EI, find out what a database is.