middle, and high are sufficient right now. But this was an attempt to capture the additional costs that we would expect with each increase in the projected enrollment of students. The other sheet does exactly the same thing except the numbers are being driven forward by a percentage of growth. Two and a half at the elementary, 1% at the middle, and 2% at the high school, which, historically, has kind of been how the growth went. And it was just a way to come up with some numbers, but since I started working with this, I'm increasingly feeling like those are a little too low. You know, that they're just not as fully loaded as they need to be. And I'm struggling with that because it's really difficult to model the all-in, which is why I tumbled back into Percubo because that really is the all-in limit. Dr. Allison? I have two things. First, the comment. Can I ask Dr. Bodie and Dr. Emma Johnson? Can you please tomorrow go in, find your spreadsheet, and take up the word survival and replace it with retention? Because I think in the time when we have events like Newtown that using survival when you're talking about children from birth to school is just, it's loaded. We can use retention, and we don't. Retention means something else. Oh, okay, well that's, maybe I don't know that, but I'm just, the survival bugs me. I'm sorry, it has bugged me for years, and I brought this up every year. So the word, the other thing is, so what's the next step? Question? I was gonna make a comment and commend. Do you have an answer for that? I think so. Okay. To the chair of a bunch of committee, I think started yesterday the communication with other boards in the town, and I don't want to speak for you. You may want to just speak for that question. Yeah, we started, yesterday we had a meeting with the chair of the select men, the chair of the finance committee, and Adam Chaplain, and Andrew Flanagan. So meeting with those three, Diane presented all of this information. Obviously it was meant to be a kind of heads up knowing that we were all gonna get this information tonight, and that of course we are on television, so we didn't want anybody to be blindsided by it. So we decided that the next step would be that this was gonna come up at Long Ranch Planning, which has a meeting scheduled already for next week. And so they were very happy that we were able to come to them with this information so early. They agreed that obviously the projections that we had been using and the modeling for the Long Ranch Planning has been on keeping a fairly stable school population. So they had, I truly think that they had no idea the numbers that we were starting to deal with. I mean they had heard, obviously everyone's heard that we've had more, but when you think that we have a school district of 4,200 students and you look and our numbers are actually more like 5,200, I think a lot of people went, whoa, when did that happen? And I think that was the reaction last night. So they have committed to thinking about this, and like I said, taking it to Long Ranch Planning and then we were gonna see where it came up after Long Ranch Planning. So I'm sure there will be many meetings to come, but we all agreed that this is best handled early and trying to figure out a plan before we get to town meeting so that we can go to town meeting with one cohesive plan that everyone is already okay with. And they were happy to help us try to figure that out. We didn't come up with any solutions, but we made sure that they all understood the data and they were all interested in helping us find a solution. That sort of ends up the question. Any other questions you would like to leave? Dr. Boeck. It's a great question, it's one of the next steps. And that was an important first step. We're gonna have to have just a lot of discussion among ourselves as we try to think about what makes sense. And it's not just us, it's all these other people that are involved as well. But the thing is we're looking at next year's budget, and this is what's gonna happen over the next month, month and a half as we go through this process. When we've had these increase of five teachers at the elementary this year, and we've had different small FTEs in the secondary to deal with a few enrollment pressures, that becomes part of the base. And at any time, when you have an increase in special education costs, which right now is definitely 500 and probably we're predicting more like 700 going into next year, that's a new base. So when you're looking at what is available after you deal with all of your contractual obligations going into next year, what will be that delta that we will be able to expand on new initiatives that we might want to have? Or we might want to put more money into professional development because that is a great predictor of how you improve instruction in a district. Those are all gonna be issues. And over the next week, we're going to have the elementary principals coming and talking about the kinds of things that they see that they need. Well then in December, having our secondary principals come and curriculum leaders as well to hear those needs as well. And so those needs are going to be balanced again what is possible. But one of the things that's gonna have to be part of our thinking is we may have another uptick next year. Do we need another five or six teachers? And what does that do? And where do we get that additional money? It was fortunate that we predict who are being very conservative in terms of what predicted for our grants for this year. And they turned out to be better than we anticipated.  And in fact, that did happen at some districts. For whatever reason, we were able to be fairly level. Some of it ups and down, but generally speaking, had that not happened for us, I'm not quite sure how we would have handled, we wouldn't have been able to do it, but the truth of the matter is we would have some particularly large class sizes. So going into next year, we're looking at long-range planning, you're asking. Those teachers now, because those students are gonna move forward. We know we have this deficit, not deficit, well, we know the overall budget by a certain amount and they predicted a fairly definite amount in the year. How are we going to fund that potential if it upticks again next year? Where will be the source of money? And that's why it's so important as we think through this right now. Well, thank you. Thank you both for performing us. Again, we will be meeting next week in a step of two weeks from now. Sure. Yes, please. May I just get one clarifying point? So basically what you're saying is that when we prepared the budget now, we were doing it based on where we were on October 1, 2012. And so now that we've got another 100 and some odd kids more than we planned on based on the October 1, 2012 numbers, we're sitting here planning next year based, still based on that baseline from 2012 because the additional teachers we pulled in were coming from outside sources that we didn't plan for when we built this year's budget. So that we've already got a built-in gap based on what we've got now and to have another another increase next year is going to double the problems. So we end up next year potentially with 250 more kids than we have in the base budget based on the 2012 numbers. I think we need to create a visual survey to understand this because we know with this plan of three and a half seven and we assume a certain dollar amount. In fact, we will be getting a dollar amount from the town. What goes against that delta? Well, what goes against that delta is what we're already now seeing as new expenditures. And the on-district expenses are not going to change. That's not a, they're going to remain and we don't know what will happen next year. So that delta of increase for next year is significantly already spent by the changes we've experienced this year. So essentially we're talking about small elementary schools where the kids over the course of these two years are you getting into the 200s? Oh, yeah. It's the equivalent of a small school? That's exactly right. And in order to close the gap this year, we'll use some of the reserves that we talked away. It's sad to take about using the small schools. It's one time, huh? Yeah. So we have a huge problem. Well, it's a small reserve. We very likely will have to go to town meeting and take some of that money that we've put into a stabilization account out. What we don't know right now is how much of that. We would like to keep it as minimal as possible because I don't see us replenishing it any too quickly. It's the issue. Yeah. All right, moving on then. Shall we, superintendent's report? We'll get back to budget during the budget or subcommittee. Well, some really great news. And I sent this press release out to you. The, once again, Arlington has been named to the AP District Honorable. This is the third year in a row that this has been the case. This is a distinction that has, it's fairly recent distinction by the college board. And it is, it's given for maintaining and improving the percent of students scoring three or higher on the AP exam. For those that are listening and not aware, the AP exam is scored up to five. And if you get a three, four, five on the exam, what that means is you either get to not do a prerequisite for that particular subject in college. And in some colleges, they actually give you college credit for that. So it has a monetary value as well. And in this quote, well, according to the college board, Massachusetts has the fifth most number of school districts earning the spot in the honor roll, which is both increasing the number of students having access to AP exams while at the same time maintaining or increasing the number of students that score that three or higher. And again, Arlington High School is one of, believe there were 33, I think there were 33 districts in Massachusetts and the highest state in Pennsylvania was 40, but still, we have 351 school districts in the state and Arlington is one of those that is now three years in a row been on this honor roll. In fact, when we painted this room, they used to just hang right over here. We probably need to get them back again. We haven't gotten the new poster yet. But anyway, it's another affirmation of the great work that is going on. And it's not just the great work of all of our teachers in my high school, which deserve a lot of credit for this, but our students have to come here to do this kind of rigorous work. And that starts very well and an expectation of the discipline of doing the work, doing the, being rigorous, and that's happening. And it's just, it's just, this is another way that the district is demonstrating that our kids are doing really well and our school district is doing very well. But in another way, also that I am kind of particularly proud of, and this came out in the newsletter, which I do want to emphasize again, but I think it's really important. And what data is important and the teaching is important. We all know that, but we also, I think at Arlington, recognize how important it is to educate the whole child, whether it's in all of our arts and music, but it's also providing a climate, a social-emotional climate in which our students can also succeed and get the support they need. Is there always room for improvement? Absolutely. But one award that I was very happy to get was from the Massachusetts Coalition of Suicide Prevention. And it recognizes innovative work done by school and community groups. Four awards are granted with only one going to a high school every year. And so this year, our intervention coordinators at the high school, Andrea Rossi and Jess Claw, and the rest of the Arlington High School mental health community received a leadership award, presented the organization's annual leadership breakfast held in October 22nd for their innovative work. And I think that a lot of credit goes to them and certainly to all of the work that this work is. So congratulations to them. Going back to achievement, our students did very well this year in the National Merit Scholarship awardees. This year we had 24 young men and women who were named National Merit Commended Students on the 2014 National Merit Scholarship Program, which received that distinction based on their scores on the PSAT last October. And in addition to those 24 for commended, we also had six students who qualified as semi-finals. And those six semi-finals will go through the process and hopefully be one of the final National Merit Scholarship awardees this year. And consistent with what I was talking about the AP district honor roll this year, one of the reasons we got that award is that this year we had over 100 Orleans High School students achieve the status of AP school scholars. And all the information is in the newsletter about the number they get three or higher, the number they have four or higher in the test. We had two national AP scholars each receiving an average score, or at least four on all AP exams taken. And scores of four or higher on eight or more of these exams. So we have some students that are really stretching and doing really extraordinary work. And so congratulations to all of our students and our teachers. Thank you. That's my report. Thank you Dr. Bode. Moving on to the consent agenda. All items listed with an asterisk are considered to be routine and will be connected by one motion. There'll be no separate discussion of these items. Lesson member of the committee so requests in which event the item will be considered in its normal sequence. Approval of warrant 14057 dated October 24th, 2013. Total warrant amount 829,941 dollars 77 cents. Approval of draft minutes October 24th, 2013. Regular meeting. Approval of the Grand Canyon field trip out of the middle school, April school vacation 2014. I'd like to pull the Grand Canyon field trip out. Okay. May I have a motion on the consent agenda? No. Second. All those in favor say aye. Aye. All those against? Okay. Approval of Grand Canyon field trip out of the middle school, Dr. Alice Mann. I just wanted to know that if you're sure that the administration is discussing a little bit. I just want to be sure that there's all safety issues are evaluated for the students who are going on this. I don't know. We got more information here at our desk which gives me a bit more. Yeah. I think we're still a little bit better but I just want to be sure that there's discussion and making sure that the students will be safe on the trip. Well, they're going through an agency that provides all of the buses and that makes all the arrangements for and provides the tour guides. Jennifer Craft, who is a teacher at Augusta is the lead teacher on this and well, I didn't have Jennifer come tonight. She's willing to come if you would like to ask them one question. Both of them. I'm asking. I'm asking that the administration is just looking at things and making sure that they go with it. It's a company that has been used by other schools. The principal of the middle school and the head of the science department of all both people on this trip. Can we, I think you're asking does the company have a good reputation essentially? Yeah. Yeah. The company does have a good reputation. Does it mean that an accident would happen? No one can ever guarantee that but it has a very solid reputation on one of these trips, yes. What further information would you like? I just wanted to be sure that someone in the administration has looked carefully at the information from the company and thought about it. Part of it was that all we got was this before. That's just what's in the very and I'm not saying that school cleaning has to decide. I just wanted to be sure that another sort of advice has been. There'll be staff and adult supervision with students, I assume, all kinds. Yes. It's a ratio of 10 to one, which is fairly standard on field trips. And so that would be our staffing. But in addition to that, that there will be the tour leaders that are there provided to the company. You know, when they do a float down the Colorado, they're gonna have people on the boat but they're not our staff. Our staff is really there in the supervisor's role, not in a trip, lead the trip role. Any other questions on this? I'm Mr. Hammond. I guess you brought your attention on day five. Again, I support the concern, free time chopping at Caesars Palace and then one down the walk down the strip, Las Vegas Boulevard to the Bellagio.  Yeah, but I, again, I want positive stuff coming back. So thank you. So much math, thank you. The cars are pretty crazy on the strip.  Have you crossed Manzana? Yes, they have up Pleasant Street here in my house. They're crossing streets. I just think the concern that was brought up, we passed it on to the superintendent. I'm sure she's going to pass it on to the right people. All right, let's vote this item off the consent agenda. All those in favor of the Grand Canyon approval, say aye. Aye. All those against? Enjoy the trip, middle school students. And this is the first time, this is not the first time. All right, moving on to subcommittee and liaison reports, Mr. Thielman, policies and procedures. Okay, so we have a motion and we have a first reading. So we have amended, we are proposing an amendment to policy DDDH, public participation in school planning meetings. And it basically talks about, so there's several points. The dissemination, point one is the dissemination of written correspondence to members, and the requirement of correspondence shall include their name and address and all written statements that are distributed to us. And then, number two, there's a requirement that people during public participation identify themselves by name and address. Number three is that if you're deleted to be considered a request to be received by the new and the day preceding meeting. So it's just a citizen who wishes to have an item in place in the agenda to present the request and write it to the administrative secretary. So these are sort of minor changes that we found when we went against this of first reading. And then the second thing is that we have been in a conversation with Rebecca Bryant from Stoneman, Chandler and Miller about policy KDV, KDV, KDV-SR. She's going to take another stab at writing those. At the same time that she began that dialogue with us, she recommended that we had a conversation with her about the idea of Stoneman, Chandler and Miller doing a review of all of her policies. And so we have the following motion that Paul and Percy and I are putting forward is the subcommittee. Move that. Stoneman, Chandler and Miller review the APS policy manual for the purpose of categorizing each policy in one of the following categories. One, policies that can be appropriately remain in effect as written. Two, policies that should be eliminated. Three, policies that might remain with a few adjustments and four policies that require major rewriting. The total billable time against the district's retainer for reviewing and categorizing policies shall not exceed 18 hours. Following the receipt of this report, the policies of the subcommittee shall request that Stoneman, Chandler and Miller provide the school committee with an estimate of the time and the cost of adjusting or writing the policies, identifying categories three and four. So once in a second I will speak with her. So here's the rationale. In the 1990s the National School Board Association, the National Association of School Committees developed a model policy manual which was adopted by the online school committee. Over the last 15 years or so we've modified this manual, often in reaction to different events that have occurred in the schools and in the town. And we have some of the policies that Rebecca and Brian pointed out are actually contrary to law or they create rights that are beyond the scope of the law. So the most prudent thing that we can do and what works with our budget is to first have her go through a process of identifying those policies. Then we'll come back to the school committee and we'll get an estimate from her and we'll make a decision about what she should or should not do. It will give the school committee and the policies and procedures committee a framework for policies to work on over the next year or two. I don't see a wholesale, but wholesale revision of all policies. Mr. Slickman. This is sort of an interesting direction that I think we're proposing and going. The whole process of identifying policies, problematic policies, so that's what we're really looking for. Policy that due to the way it's written could engage and get us in criminal litigation or some sort of an issue that one. It is sort of an important first look. Now what we do once we get the results of this first round is up to us to decide. We can go to ask them to do a quick rewrite on some of the policies. If it's a relatively small group or we can take our findings to MASC and say, hey guys, our attorney has identified these legal issues attached to these policies. Why do you think it asks their attorney to go over the policies and come back with a recommendation? So it's entirely possible that at the end of this first bit of research, we come up with a document we might go elsewhere to think about. But I think it's, in life or so, the problem we have with the company of our policies in the past is worthwhile to see which ones would need to be re-crafted to reduce any legal liability that might be generated from it. Mr. Hamm. Two questions, number one. If we approve this, we'll approve this. The report back to the us, will they give a little anecdote or something with the rationale of why the recommendations and each one of the things? I'm not looking for total change, but I mean, why they recommend this to be deleted? It's against the law. Some of the things that you just said. Yeah, I'm sure she's going to have to do some. Right. Yeah, great. And the second thing is, I think I see this, the billable part of it, part of our retainer. Yeah. Right, it's available against the retainer. I mean, it goes against the retainer. Right. It's 18 hours against the retainer. 20, how many hours? 30 for 20 based on 190 times 18. 3,420 dollars. Yeah. Is 18 times 190. Oh, okay. So, okay. That's theory. So, that's where it's going to be. That would be the max. They said. It's not an additional expense. It's an early budget. Right. Talk to us. This starts. I think this is a great idea. I think that, you know, that's always the problem is that you end up with these things that have just kind of been mounted into this pile of things and we don't ever get a chance and I don't know what else. I know some of you do have more legal expertise than I do. I do not proclaim to have any of it. So, I think that's a great idea to have someone as just an eyeball on everything and kind of give us that, you know, thumbs up, thumbs down, thumbs in the middle. Where are you? Any other questions before I ask them? I just want to say that there's attention here because I mean, the attorneys in the room versus the school administrators in the room are looking at the policy documental differently in that the attorneys seem to want to take a much more minimalist approach and I think that that was sort of the message I was getting from this. Whereas the school administrators want a little more guidance and things out in front. So, how we balance this out that once we get this report is going to be a really interesting conversation we're going to have as well. Was there discussion about putting NASC unnoticed and questions sent to them first? And then if they couldn't answer them going to Stoneman and asking for further help? I think we were trying to get this a different set of eyes at it is where we're trying to go. This is a first, first take on it. Because I know in the past Steve Finnegan I think is there, right? He's been incredibly helpful about policy questions. He certainly has been. And it's pretty good, yeah. You all know where I stand on some of the legal issues. But I think this is a very good idea to go to Stoneman, Chandler, and Miller to get this right here. NASC, sometimes we get it. I always find the documents that give us they'll give us a response and then they say this is not, we do not feel legally bound by this where this law firm has a degree of the legal liability to it. And I think it's good to have this. And no matter how many people are looking at this, it's an awesome document. You may get to see a particular policy once every four or five years as it comes up in a review. Have them do it. Let them spend this time. I think it's a great idea. Yes, Brian. Just to give you a judge's point, we will once this is done, we will have conversations. But this helps us to have a productive conversation. Because then I can say that they've identified these policies the way you think we should do it. And any further discussion on this motion? All those in favor say aye. Aye. All those against? Terrace. Thank you. Mr. Thielman, I have one question before we part. Oh, policies. We ETO. Is that what you're asking? Yeah. I saw in the minutes, if you might just let the folks out there know what the initial findings were from Ms. Bryant. Okay. I would love to just, I can't find, I have like two versions of improvements. I have to, is there another? We'll have to wait. Music, I like to do it. Oh. What is that? Strike that. Okay, got it. Okay. So we had discussions about the question that was sent to you. How do I PTO? About how do I PTO I believe. So first of all, we know that either the town or the school department has a writer and a general liability policies protecting PTOs in the event of a lawsuit. Dr. Bode agreed to sit down the town council to get some ideas from the new town council. Used to work in the general council's office for the Boston Public Schools. So you might have some insights on how to respond. It's Rebecca Bryant believes a school permit should make sure that its policies make it clear that the district is a separate entity from the PTOs. So we need to make sure that's clear in our policies. PTOs are welcome to purchase liability insurance from the national PTO organization. Dr. Bode pointed out that in many years of experience in education, were the 30s? Yes, 130. 130, including time on a PTO in Winchester that she never heard of the PTO actually going out and getting liability insurance. I had no idea we were getting sued. We're getting sued, yeah. But we did ask Ms. Bryant and she said that yes. She says it does happen. And yes, PTOs can be liable for things that happen during an unraising effort that they have. It doesn't happen often. And so I think PTO has to balance the risk of it happening versus the potential risk of being lost. So maybe that's what we could do is help us to do a research in terms of what's happened in that area. And perhaps the new town council could be very helpful in that regard because it comes from the Boston Public Schools. Right. Any questions on that issue?  I mean, right now, I think the best thing is to wait for the real and more guidance. If you really want to be approved, you can go to the national PTO organization and price liability insurance. Is that? I think there's a PTA in every great PTO because they're all independent. And they don't have to pay dues and stuff. That may have changed. Remember I need to know from the back, I don't have it in front of me. Well, there was some discussion that there may not be part of the national association, in which case it wouldn't be eligible for it. It just may be prohibitively high. I know that you're aware that the insurance, liability insurance for the school committee, just keeps going up every year. And so I have no idea what the pricing would be on that. And they're not making any sense because they don't have that much money. They're raising money.  Well, thank you for taking that out on the background. Moving on to budget. All right, we met last night. It was two parts. The first part, we have started the conversation. And Paula came in and presented a lot of data about the afterschool programs that rent space from the schools. So she has sent out a questionnaire that they all filled out. And then she's trying to put all of that into a spreadsheet and make some sense of it. And so we've started that conversation. All of the afterschool programs were represented. And it was a great conversation, I think, that they are happy to be involved in what we're doing. They understand why we're doing it. So we are trying to figure out on our side what the expenses are and what reality it has to be that we have to charge and rent so that we're obviously not looking to make money, but we at least need to get back what it costs us. And even just having it all on a spreadsheet was very interesting to see some of the discrepancies already that exist. So we are in the process of doing that. We are involving all of the afterschool programs. And they were thankful to be part of it. So we're moving forward with that. I think that I know I had a couple of questions that I shot off to Paula today. We'll probably continue to. There's still data gathering and information gathering that we're doing. So nothing, no actionable items from that. The other half of the meeting was, as I said before, with Alan, Tosti, Dan Dunn, Andrew, and the budget. And just starting to talk about it, it was mostly just informative. We didn't do much anyway of brainstorming or problem solving yet. But like I said, they're going to take it to Long Ranch Planning. And then from there, try to see what Long Ranch Planning might offer as advice. And then move forward from there, hopefully with the next step, probably after Thanksgiving. And for the folks out there, the Long Ranch Planning meeting is next week at 8 AM at the Town Hall of Conference Romanics. What day? Thursday? Thursday. Thursday. Are we from today at 8 AM? Mm-hmm. 20th. Any questions on the budget? Thank you. And this starts tonight? No, we don't have a next meeting, so yeah. OK. I'm waiting for the Long Ranch planning. I'd like to report. OK. And curriculum instruction? Oh, he's scheduling a meeting of about five days, at least one night. That's come up from a group of parents. I think there may be another one, sir. OK. Thank you. Mr. Hamer, on facilities? No, not this time. OK. I just had a couple of things. Oh, sure. I can get at you. No? Go ahead. This time, I'd like to commend the workplace program we have here at the high school, one by Mr. Lundstrom and Mr. Minor. Three of the students, Derek McMunn, a senior, Caleb Strasconus Jr., pronounced right, and Brendan Wall, another senior. They work today around between 1230 and 130 with members of Rotary to clean up and restore Memorial to let Lieutenant Daniel Barry at the corner of Warren Street at the intersection of Medford Street.  Now you can actually see the Memorial. And these young men are really great for flexing on their program, and people are there. So I just wanted to pass them on. Second, I'd like to remind the committee and other staff that we'll be having a special meeting regarding going to Papalist next Tuesday, November 19th in this room at 6.30 to 8.30. I hope you can all make it. Thank you. Thank you. And I just wanted to thank Ms. Starks again. We spoke by phone. Briefly, you're telling me you were going to have this meeting this week. And you had last night, Mr. Hainer and I, we were at Mr. Schlickman, Dr. Bodie. We were at this conference they have every year on the Cape on an ASC Mass Associates of School Committees and Mass Association of School Superintendents all over the state coming together, had multiple breakout sessions on different areas of school, issues, law, and topics. And I think I was just coming out of a breakout session on municipal school relations. And one of the things that I got from that breakout session was talk about it early, talk about it openly, and keep the talk going. And so that is precisely what happened last night. And it was a great first step. So thanks for doing that. Ms. Hansen, I forgot to recognize you at the beginning of this meeting. Linda Hansen, ADA rep, she joins us. Thank you for being here. The report from that conference last week it's an amazing thing to see all the different districts and what they're doing and the superintendents and what they're doing. I, of course, have always done music and drama in my life and doing the breakout session about STEM, science, technology, engineering, math, and how folks are incorporating the arts in instruction is so helpful. And at some point when we have more time meeting, I'd like to get into it a little bit about what I learned. I think Bill was in that one with me. We had one the day before we left on the superintendent evaluation. It was just so happy. I was just so fortunate to be there because I knew we were going to have this process this evening and I was concerned and anxious about it. So it's a great conference for those who have gone. Go again. For those who haven't gone, please do go. It's really wonderful. I wanted to report out that the special education advisory committee, CPAC, is holding a meeting this Monday evening, the 18th, Monday morning, Jefferson Cutter House and Barlinton Center at 8.30 AM. And you all heard Jane DeAnde invited everyone to Monday night's 8th thing at floor at 6.30. And again, 6 o'clock, my floor on Monday evening. And once again, the fine dramatic presentation we saw earlier tonight, Dead Man Walking, this weekend. Anything else that you'd like to put in before we go? Secretaries? Secretary's report. Secretary's report. We received the following correspondence. The superintendent's October newsletter, an email from the superintendent informing us about the AHS Act of the A.P. District Honor Rule, a letter from Ian Jackson, chair of the MLK Junior Birthday Observance Committee, soliciting sponsors for the event to be held on Monday, January 20, 2014. Email congratulating the AHS mental health team for receiving a leadership award for the Massachusetts Coalition for Suicide Prevention. The September 30, 2013 draft of the strategy for the Massachusetts Executive Office of Education. I'm not really sure we're supposed to do that. But we got it. Information from Jen Krauts on the OMS Grand Canyon Adventure Trip Plan for April vacation 2014. Mail regarding the tools of the mind curriculum in the kindergartens. An invitation to attend an artist's opening reception at the old 12th mill of David Moore from December 7, 2013 to March 14, 2014. One last thing that I forgot to mention that I wanted to mention, I did pick up a poster getting back to Gettysburg from someone who actually works there. And there's a story in there. This is all the memorable sites and monuments. And he signed it, and there's a description of the history of Gettysburg. It's 150th anniversary of that speech next week. I'd love to give this to Ms. Fitzgerald to a respectfully adorned room, at least for the next five months that I'm in this chair, because I feel so much pride about it. And that speech is just such a wonderful speech. I'll be giving this to you to maybe go somewhere. So you're not next school committee meeting? Gettysburg Address? I expect a little bit of form and circumstance. I don't have a hat tonight. Oh, OK. But maybe next week, I have a hat. I can break it off. Well, I thought that they already knew that Bill, who did y'all do in tandem talk about the teacher of the year last year, Kelly Brown, who gave an extraordinary talk on how the Gettysburg Address relates to the common core and how she teaches it today, and how different it is today that she made it from college in her social studies class a couple of years ago. So maybe you can share some of that. I know, Bill, you're going to. I've already done it. We already done it. I remember the group of parents that we were asking about the common core. I just used that as an example. I did not do justice to what she presented. But in that speech, I thought I knew everything. I learned so much that night from her. Anyway. But the difference was, instead of that, I won't spend a lot of time in the group, what could have happened years ago who may have all experienced that, go home at night, read the Gettysburg Address, come in tomorrow, and let's talk about it. So the teacher comes in, and what did you get out of it? Blank. And so then the teacher would explain what the Gettysburg Address was about, the significance, and do all that. The difference today is that the teacher does not do that. The teacher leads the work of the students in thinking about it, giving some structure to it, might start out, Kelly was talking about how she might start out with the word dedication, and looking at Gettysburg Address. I think it appears six times. She said, how many times does it appear? It's six times, and it's used differently each time. She had the whole audience sitting there going, re-reading it, and going, oh yeah, that's different each time. And the word nation is used five times, 10 times. This is close reading. And going through the different structures of it, so that the students start pulling the meaning of this out. And then, but then she can also throw in perspectives that they might not have. For example, in the Gettysburg Address, they used the word nation for the first time ever in our history since the Revolutionary War. And what's that significance? Lincoln was laying the foundation for what was gonna happen with Reconstruction after the war and the healing. Before we talk about, we don't still talk about states, but in terms of the language of a president, they didn't ever talk about nations. So you start going into the Gettysburg Address at that little detail. You really start, it starts to come alive of why it's such an important document, but the teacher doesn't tell them why it's important. Thanks. I think you did it better than I did. I'm rising up. All right. We are going to go into executive session to conduct strategy sessions in preparation for negotiations with union and or non-union personnel or contract negotiations with union and or non-union in which a panel in an open session may have a detrimental effect. And to discuss strategy with respect to collective bargaining or litigation if in an open meeting they have a detrimental effect on bargaining or litigation of the public body and in terms of the players exiting only for the purpose of adjournment. Any motion? It's on a little bit. Second. Okay, welcome. Aye. All right. Aye. Aye. Aye. Thank you. We're in executive session.


I want to add, just as the other lecturers have said, a very warm welcome to Trieste, and over the course of the two weeks I very much look forward to interacting with all of you personally. This is lecture three. So, it's introduction to our Gothic theory. We have five lectures as this course, but each of us are only doing one lecture each. So, I wrote our names up here. The order is chronological. I'm talking today. So, well, we all stood up earlier, but maybe I can ask my fellow lecturers and tutors to stand up again. Llucia, arena. So, yes, it's in order. So, today, me, tomorrow, arena on Monday, on Tuesday, and then, ah, Stefano is joining us. And Llucia at the back. And Davide on Friday. And we'll also be the tutors during the exercise classes. And all of us very much believe you can't really listen to mathematics and you can't just read it. Mathematics is about doing it. So, well, you guys are very calm and quiet. And I think you're paying attention or sleeping. And it's very respectful. You're being very quiet. I came in here to try and work out putting the PDF on the computer. And it was really calm, really quiet. I felt maybe it was very, very respectful. So, before mathematics, I have a task for all of us. So, it goes like this. In just a moment, talk to the person behind you, the person to your side, the person to the other side, the person in front. Introduce yourself to these people. And one additional rule. Find out one piece of information at least from these people beside you in all directions. It can be maybe where they come from. Or perhaps more important details. Whether they're preferring pasta or they're preferring pizza. Or perhaps whether in their home country the summer is hotter or colder than here in Trieste. Rules are clear? OK. Start. What should we do? Everyone to the left. Everyone to the right. Go, go. In all orders. Simon in front. Good, good. So, now I apologise for interrupting you. But yes, this is good. You're going to have fun without the mathematics. You'll have far more fun without me saying anything. I have to stop you. I have to stop you because otherwise everyone else will think I haven't prepared anything to say. And I'm just trying to find ways to escape. I have a lot of lectures I haven't done very well, but... So, this is... So, our course is Introduction to Agotic Theory. And to start with, we're going to do measure theory today. I'm not really going to do much about dynamical systems at all, which... Yes, it has to be the way. And I'm not really going to motivate it so much either. I'm going to try very briefly, but we've had the two lectures this morning. Maybe we're getting some idea. I wanted to say very quickly and very loosely, and therefore I want to remove the slide quickly before anyone points out problems, that as we've seen earlier and as many of you have seen before, the framework is we're looking at dynamical systems. Questions like maybe some orbits we can understand, but maybe then other orbits they're not quite the same. And then what about typical orbits? And definitely I needed quotation marks here or many quotation marks. We want to say something, so maybe a measure is going to help us with this aim. And also, I've written here the push forward. So, if we have a measure and we have... Well, it has to be a measurable map, then we can look at the push forward actually on the space of measures. And so we can imagine maybe we're faced with a very complicated dynamical system, but then actually we have a linear map when we're looking at on measures. So as is the sad truth of all these problems, if we make one problem disappear and it became a linear map, that's lovely for sure the other problems. There's here somewhere, they just moved to a different place. But yeah, I can't say much. We're going straight into measure theory. We're going to believe it's important. I'm sure all of you here have seen measure theory before in one way or another. Be patient, be tolerant. We need it set up so we're all talking the same language in the same way for the rest of the lectures. The goal. It's not really a goal. But I wanted to start somewhere. And as I'm not starting with dynamical systems, maybe measure theory a goal. So it's not really a goal. It's sort of a vague idea. But let's start somewhere. And one of measure, measure the etymology or something like this. We have the idea of volume or length for things like this. We want to formalise this properly as maybe an intuition. Yes, lots of intuition, which means incredibly dangerous from a mathematical point of view. When there's more intuition present, it's more difficult. It's something like this. If we're looking towards Lebesgue measure, which we're only doing for the moment, we want it so on RN. I'm thinking on RN, Euclidean space. We're looking for something that conforms to what we know on the sets we know about. So for instance, the unit cube, it should have unit volume. We want to have the idea that stuff matches together. If we have sets and other sets, we want to take the unions of them. We want to be able to measure them separately and add it together. If I take the measure of one set, like the volume, and I look at a subset, then I want the measure of the subset to be definitely not bigger than the measure of the big set. Things like this. And also in the case of volume in Euclidean space, we want translation invariance. But where do we go with this? In actual fact, we would like to do this for every subset of RN. It's not actually possible if we want all of this. What's the best that can be done? And then what happens if we drop some of the requirements I've listed here? Maybe we don't care about translation invariance. Maybe we don't care about some of the other things. And this is measure theory. So we get serious. Actually, maybe. Who knows what an algebra is? Who knows what a sigma algebra is? So anyone with a hand up, I can ask him quickly. No, we go there anyway, but fairly fast. So we're looking at subsets of our space. We want the empty set to be one of them. We want it to be an algebra in the sense that if we take compliments, the compliment is also in the set. We want it to be closed under finite unions like this. Oh, so simple quick question. Someone say very quickly, if I want to change this to a sigma algebra, what on the board am I changing? Countable. Indeed, sigma algebra, then we do it for countable unions. We also need for talking in a moment that if we take some collection of subsets, then we write this notation. We can take some collection and then we can say, well, it's not big enough to satisfy what we had there. We add some more. So we will call this the sigma algebra of that collection of subsets. So definitions are fine, but really they're just decoration around examples. Many examples. So on the line. So we take the collection of all finite unions of subintervals. It's an algebra? Is it an algebra? Yes. No? Yes? Yes. Is it a sigma algebra? What about we again take the real line and we look at the collection of all the subsets of the real line? Is this an algebra? Sigma algebra? Very simple examples. Now something just a little bit different that we use all the time. The terminology Borel sigma algebra, how many of you is known to everyone most? For the Borel sigma algebra, for any topological space you have the sigma algebra, the smallest sigma algebra that contains all the open subsets of that space. Good. We're covering a lot of ground. So yeah, very basic things just to be at a good stage on the terminology. We have a measurable space. A measurable space is the space and the sigma algebra of subsets. A measure. So a measure is this function from the sigma algebra to the extended real line. We want to know that the empty set has measure zero and we also want this, we call it a countable additivity or good or clear. That's our measure. Well, before I show anything, examples of measures, favourite examples of measures. Let's shout out some examples of measures. Lebag, something else? Zero measure. I like it. Elegant. Yes, the delta measure typically cool. It seems reasonable any Greek letter. Oh, I forgot, I was going to say. Yes, for a later reference, we differentiate, I said to the extended real line. So we differentiate between, well, let's go on. So this is what you said. You came before. We come back in a second. So I wanted to say we have finite measures. What's an example of a measure and on a measurable space that's not finite? We keep using the real line. So maybe a measure on the real line. Lebag measure on the real line. Simply because the real lines, it's big, it's long. Probability measures. Actually, when we are talking about dynamical systems, we're kind of seeing all the time a connection to probability theory in some way. So the word popping up is not surprising. It's a terminology that if the measure of the whole space is one, it's a probability measure. Of course, if it's finite, we can renormalize it. And in the definition of the measure, renormalizing it still would be measure. So, yeah, examples, you mentioned the direct delta. At the very beginning, I listed some, I said goal. I said maybe it's a goal. I said this is the sort of thing one was aiming at when one was trying to create Lebag. But then we're seeing where it goes anyway. In what way does this fail to satisfy what we were thinking about at the beginning? The translation invariance. So, yeah, maybe it's good for things, and then it's maybe not good for other things, but not translation invariant. Yeah, I wanted a nice way for this to crop up, but I wasn't sure how to bring it in in a neat way. So we, and we haven't seen enough examples. Okay, it's coming in the wrong order. But we've understood that for some reason we're looking at space and we're taking a certain collection of subsets. I haven't really, I realize I should have convinced you why we're not taking all of them. I told you we can't take all of them in some cases for some motives. And then I just started not taking all of them, talking about a collection which isn't everything possible. Hopefully it becomes clear when we really play with it. So here a useful concept that maybe there's a measurable set. So the terminology is any subset that is in the sigma algebra is a measurable set. So here maybe I could have a measurable space, a measure space, and I have a measurable set that has zero measure, and then I want to look at a subset of it. And maybe some of the subsets of that zero measure set aren't even measurable. So for sure if it was measurable it must be measure zero, but maybe it's not even measurable. So yet another question. Can someone give me an example of a non-complete measure space? Are people just really quietly replying, or is this definitely a question slightly further forward? Any ideas, possibilities? Ah, so just add to your saying just to check if I've understood correctly. So we have a measure space and we say, oh no, it's not complete. Let's just add all the zero measure subsets. Can we definitely do it? Is it still going to be a sigma algebra when we add all of that? So yes, we want to do this. I don't have a really proper concise answer, and I'm sorry about that. There are various extension theorems that can. So yeah, I'm sorry, I don't have a really concise. It is something to worry about. Yes, in some way we want to have all the zero measure, all the subsets present in the sigma algebra, and we want to assign zero measure to them. I think there are some difficulties knowing that you can do it just in general. But I believe there are extension theorems that I don't remember precisely. Any answers from the audience? Ah yes, for the example, Lebesgue measure, and the Lebesgue measurable sets and the Borrell measurable sets. So yes, Lebesgue measure on the Borrell measurable sets is not complete. Yes, I try and answer you more fully another time. I would have to think, in general it's not so easy. Okay, going on. So I wanted to say, because we're always dancing around Lebesgue, I wanted to recall a construction of Lebesgue measure. There's various ways. Well, not so many ways. Who for Lebesgue measure prefers to define outer measure in inner measure, and then define Lebesgue measure, and who prefers to define outer measure, and then use the Cattitidori system. First, outer and inner. Second, just outer and then Cattidori. Good, good. Okay, that's the way I was going for. Thank you for trying to make the system better. We still have sides and sides. No, okay, it's better. So, yes, I'm looking just on R now, because from the first two lectures, I realized we are in a one-dimensional week. Although everything I'm saying applies to a higher dimension. It goes through basically the same. So yeah, outer measure defined like this. So we look at sets of intervals, which cover the set we want to measure, and we take the infimum of those possible. So we understand for an interval, we can really sensibly define the right measure of that interval. It's just the length of the interval. And so we define outer measure. Is outer measure a measure? Not according to what I said before. It has some properties. I'm not going to look at it now. I'm going to say you've probably already checked this in your past. It's sub-additive. We were talking about additivity before. In this case, outer measure is sub-additive, and note well we're defining it for all subsets. So then to construct a big measure, we do that, and we check the properties of this outer called measure, but not actually outer measure. And then we do this. We look at all the subsets of A such that this holds. So does it seem reasonable that this holds? Let's think. So if it was a measure, yeah, so what we're doing, we're looking at the intersection, and we're trying to measure a set A. What are we doing? We're trying to measure a set A. Then we're looking at some other set E. Maybe it just covers the whole of it. What happens there? Okay, E covers the whole thing. Ah, so the intersection is the whole of A. And what about this other bit on the right? Sorry about the star. The star obviously fell down. It's meant to be up the top. So that other bit. Complete E without A. Ah, but that's just E. Okay. Have I got this right? I've made a mistake. This should be the other way round. Yes? Does that seem reasonable? This was an intentional exercise to check whether... I'm sorry. Oh, I want E there. I'm sure I want E there. I'm sorry. Is it good? I want us to be happy it's right. I'm sorry. Yes. So it seems reasonable. Do you think it contains a lot of the subsets? It turns out it contains a lot of the subsets of R. So in the construction of Lebesgue, what we do is that. So that is the sets that are Lebesgue measurable. I then take the set of all Lebesgue measurable sets and, well, I'm going to hope and I should prove it's actually a sigma algebra. So yes, here we have a sigma algebra of all the Lebesgue measurable sets. Of course it has to be checked. And then for these sets, we define the Lebesgue measure to be equal to this outer measure of that set. So yes, we said that exercises are the important part of the week of doing mathematics. So here's... We have two exercises and each exercise has two parts. So this is the first of the two exercises, exercise A. And this is something a bit different. So here's an example. I don't know whether this is a very common example, but I saw it recently and it seemed interesting to me. So this is the example. Is it clear? So we have the set of natural numbers, is my space, and then I look at all the subsets of these natural numbers where either that set is finite or the complement of that set is finite. Then I define this function mu. So of course I'm using a symbol that I like to use for measures. So I'm thinking maybe this is a measure. But anyway, that's what it's defined as. And so the question here is, is this function additive and is it countably additive? Countably, sorry. The exercise is clear. The other thing that I said had to be shown and I didn't suggest anything about how we're going to do it. I did mention about the sub-additivity of outer measure. So yes, this is a second part of the exercise. Again, we're talking about algebras, sigmar algebras, show that the collection of Lebesgue measurable sets is a sigmar algebra. Or go with the exercise. So yeah, when it comes to the afternoon, I think we will probably write the exercises on the board. We will have, yes, we have from each of the lectures today, we will have two exercises from each lecture. And when it comes, we have all the same time for all of them. And in theory there's going to be one slightly easier and one slightly harder exercise from each of the lectures. But of course this is going to be subjective. We see what happens this afternoon. So yes, exercise. Good. Another thing that's very important for us to, well, I haven't really, there's something a bit more I want to communicate that, so we're fighting. We, with the business of Lebesgue measure. And now let's recap for a second. So we're looking at Rn. But actually I'm saying Rn is like R. We look for today just at R. And on R we have Lebesgue measure. We've always used Lebesgue measure. We can happily live our entire lives thinking about volume. As physicists we can happily live our entire lives believing that we're rigorous and thinking of Lebesgue measure without really questioning too much. And here we are thinking how actually we can't say all of the subsets of Rn are measurable. We can just say most of it for lots or quite a lot or enough for our purposes today. And we've said about the, so let's clarify the two things. We have the Borel sigma algebra and we have the Lebesgue sigma algebra. The Lebesgue sigma algebra, the sigma algebra of the Lebesgue measurable sets. And these are not the same. Well, maybe that's an exercise. Yeah, well, let's see. So it's not quite clear what, because it's not obvious in any way, but if we're making so much effort about it there must be some sort of craziness going on. And these sets are looking a bit weird. They're looking a bit counter-intuitive. So, we don't want to study measure theory this week. We're doing dynamical systems. What we want to do is be able to show results when we're working with measures. So this is one of the main motives for this. So this is a theorem. So the theorem, we start with this setting. We have a mu star, a function which satisfies this. Yeah. So I've insisted that it's finite, but I see in the top line I've ensured it's finite, because I've ensured it's a probability measure. Well, at least not. Yeah. So it is some function that assigns to the empty set, the value zero. As I say, it's definitely finite because I wrote that in the above line. Then if I take countable collections of pairwise disjoint measurable sets and if the countable union is a measurable set. So, of course, I've said algebra at the top, not sigma algebra. So it's entirely possible this countable collection, the union might not be a measurable set. So this is just in the cases where it is a measurable set. So if it is a measurable set, I want this countable additivity to hold. If that does, then the theorem tells me that there exists a unique measure, and, of course, sorry, that I was going to do it in one phrasing then in another phrasing, so this is why it's been mixed. Of course, this other measure is from zero to one. It's a finite. Anyway, there exists this unique measure on the sigma algebra generated by the algebra which extends the measure we start, the, so, pre-measure. The terminology is pre-measure. So if I have these properties, then I can get the extension, and it's unique. So it's good to have this because quite soon we'll be checking, oh, we've got this system and it goes this and it push, maybe push forwards this measure here, and so we have a measure defined in one way and a measure defined we started with, and we want to say, are these two the same? If we have to check it on a lot of measurable sets, then this might be a bit hard. This says we only have to check it on a limited amount, and we know because of the uniqueness that suffices. Please, Milify. I'm sorry. Ah, no, I'm sorry. This is stated for general measures, not just for the outer measure defined before. Yeah, sorry. Yep, this is starting from nothing. This is any general function, mu star. It happens to have the same symbol as used previously. Thanks for pointing that out. So, another set of exercises. So first of all, very simple. Show that there are subsets of R which are not Lebesgue measurable. And I want to do it. Hang on, I have the other one, but then I pop up a hint. Yes, the hints are coming after. So, my suggested way to do it is consider an irrational circle rotation. So, the one that Karina wrote here first thing this morning. So, we want to use the irrational circle rotation. And we have orbits. She talked about orbits. Some orbits happen to coincide and some are distinct. I am choosing a single point on each distinct orbit and from a single point on each... Yeah, let's see. Is it clear how to do the whole problem now? I hope not totally. No, there are some details to look at. So, I hope it's an enjoyable exercise. And we're also getting the dynamical systems idea back into the measure theory which we're doing in order to do for dynamical systems. It has a certain rightness about it. Number two of the second exercise. Show that there are Lebesgue measurable sets which are not Borrel measurable. Because why not? Whilst we're at it, let's play with it and do everything. Do we want a hint? No hint? I'm sorry. Oh, maybe I didn't. Sorry, thank you for the question. So, the question was about the definition of the Borrel measurable sets. So, this is you look at for a topological space, you look at the sigma algebra generated from all the open sets. This is the Borrel sigma algebra. So, a Borrel measurable set is one of the elements of the Borrel sigma algebra. Ah, the Borrel measure will be Lebesgue measure. Ooh, this points out... Yes, it's been in the background and I haven't said it explicitly. So, of course the definition of the Borrel sigma algebra can apply to any metric space. Let's, for the purposes of today, fix what we're talking about. Sorry, metric space, any topological space in particular metric spaces. But let's go back a bit. Let's talk about R. So, the spaces are or a subset of R or we can see the circle as a subset of R. So, here we've already discussed about Lebesgue measure. And we have... Yeah, I'm very happy you asked this question because it really makes me say the thing I really should have said without anyone pointing out. So, what are we going to do? So, we've got here Lebesgue measure, we discussed outer measure, we discussed this criteria for the definition of a Lebesgue measurable set. Now, let's go and start back from the beginning. So, I have R. Now, I look at the space of the set of the collection of all the open subsets. Now, I look at the Borrel sigma algebra which is generated by this collection of open subsets. You know I could do something because, well, let's suppose I looked at intervals and the intervals will generate the open subsets for me. So, let's even take a step back. So, here what we're going to do is we have intervals. We can very easily define the measure of intervals by length. And we can very easily define... Ah, yeah, but there was the example the collection of all the finite unions of subintervals. So, we could define a measure on this quite well because we have a really proper notion of length of the subintervals. We can certainly add them up. So, yes. We have now, what have we got? We've got this algebra which is the collection of all the finite unions of subintervals of R. And we've defined a function on this using length in a very straightforward way. This, it's not so hard to check, has the additivity property that we've talked about a lot. So, it has an additivity problem. And we have this algebra. And actually you can see this behaves properly even if we take countable unions of elements of this algebra if that union is still an element of the algebra then this function we've defined this coincides like we required. So, now we can look at the catatio dori extension. We can look back at this. So, we're now applying this. We're applying it to the algebra which is the union the collection of all finite unions of subintervals of R. And we define this mu star in this case based on the length of intervals. Now, we're checking that this second point holds. And we can show it does hold. So, now we can see the extension which holds on the sigma algebra. So, in this case that sigma algebra will be the Borel sigma algebra. So, we could define this measure in this way. It's a measure which coincides with length on all the intervals and it's a measure to find on the full sigma algebra. In actual fact this measure also coincides with Lebesgue measure. So, it's not absolutely clear but we have here the situation that the so, in this setting where we're looking at are the Borel sigma algebra will be what's the right word? Not subset. The Borel sigma algebra is strictly smaller than the Lebesgue sigma algebra. But we can look at the two sigma algebras with the same measure. So, in both cases it's Lebesgue measure. I hope that. But thank you for bringing that up. It's something I should have said before. So, what does I... Ah yes, we exercise we didn't want any hints for the second part of exercise B or we wanted hints. So, I don't know the hints are quite short. I don't know how short or long it is. We'll see and I will definitely be present during the exercise classes. So, I guess if I give exercises that just really horrible I suffer maybe physically later. Anyway, I'll be here when we do all these exercises. So yes, my hints are simple. We will call the Cantor function to consider some pre-image. I don't know exactly what's coming in the next days for the dynamic systems thing. I think we're also going to do integration. I... What's going to say a bit about integration. We do like this because it's coming to lunch time and in theory I have two minutes left and it's okay overrunning a lecture a bit but overrunning a lecture before lunch and anyway I need lunch as much as you guys want. So, at some point we will be looking at integration and that's the other little bit of measure theory I'm not covering here in any way. But yes, so be it. At some point we play this. We define integration. We talk about characteristic functions. We then talk about simple functions and then we would define integration for positive functions. Then we have a concept of integration. Just in the moment we don't have time to do justice to this and we can also talk if it's required. Okay, so yes for the moment if anyone has any questions about anything let's please ask and yes, you're good. Why did we make so much effort? That was meant to be where we came back because we found the problem then we worked hard and then why did we make so much effort with Lebesgue? Lebesgue is complete. It would be very good. Yes, so it's a good exercise but I never said it. Lebesgue measure is complete. I've not presented an argument for it. That's why we spend a lot of effort with it. In my point of view that's the huge thing. The sigma algebra is strictly bigger than the Borel sigma algebra and it is complete and yes, he's very right with the observation in the second part. We want to use that because what if we can find some subset of a zero measure set which is not measurable? Any other comments, questions? Lunchtime. Thanks very much.


U.S. to build defense sector partnership with Ukraine in coming months. The U.S. Department of Defense has confirmed its determination to strengthen Ukraine's military potential and develop partnership in the defense sector, a Department spokesperson has told. U.S. Undersecretary of Defense for Acquisition and Sustainment William LaPlante said that the United States was set to create joint production of certain types of military equipment on the territory of Ukraine. He gave no further details of the U.S. plans. When asked by TASS agency to comment on the types of military equipment and the timeframe of the project, the Pentagon spokesperson said, the Department of Defense continues to work with our Ukrainian partners closely to ensure that they have what they need to defend their nation both for their immediate battlefield needs and to build Ukraine's military capacity for the long term. Although we have no additional announcements to make at this time, the U.S. is committed to building a strong Ukrainian defense industrial base and we are working to enable industrial partnerships in the coming months. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said in a video address on September 22 that his country was preparing to create a new defense ecosystem together with the United States to produce weapons. The project will create a new industrial base and new jobs Zelensky added.


Last Monday mystery, we spoke about the possibility of satanic cult rituals happening at Olympic National Park. We also spoke about how these national parks provide good opportunities for people to dump bodies. Well, today we're going to talk about a body that was found from a woman who allegedly still haunts one particular lodge at Olympic National Park. But before we go any further, you know what to do. Please hit that subscribe button and give us a like. As always, a very, very, very special thank you to all of our patrons and our producers on this channel. Without you guys, we would not be able to do what we do. Your help and your support is greatly, greatly appreciated. Welcome to esoteric Atlanta. My name is Bryce and today on Mystery Monday, we are going to be talking about the Lady of the Lake. Lake Crescent is home to the Lady of the Lake. It's the second largest lake in Washington. It's about 600 feet deep and 12 miles wide. Local legend states that Lake Crescent never gives up its dead, except for this one time. Halley Brooks Latham Illingworth was born on the 7th of January in 1901 in Kentucky. However, for Halley, she sought her sights out west. Halley herself was a bit of a nomad. And in 1936, at 35 years old, Halley ended up in Washington State. By this time, Halley was a two times divorcee. In 2022, that's not super uncommon. But in 1936, being a two times divorcee seemed to put a bit of a stigma on Halley. Halley eventually got a job at the Lake Crescent Lodge, a tavern that was about an hour away from Port Angels. Through her job at the tavern, Halley ended up meeting her third husband, a man named Montgomery Illingworth. Now Montgomery went by the name Monty and he was a beer truck driver. Halley and Monty had a very contentious relationship from the start. They were constantly arguing, making up, arguing, making up. Many people even today would mistake this kind of relationship for a relationship with passion. However, psychologists would probably tell you this had all the red flags in a very toxic situation. But nonetheless, less than a year after meeting Monty, Halley and Monty were married. And of course, their marriage did not fix their problems. It is said that Halley and Monty had an apartment very close to Lake Crescent Lodge, where Halley again worked as a waitress. Passerby's would often hear intense arguing and fighting coming from this apartment. And a lot of Halley's coworkers also stated that Halley would often come into work covered in bruises. On December 22nd of 1937, Halley was reported missing. This was about five months after the couple had gotten married. Monty's explanation for her disappearance was that she had run off with an Alaskan sailor. In seeing that Halley was already stigmatized by being a two times divorcee, the police closed the case and left it at that. And by 1938, Monty was granted a divorce from Halley so he could move off to California to start a new relationship with Halley's sister's roommates. I know, I know, super, super red flags. But again, this was the 1930s and things were done a little bit differently. In July of 1940, Monty Ellingworth's life would change. This is because two brothers, the raw brothers, were on Lake Crescent fishing when they noticed an interesting object bobbing in the lake. They went over to retrieve the object and to their horror, they found that this was a body. The body had been wrapped in blankets covered in rope and it appeared that it had been or attempted to have been weighted down 600 feet to the bottom of the lake. Now normally you would think that if a body had been dead for three years that there would be some major decomposition. But this wasn't so with this particular body. In fact, the only thing distorted about the body was missing fingers and toes and some of the face had decomposed like the nose was missing. But as far as the actual body, it was very apparent that this was a woman. It seems that the cold water had somewhat preserved her body so much so that they could still make out the fact that she had a green dress on. The brothers eventually went to go find help and when they told the authorities that they believed they had found a human body, the authorities thought they must have been mistaken. Maybe it was a deer's body or something like that. But of course, once the authorities got to the lake and they discovered that this was indeed the body of a woman, medical teams got involved. Now of course, again, this was 1940. There really was no forensic science at this point. And so the team did the best they could. According to Hayland McNuck, a medical student who examined the body said the body was the texture of soap. This was because her body had spawnified. This means that her body fat had molecularly mixed with some of the chemical compounds of the lake causing her body to have a waxy sensation. In fact, they compared it to almost soap like that her skin had turned porcelain light and feel very much like soap. From everything I read about this case in this time of 1940, even though the medical assistants and the doctors knew exactly what had happened to cause the skin to be this way, it still kind of freaked them out a little bit. I mean, here you have this body that they can tell had been gone for at least a few years without the telltale signs of decomposition, besides the face and the hands. The body still appeared like it would have appeared in life and was basically preserved in time, but yet felt like it was waxy soap. At first they had no way to identify this Jane Doe. And so this Jane Doe became known as the Lady of the Lake. Even though they had no identification and even though the body had spawnified, they were able to gather that this body again had been deceased for at least a couple of years. They also determined that the woman had lost her life due to strangulation. Not only were there the telltale signs of strangulation, but the body was still covered in bruises. Just like most of the body had been preserved by the spawnification and the cold water, so had the bruises. It's almost like her death was stamped in time. The Lady of the Lake was eventually buried in an unmarked grave in Potter's Fields near Port Angels. Now, Potter's Field, we've spoken about Potter's Fields a few times in some older episodes, especially dealing with some cemetery-based episodes when I first started this channel. Potter's Field is basically a section of some older cemeteries that offer resting places for people who are paupers, who are poor, who can't afford the expenses of a burial. However, 14 months after the Lady of the Lake had been buried, her dental records showed up to a positive match with Hallie Illingsworth. Before coming to the state of Washington, Hallie had lived in South Dakota and her dentist in South Dakota was able to identify work that he had done in her mouth. At this point, the Lady of the Lake was exhumed from her resting spot. Once she was identified, the police officers remembered that back in 1937, December 22nd of 1937, to be exact, a woman had been declared missing. And then they remembered that her husband had claimed that she ran off to Alaska to start a new life with a sailor. They also remembered that many of the locals had complained about the fighting that they would hear from the apartment owned by Monty and Hallie Illingsworth. So Monty Illingsworth was brought back to Washington to stand trial for the homicide of his wife. The trial was officially started on February 24th of 1942, and Monty himself kept proclaiming his innocence that this was not Hallie Illingsworth, this was just some Jane Doe. Hallie was still living in Alaska with her sailor lover and no, no, no, no, this can't be her. However, in the court, they brought up all the records and the complaints of abuse that had been filed all those years ago. They also brought in witness testimony from Hallie's job where her co-workers claimed that Hallie would often come back in with bruises. Monty's defense was that, yes, sometimes their arguments got a little bit passionate, a little bit heated, but that's okay because she hit him back, too. But the real kicker in the case was the rope. The rope that had been used to tie Hallie up and tie weights to Hallie to keep her down at the bottom of the leg. It seemed the rope had over time loosened itself and come undone from the weights, hence the body was able to float to the surface. There was a local shop owner in the area at this time that claimed that Monty had come in asking if he could borrow some rope. He claimed that he needed to pull his car and he would bring the rope back as soon as he was done. But lo and behold, Monty never brought the rope back and the rope that was left attached to the body matched the rope owned by the shop owner. This was the nail in the coffin for Monty Inglesworth. It took the jury only four hours to find Monty guilty of homicide. Monty was sentenced to life in prison, however, nine years later he was paroled and ended up going back to California where he spent the rest of his life and passed away in 1975. However, people who now visit the Lake Crescent Lodge claim to see the spirit of Hallie Inglesworth smoking cigarettes, talking, laughing and having a grand old time at the place that used to employ her. Now, yes, of course, right now we are in the middle of reviewing missing persons cases in national parks. But I thought for this week and for next week we would take a little bit of a break and look at some of the more metaphysical or paranormal aspects of Olympia National Park. It appears that Hallie Inglesworth or the Lady of the Lake is one of the most famous ghost stories in the area. And I would hope that if Hallie is still hanging out at the Lodge where she used to work, she's doing so by her own free will. She's back at a place that maybe brought her joy and I hope for her sake that she's not stuck there. So if you're an Olympic National Park and you go to the Lake Crescent Lodge, be looking out for Hallie Inglesworth. All right, guys, I hope you're having a wonderful, wonderful Monday. Please leave me your thoughts and your opinions down in the comment section below. Let me know if you believe in ghosts or not. I absolutely believe in ghosts. I've seen many of them. But let me know your experiences down below. And also, have you ever seen Hallie Inglesworth at this lodge yourself? I would be curious to know. All right, guys, tomorrow we're going to be releasing part four of the Magland series, which I'm so super excited about.  I hope again that you're having to start a really, really wonderful week. Hold your head up high and know that the best is truly yet to come.