There you go. I don't need to yell that again, but it is six o'clock. Uh we'll call the meeting to order. Our joint meeting between the select board, the advisory board, and the school committee. Um assume everyone has quums. Yep. I will call the school committee meeting to order.
Call the advisory board meeting to order. All right. Great. Um so um select board we have a not a full agenda but we have a few other things after this but we are going to start with the public comment and then jump into the the Graten Dunable Regional School District
operational audit review. We have some minutes to approve um few appointments for um a few of the positions. The emergency management director LRTA representative in the commission on
accessibility liquor license request discussion on the f uh fall special town meeting and the warrant. And that's it. Um we'll open it up to public comment. Is anyone here to speak on anything that is not on this agenda tonight?
Okay, we will move on. We will jump into the the operational audit review. Um I believe that we have a PowerPoint presentation that's being presented by the school. Yes. So uh first of all, I just wanted to say thank you to everybody for meeting with us. Uh we felt like it
would be um a good opportunity now that the operational audit has been completed to fully go through it. Have the opportunity to answer to ask questions and have them answered. um to talk about you know next steps going forward. Um so
Dr. Ber does have a presentation that kind of provides an overview of the audit. There's three sections to it. Um we did meet with Brton last night and the way that we did it there was we kind of went through section by section and in between opened it up for questions.
Um so if everyone's amendable to that we can do it the same way but if you would prefer to do it all questions at the end that's fine too. Yeah. Um just to take note that um believe these boards, the select board and advisory board have been receipt of this. I assume
everyone's read it. This is the first time that we've discussed it together as a group. Um that no decisions on this have been made at all. This is purely just discussion on what the audit says. Um so just keep that in mind as you may see some things
in there that you may like or not like. No decisions have been made or going to be made this evening on this. Correct. And um I'll just follow that up by saying that um we are planning on having a virtual forum next week. Um so there will be a Zoom link available. So if
anybody does have questions that don't get fully addressed tonight, there will be another opportunity virtually to log on um and continue the discussion uh next week at 8, right? Um but as you said, there's absolutely
no, you know, decisions have been made. Um, you know, this is sort of a result of long-standing conversations of just wanting the school district to have an independent third party kind of come in and assess our operations and then make
recommendations purely as to cost savings with no like this is just that. It really doesn't offer um advice on what is the most educationally sound practice. It's it's purely just these
are some ways in which you could achieve some cost savings. These are some ways in which you could be more efficient. Some of which are you know things that we would want to look at and pursue perhaps and others are not. So with that
we're going to go over to Dr. Bruno. Right. And I I just want to add this is now the third time we've walked through these slides. So the some and it's really just to summarize um what is a very you know dense document particularly the second part on um special education student services and
student support. Um so this is the third time we've gone through it. It's also been shared publicly as well. first on the 27th um which is the date on the on the title slide here which is when we first um went over the summary and and and presented it um publicly at a school
committee meeting on the 27th and as as Lacy mentioned we went through um the same slides last night uh broughten uh select board and fin. So, um I'm going to have uh Sherry's going to walk walk us through the first couple sections and
then um and then I'll hop in uh for sections two and three. Thank you everyone for having us tonight. Um so just to refresh everybody's memory, why did we do this operational audit? And during the FY25
budget season, the uh town of Brtton gifted us $619,000 with the stipulation with two stipulations. One um anything that we were supporting with that money were supposed to be one-time purchases, so no
reoccurring expenses on those. Um and the second was that we would have an independent operational audit to vet potential cost savings. Um the Abraham's group was the consultant who was chosen to perform the
audit. They are the same uh consultant who was used in the 2017 audit that we had. Um and that did result in the school district implementing some cost-saving measures such as the central office um yeah central office moving to
uh the Stoddard building um and outsourcing food service and custodial services. Um the expected outcome um given the fact that certain expenses that the school district have grow at a rate
higher than um revenue rate grows um the elimination of positions over the last fiscal years. The goal of the operational audit was to explore various options and reduce costs, review current staff and support and explore potential
long-term efficiencies. So, as Lacy said before, there were three um specific areas that we focused on. One was the administrator staffing, student services and support staffing, and
building usage. So with administrative staffing um the purpose of of doing this was that um the district had heard at many uh open meetings that there were some that felt that we were administrative heavy
that our salaries were um too high and and whatnot. So, and we put this as one of the items for the auditor to the consultant to look at um and give an unbiased opinion.
The methodology was that the consultant um received a list of all the central office staff with available job descriptions and then they followed up with um phone interviews. Uh there were
actually Zoom interviews with myself, human resources, um the former assistant superintendent and uh the principal of the middle school um to ask he asked us each a different set of questions. Um and then he was
provided a comparison of salaries that we've had in our reports before of our comparison to our market basket and ourselves. Um, and I also provided him with a um a data point that my
organization, MASPO, um, maintains. So, it's a a Google sheet from every municipality and school district and there's tabs in there for every administrator salary. So, whoever
participates in that can go in. Um, that's that was provided to them. Um and then the consultant also used information that he found on Desi. Um so appendix A, there's two appendixes
in here. Um A was a salary comparison by enrollment. So that was the factor, the data point that the consultant used to try to um compare us to other districts. So he looked at um dis
district districts that had similar enrollment and um um EQB um value. So the districts that he chose are different than our market
basket. Um they're Mansfield, Bendon, Upton, Swaps, Swamcott, Wilmington, Gardener, and actually um I there should be Triton up there as well. Um, so the rationale behind that was that he was
looking to see that if he picked a different subset of who he thought was a comparable district, um, he would come up to he was going to see does that jive with what we've been saying with our market basket. Um,
so that shar Yeah. Can I just just so I understand the market basket is the comparison based on SAT scores, right? Is that how that came up with it? No. No. Our our market basket is um the set
of 10 school districts that the school committee 10 years ago maybe uh less than 10 years ago um picked and that's who we compare ourselves to when we're looking at um with comparable
test scores and things like that. But back when, it's my understanding, I wasn't here then, but it's my understanding that there was um they decided on going with like value and um enrollment at the time, so that
would probably be a little different now, too. Um but it is I I wish I could tell you the the 10. No, my my understanding was that they picked the market basket schools because it was based on what what their SAT scores were in comparison to ours.
So, it's there's actually a whole list of factors that I think was one of them as as well as MCCAST scores, but it was also like median home value, um, enrollment, um, I think median income, like there was a whole list of I think 10 different
factors. And so based on that, roughly 10 years ago, the school committee selected these 10 communities to be our market basket. Um, and so oftent times over the years, like you'll see and hear us talk about like this is
how we stack up to our market basket. Um, so I think the thinking was here the auditor wanted to pick different communities to kind of determine whether what we were seeing with data points
comparing us to our market basket would hold up with other similarly sized districts um, which also had the similar EQB as well. So based upon the results of an independent auditor picking independent schools, is that something you're going to consider to modify your
market basket since an indepartent third party has determined that the market basket we're evaluating ourselves to is different than what the the actual market is actually showing. So the way that I kind of interpreted that was not necessarily that he was saying this is your exact match or these
are always the schools that you should always compare yourselves to. Um, but these are other similarly sized districts that do have a similar EQV. So, it is taking those two data points. It doesn't really factor in some of the
other ones. That being said, it was 10 years ago that that was created, right? So, I do think it would be time to kind of refresh that list. I don't know in doing that if we would come up with these particular communities because I do think that there are some differences
that you could kind of look at and say well we don't really match up with gardener for example for some reason you know certain reasons. Um but I do think that that it is time to do that. But if it's time to are we going to modify the warm basket or is it still
going to be a comparison towards the same 10 schools? No, that's what I'm saying is that I think we will do that, but for the purposes of this report, like this is what the auditor, these are the schools that the auditor chose to compare us to. And so all of the
comparisons that you'll see in the data points that you'll see is like GD compared to these other districts. So it's just kind of giving you a sense of like how do we stack up with our administrator staffing? How do we stack up with our administrator headcount?
I mean they're not just random schools. They're schools that would could be potential market baskets. Good. And they they list of criteria that are make sense to compare to. Yes. It it's like those two data points are very relevant. But I think in the past like the previous school committee
that came up with this used additional data points to like hone it even further. So you know if we were just to look at those two data points of like EQV and enrollment. Yes, we could use these schools and and that would be a very comparable, you know, an accurate
comparison, but if we wanted to kind of dive in and use other data points, we may come up with some additional ones as well. A bigger. Yeah. These communities were used basically to check, right? Yeah. To make sure that what we've been what
the school district has been presenting is more or less accurate. So they kind of pull down other similar school districts to basically be a check to what we've done what the school district. Yes. Exactly.
Okay. Um so in looking at the the comparison of those um communities that they chose, the superintendent salary ranked fourth out of six. The assistant superintendent
at the time ranked second out of six. The director of business and finance ranked third out of six. Human resources third out of six. Director of student services second out of six. Technology uh director of technology fourth out of
six. And the athletic director ranked third out of six. And there was a note on the um the report that the salary comparisons do not take into consideration years of service. So there may be someone who's been doing it for
one year versus someone who's been doing it 20. Um but this was purely on the salary that was being paid. Um the consultant also included m um municipal finance data including the EQB on that appendix A. It's on the bottom.
Um this was to provide a sense that each community's financial status as an additional data marker for comparing um the chosen communities. Appendix B of that report um chose not
only just to look at salaries but the number of administrators that were in the medical office. Um although it's sometimes it can be difficult to match um some of the positions one to one because they have different requirements
in their job description at each individual school. Um these were selected um the communities were selected compared to us and it illustrates the number of administrator positions in connection with district
net school spending per people expenditure and school leadership for pupils. So, if you look at appendix B, um it outlines it'll have each community with the the uh titles of the administrators, how much they spend per
pupil of administrative costs um how much um of the budget does that represent? Again, just to to see um how closely they align. Um the conclusions were that the percent
of spending on administrative costs is not significantly different from other simils sized districts. The central office staffing included superintendent, directors and principles across similar districts. The per pupil expenditures
are similar with the exception of one outlier which was Triton. Um they were they were a lot higher. um and the staffing configurations were similar and appear reasonable. Uh he additionally went on to look at
what he called middle management which is the rest of the uh central office positions. The coordinators, the team chairs, a math supervisor, the assistant business director, the whole technology department, the community coordinator
and student services support. job descriptions were provided for each of those positions on this and the consultant states that they accurately reflect job responsibilities. However, some were job descriptions and some were actual just job postings. So, and there
is a difference between the two. So, the recommendation is um that the central um that's kind of like the same. I don't know why I put that in um because it's so important.
Um I think you can go to the next one. So in reviewing the middle management pos positions also a lot of those positions have different number of work days during the year. Some are 180 which is a school year. Some are 200 which
goes a little bit before after. Some are 210. Some are 216 and some are 261 a full year. So, what they recommended, number one, is that we um update all of our job descriptions so that they're actual job descriptions. And actually,
there's a new law that just came in that you have to put the salary range on there, too. So, um it's something that we would have had to do. Um but also we to evaluate the number of days that are on these contracting positions. Um to
see if there's any efficiencies like if they're currently 220 days a year um is is it possible to go and reduce the contract. So those are things during this budget season we will
be reviewing and um taking on that recommendation. Yeah, and I would just add that that that some of the findings that cut across both sections is around this issue of um reviewing and then revising and updating job descriptions. Uh that's
already underway. So, I mean there there are some of the findings and recommendations that are in here that that we're doing and that we're already doing. I just wanted to note that. Do you want questions now or should we wait till the end? I was going to ask. Yeah. So, that's what I was saying at
the beginning. We can do it either way. But that is the way we did it last night. Um, and that way it's sort of section by section, but if you prefer to hold them until the end, that's fine. So, whatever your preference is, I think it makes sense to address the questions with each section. Okay.
Now, yeah. So when I read the sorry I when I read the um with the report one of the things that was mentioned that was not mentioned there was that you had you had shared a job description with
them for all of those positions but it said that there was only a partial set of documentation shared with the auditors. Why was that partial documentation? This is a partial set of documentation. It probably meant that we probably
didn't have a job description or posting. So you have nothing was withheld. So you have people in positions and they don't have a job description. Yeah, could be. Are there other recommendations at least that uh you're talking about here? Are they those implemented in the budget
discussion? We'll talk about later. I guess have we already taken that into consideration for that that next fiscal year budget? Absolutely. the question. Can I just want I just want to respond to Matt real quick and then um so just
on your point M like I think that was sort of the recommendation was to ensure that that is done right. So like I mean notwithstanding like what's already happened. Yeah. I mean that was sort of one of the purposes of doing this was to find areas where we could
improve become more efficient and so that was something that was pointed out as needing to be done and is currently in the process of one of one of the things in there that I that I read that I thought was very telling was that they mentioned the whole middle management resources and
how a lot of the middle management positions are focused more on um more administrative functions as opposed to, you know, different projects. And before I even go on, I just want to say I I understand it must be awful to read an
audit of what you guys are doing. And I and I know that's not easy. Um, and I appreciate you guys having these public forums to to basically listen to to us. And I know that your job's very hard and and I don't want you to think I'm I'm questioning that. But to me, there was a lot of really good information in this
report. And when I the presentations that I saw, I did not hear that there were I heard explanations as to why things are the way they are, but I didn't I felt like I didn't hear explanations as to they're making recommendations for, you know, efficiencies and savings, but I I wasn't
getting that information from you guys. And I guess that's kind of what I'm focused on more than anything is that yeah, we needed to look at job descriptions, but it looked like they were also questioning the role some people had and that some of those some of the positions could be realigned to better.
Right. No, exactly. No, I think that's sort of what Sher was saying um is in doing that work of like evaluating job descriptions, we're also like making sure to look at how many days is this person working? Is it possible for them to complete their job in a fewer number
of days and to kind of revise some of those contracts or when there's vacancies to kind of completely kind of revamp that job description and you know higher at a lower rate like so I think that really was the main takeaway. So
it's it's talking about the job descriptions but that kind of does translate to the potential for some cost savings as well. And just to agree with what Matt said, it is a non notation that they put in there that some of the information was not provided. So that just I understand you give everything,
but it's kind of weird for them to highlight the fact that they did not have all the information at the point of time the audit being given how critical and obviously how you know uh how much both communities wanted to see what the audit looked like. to have that notation
added to that was kind of I was sort of disappointing to say that like that something may have been held from uh from their audit or view of what was going on. Yeah. And I think it was not that it was withheld but that it was incomplete. Yeah. Or didn't exist.
I just wish they didn't. So I can't give them something that we don't have. And other questions. So Eric had one. Yep. So one just a quick comment and then a question is I was one of the ones who mentioned the third party audit
during the overall meetings. What I was requesting was a financial audit which is not what this is. That was not common. The second is what's more concerning besides that they don't have a level you know years of service as part of the salary. They don't mention
benefits. They don't mention retirement contributions. none of that which can vary greatly from district to district. So to me the data that they provided is really not helpful. I I totally disagree. I feel like there
a done very well. There was a lot of financial um disclosures that were listed in there. Um benefits retirement expectations not listed anywhere. I mean I mean part of that would have to do with the teachers contract being you know you you'd have
to do a whole different audit for that kind of that kind of thing but there was a lot of financial recommendations in here you know you read through it but if the data is not complete how can you make a financial recommendation well I mean they made some recommendations based on what the information that was provided to them so
you know it's certainly certain there's a lot of financial information in there we have a financial aid financial audit every here that's available if you would like me to send it to you. It's not secret
as far as policies and classifications and all of that goes along a financial aid law we have to do that. Any other questions or comments on this section before we move on to the student services?
So just to transition into student services and again um this ties into um some of the recommendations around um job descriptions and functions. Um this is really the the as far as the operational audit is concerned the
longest section and kind of the most meaty in terms of uh the very positions and services and how we support the needs of kids. Um and then also the the the the most opportunity for potential savings efficiencies um and frankly
better uh strengthening how we support um our students overall. So um we looked at multiple years of data posted on the or the consultants looked at multiple years of data posted on the mass desic website to look at a profile of
broadensible. Um also comparing other districts and then also statewide trends. Um looked at job descriptions, program descriptions, staff lure case loads and schedules, special education referrals and eligibility and IEP services. um some of the findings and
the trends that were outlined looking at uh roughly 2022 to 2025 uh the numbers and percentages of students that are eligible for special education services uh has increased um in gromable and in mass so in groable from around kind of
15% of students being eligible or on IEPs to uh between 18 and 19% um in 2025 full and partial inclusion percentages are higher ground dunstable. Our graduation rate is higher for students that are on ed plans, which is
a which was a a nice thing to see as part of this. Um reading and math mcast performance in meeting state targets across grade levels warrants attention. And this is when you look at um how our students who who are receiving special education services or on APS, how they
perform um on on the MCCAST, for example, versus uh students who are not uh receiving those services. All right. Um, so again, job descriptions are needed across all positions districtwide. Um, we're we're
through we're we're uh working hard on making sure that they're all reviewed and updated. Um, role clarity, alignment, responsibilities, and efficiencies. I wanted I wanted to just pick out as part of that um specifically uh our team shares. So, special
education team shares um vary their their job responsibilities and what they do can vary across districts. In some districts like ours, Grant Dunable, our team chairs are uh considered administrators and that means
they chair um IEP meetings and and function as team chairs special education. They they are also um building level administrators and part of that um building leadership team alongside principles and assistant principles. They supervise and evaluate
staff. Um and so in GR and Dunable and you saw some of this a little bit in the in the findings and in the report. um they have a a wider a wider um array of responsibilities than team
chairs in a district where they're actually considered part of unit A and on a teacher contract. Um so I just wanted to mention that and and I will say there there are lots of um benefits and strengths to having your team chairs
be administrators as opposed to uh members of today and being part of that. um building leadership team. Just one question. Uh how many, if you're able to answer this, how many employees didn't have a job description? Just sort of do you have a rough
ballpark number? Was it like 10 employees of the district in general didn't have a job description that they were understanding what their responsibilities were day-to-day? I ballpark small. I would be a small number. It's not a large number. Um, and I think it's
more about making sure that those job descriptions are complete, that they're current, that they're up toate and in line with what we need, um, our employees to be doing. Okay. Yeah. Excellent. So, um, this is one area that that, um,
was of concern particularly of the cost involved. Um so when when a child is referred for special education going through um that eval evaluation process um hire our school psychologists and in some cases even um contracted services
to make sure all of these evaluations are complete and then there's an eligibility determination. It's a it's it's a um a very involved process as it should be. Um roughly uh a third of the referrals are preschool age children.
The number of referrals overall has been increasing. Um which obviously tracks with a greater number of students who are who are found eligible and on IEPs. Um, one of the uh, one of the troubling
or troubling uh, parts of this is that the percentage of um, students or families that go through the evaluation process and their student is found not to be eligible. That that percentage has kind of typically been
around 30 30% somewhere in there which which is um, not a bad benchmark. uh last couple years that's inched up and last year was it was closer to 50%. So um going through that whole evaluation
process for a student not found eligible um is concerning and and they me and and as part of the the findings you know mentioned that um you know communication with parents making sure um they understand when to refer or why to
refer. um sometimes it can come from a teacher, some a lot of times it's a parent referral. Um anyway, understanding that process and then also strengthening our in-class supports for kids who may be struggling academically are key to address um address that that
data. So, um that's really the next bullet is strengthening our student support teams, how how we meet and support kids when they are struggling. Um and then what are we doing in our classrooms? um as part of like our decap district
curriculum accommodation plan which is which has recently been revised and updated. What are our um interventions with students in the classroom with our classroom teachers uh when kids are struggling. So that tiered system of support strengthening that that's um that's really has been a big theme of
ours in our our professional development in all buildings and with all staff. But that's that's key. That was a key part of the findings in this report. And then looking at um speech and language therapy and occupational therapy, our service delivery. So with some of our
spe special specialists um an over reliance on onetoone uh meeting with kids and are there ways uh to or are there more you know appropriate times that are even better ultimately for kids to be working in small groups with an
occupational therapist or a speech and language uh therapist those kind of things. So looking looking at um how can we be more efficient and effective in providing uh services that our our students need. Are we is something happening at the elementary school level where the need
for that in middle school is so high? I'm sorry. Am I am I reading it wrong when I say that the the number of kids that are on IEPs 40% of kids that are on IEPs are need speech and language services which is significantly higher in this district
than it is in others. what right what is the correlation with is there some kind of correlation with that well I think I think there's a couple of things there that she was alluding to is it um is to is to really look at how we're scheduling those services and then
also um you know weaning students off as they progress you know and so there could be some cases where uh students are still receiving services um for specific needs and it may not be necessary So is that part of the 504
problem that was mentioned in the in the audit as well where the the the it kind of mentioned that the team chairs this is my interpretation. Okay. And if it's wrong you know you can correct it. My understanding was that the 504 should
be more focused on assistant principles and the um assistant principles and the guidance council should be managing those rather than having team shares manage it so that they can focus more on the IPS themselves. Is that something
that will help address that or am I am I not understanding that correctly? Um it could it could potentially but um that was definitely looking at um the team chairs overall job descriptions and responsibilities as being too broad and
and and and that particularly with students who are on 504s that having um guidance or an assistant principal manage that process uh is more difficult. It also mentioned that the high school block scheduling is a deterrent for the IEP students. So is that
there's a challenge? Yeah. Okay. And the fact that not only that, but the fact that the teachers at the high school level have get two prep periods per day rather than the normal one. Is that my understanding? Yeah. But that's in their contract. Correct. Correct. Okay.
Um so some of the scheduling as we talked about um how are we scheduling and allocating uh case loads amongst our special education staff. One of the one of the commendations and
this this is part of um of opening the new Florence Roach building. uh we were able to put all of our substantially separate um special education classrooms at the elementary level uh under one roof and at one building. And so there there are some efficiencies there
transportation wise and also staffing wise, but then also um you know meeting the needs specific very complicated needs of of some of our students and having our staff um you know who are who are educating our kids under under one
roof. there's a lot of benefits to that as well. So, uh in terms of meeting the needs of kids and then also operating efficiently um having that makes a makes a big difference and then also being able to have therapeutic programming in
district as opposed to um having to send kids out of district which is extraordinarily expensive. So, um being able to do that and has been something that will continue to um you know save
us money essentially and also um serve our kids better because they're able to you know be educated in the same buildings as as our our community and our and our other students. So this um offering that specialized programming and demonstrating a cohesive and
comprehensive service delivery delivery model um for all of our students will will will help um make sure that we're operating more efficiently, effectively and do what's best we can.
Quick question, who does the um the eligibility? Is that within the school or is it an outside who determines whether a referral or student is eligible? Well, that's that is um the IEP team
with the team. Yeah. There's not a state outside correct. Yes. Yeah. So, that's team chairs and you know headed by our um Jill Green who couldn't be here this evening. She's the director of special services just sort of like weaning the weaning
process off of the the IEPs. Is that still a situation with the state where each person has to do that including the parents? Is that what you're seeing is that maybe the parents aren't turning their heat the first day to come to have somebody come off of an IEP or is that where are you seeing those the trouble
being able to wean off at least it seems like you were it's anybody that's challenging to wean them off of it. Is there is there one particular group that's slowing that process? No, I don't I don't think so. I just think sometimes um you know, you receive a certain amount of services and having
to talk to families or even the n team about pulling that back is can be difficult. I think that's that's a universal thing. But isn't the general consensus though if like the kid got the services that they need so they are now at level but you take it away and
they're going to fall back again. That's well I mean that's the fear right? Yeah that's the fear and again that's every child is different every every um evolution of their skills and how they develop can be different particularly when you're dealing with specific
learning disabilities. So there's a lot of cases where you know their their services will will continue and and need to right. So um it's you know that's not each each case is is independent. That
being said you're also trying to develop more independent skills you know for all your students students who are on IEPs and those who are not. That's a that's a universal goal of education at least in my opinion.
Take question. Yeah. Um I will actually just add as well if you're not aware of the process students that are on these are so at that point they are meeting their
goals. Um, one thing that I two questions, one thing that I noted in the report was that I didn't realize we have only one physical therapist in the entire district. Is that correct? And one of the things that they
recommended was that hire actually additional physical therapists because or physical therapy assistance because we are contracting to bring them additional people that
was also an that was also a savings opportunity as well. Yeah. Yeah. except for having correct right and and um in some cases you know some of those highly specialized positions it's hard to find people um
number one so that that but the services are there and and need to be provided so um that's where sometimes contracting services come into play but that was definitely a recommendation and again from this operational audit it's really this section two where there where
there's the most opportunity Um in terms of savings uh with personnel and FT which again our staff um the people who we hire and work for us is roughly 80% of the overall budget
um um when we were talking about um maybe parents I wasn't clear on the term referral if that's the same as evaluation referral for evaluation referral Okay. So, if we're concerned that maybe
too many parents are asking forations for kids that aren't actually meeting that that need. Um, is there someone exploring and asking a question of why so many parents feel their kids need
additional help and that those kids needs are not being met? Yes. if if they're not, you know, if they're meeting a benchmark in a test, but they're struggling to be schooled enough to the point that the parents think something's wrong needs to be addressed. Like,
yes, there's a disconnect there, right? Well, right. And that's that's communication. Um, that's some of the professional development that we're talking about in terms of um what are some the interventions that you can do and you know immediately, right? because
you're not waiting for okay let's see if this child has learning disability you're just like all right um my child is struggling um and in English class right and so um here here are some things that we can do uh and try with
the teacher and in the classroom to and like are there ways more proactive correct yeah yeah I think um just to kind of follow up on what Bruno said I think that this particular recommendation provides an opportunity for potential cost
savings, right? If you're if you are avoiding maybe unnecessary evaluations, but it also has really more important um benefit of providing intervention and providing assistance to students sooner. Um it may
it may end up being that that student does require an IEP, but in a lot of cases it doesn't and maybe they just need some temporary intervention. they get that assistance, they get back on track and then they carry on and they and they don't need anything further at
that time. Right? So I think it kind of serves two purposes um which you know is one thing that I think is is really positive um coming out of the the audit. So kind of along the same lines is you
mentioned that there are going through these evaluations that take quite a bit of time has risen to you said 50% that are being deemed ineligible right so what um if you have it what would be
the dollar estimate that is actually costing the district and two what are the other districts doing in order to keep that percentage Yeah. Yeah. I mean, um, I think it's, if I were to speculate on
the second part of your question, what are other districts doing? I think again it's revolves around some of the recommendations we're talking about now in terms of um you know probably better communication with parents um digging in and talking more about classroom
interventions before we get to a referral um for a special ed evaluation in terms of the dollar amount I don't have that um the like the average cost of an evaluation but find that thank you Jen can you just clarify I um
what you're talking about was one the periods of the high school. So each teacher gets two blocks for planning purposes at the high school. Is that what correct? I believe so. I think they just get one. They teach
three and one. The audit said that they get two per the contract. Was it special education specifically? No. So it said it said by getting it says by getting the two it it adversely
affects the ability for the I for IEP students um when it comes to class classes was but I guess my where my thought process is going I mean these block periods in high school are what 88 minutes long so these these teachers are getting two
88 minute periods call it 3 hours a day for planning where if you're an elementary or middle school teacher that same teacher is only getting a 40 or 45 minute planning period because they don't have this block schedule the way it is in the high school.
It could I I it may be though that like when the audit is saying two periods they're talking about one block period which is two like roughly 45 minutes. So it's it's an 88 minute not that's why yeah no no
holy teaching two periods but the other two periods they are on planning yeah the challenge with the block schedule specifically for students who who are on IEPs there's just there's less flexibility in terms of being able
to balance students into um classes that that you don't have as many many ways to kind of schedule kids together in in groups that would be a little more efficient.
I'm not even saying, you know, to tie this into the IEPs or special ed. I'm just thinking how are we have efficient are we using these teachers and you know educators over there efficiently if they're um 3 hours a day of planning when teachers
follow union is you know has one period which is probably 40 minutes of planning time so I mean I know my children are struggling and we're hoping to get classes back well can we take this one teacher that's on three hours of planning and throw in
another class um So, and that's probably going to ask the teacher tomorrow. How many do you teach two classes and are you I already up it does say that only special education teacher documents were and noted that almost all special
education teachers had two preparation periods for specific special. So, like the math teachers and the English teachers we don't think are getting three hours a day. It doesn't look like they were. No. I just had one point and that so over the past two years increase of the
impressive fees right the 15% and what happened then was also we dropped extra math right we have cut staff because I know like personally I had a child that was getting help in school
services dropped because of the cut and staff. So, I'm just wondering, did parents start to request for IEPs because they felt where students were not getting supported in the classroom due to the cuts and how do we bring back that extra math and reading support,
right? Yeah, that very well could be a factor for sure. And um we did bring um back additional math intervention um for this year at the middle school specifically. and it and um keep it at Swallow as well. So that's actually a
split position between Swallow and the middle school. um to bring some of that back. um you know and and and one of the roles of a math interventionist is also that instructional coaching working with classroom teachers specifically to
around those tier one and tier 2 interventions um so that we can kind of counteract that you know and and we've had probably a steady growth in the number of referrals but the the the where the stat that really jumped was
that finding of of anel eligibility that jumped. Um, so that that doesn't necessarily mean that there were significantly more referrals, but there were more referrals that were then the student was kind of found being eligible and that was the concerning part.
Any other questions, David? So, when it comes to these referrals, specifically in SWAT unit, uh towards the end of last year, my son was missing a lot of his
one-on-one time between testing, MCAST, and things like that. Will these efficiencies help put those services back to the kids that need it, or are we under staff at this point? I'm not sure the best way to answer that
question. Um, so you're talking about um services that were interrupted because of testing because of MCCAST um IEP testing meetings. So if you're saying there's a 50% ineligible rate,
an efficiency in that should put the teacher back in the classroom or well it's not necessarily the teacher who's doing the evaluation, you know, who's managing that. So like the I mean and then the testing windows are going
to be the same every year. So if there, you know, unless depending on the how your child is scheduled for specific services, that could be the same because the MCAST window will will likely be the same that year. So it's not really impacted. It's not
really a staffing impact. It's more of a a testing. Yeah, if I'm understanding your question correctly, I think this this particular recommendation wouldn't really have a positive or a negative impact on that. Like I think that's a separate issue. will be an important one but separate.
Yeah. Yeah. I think it would be separate from staff and efficiencies. That makes sense. Okay. All right. Building usage. Uh so this section of the audit first um is looking
at current data review current building utilization uh effectiveness productivity and cost efficiency and then looking at uh building usage scenarios. So um early childhood center relocating uh the
early childhood center to to another building and merging students into Florence Roach and closing Swall Union. Those are the those were the two big scenarios that were kind of investigated um in terms of potential savings uh operationally and financially. So
swallowing Gro and Dunable Regional Middle School and Grodunible Regional High School were or are rated as underutilized by MSBA standards. Um with respect to the ground dunustable middle school uh it's noted that this
the rating standard as underutilized um was prior to 20 2018 when uh the central office was relocated into the Stoddard building. The Bowwell Early Childhood Center is rated as a one which is the highest
rating. One is good, four is is the worst. um for both building condition and environment. Uh one of the quotes around Bowwell currently bow building serves the ECC program well. While somewhat antiquated has been kept up to date, air conditioning, new heating
system, there's a room that can serve as a play space gym. There's an area that serves as a library now uh which is new. Outdoor play area is aging and should be replaced. Uh, Swallow Union Elementary School, well-maintained older elementary school
in need of in need of renovation. 2016 MSBA need study. The rated building is a level three for building condition and then a one for general environment. The enrollment last year was 211 students. Um, capital improvements underway through
all union as well as an application to Massachusetts school building authority to repair slashreplace the roof. some process. Florence Road Elementary School, new building completed and open to students for the 2024 2025 school
year. Um designed for maximum 645 students. The enrollment in 2025 was 615. Uh middle school two buildings with Stoddard fifth and sixth grade. Uh also west central office in the back. Middle
school north 7th and eighth grade 2025 enrollment 739. um MSBA study in 2016 rated both buildings as one for condition and general environment. Um and again as I mentioned district office housed in solder building that was actually um one
of the things that came out of the last independent operational audit which was done in 2017. our high school um 2025 enrollment 659 students rated one for building condition and general environment um project underway to connect the high
school to town hall. So the scenario of moving their early childhood center to Swallow while there is room and available classroom space the cost associated with the move would be very high. Uh when the elder SW building is also in need of uh major
renovations the current ECC locations preferable to the district as a whole. There would be minimal if any savings with respect to personnel for moving the ECC either into swallow or the other scenario to the high school. So moving ECC to the high school um similar
recommendation. While there would be adequate room and classroom space at the lower level, the cost of moving would exceed any benefit to having the ECC at the high school. The savings would be minor and the cost would be high to retrofit all the classrooms. Have to add a playground. Uh it would also displace
the GR TV studio which is uh in the basement of the high school. uh closing swallow union and moving all K to4 students uh to Grten. Um there there is a paragraph about I mean
again this is an operational audit but the educational costs um and the impact would be would be felt across the district K to 12. Um it would require the new Florence Roach building which is specifically designed for K to4
classroom neighborhoods to be K to3 only. uh which would then displace the fourth grade. The uh fourth all the fourth graders would then need to move uh to one of the middle school buildings. Middle school buildings would then need to become fourth grade through 7th grade. Uh likely displacing the
eighth grade um which the eighth grade as a whole could fit in the high school. Um or by maximizing available space you could potentially um fit fourth through 8th in the two across the two buildings. but it would display central office to the high
school. Um anyway, the either scenario, the shift in the grade level and use of space is highly disruptive uh and not educationally or developmentally appropriate for our students or for our staff. Uh Dunable obviously would lose its
elementary school uh which is a central part of the town community and a critical part of our school district. Uh it's one of the highest performing elementary schools in the state and and is a model school community. Okay. Closing small union moving all K to4 students to Groten. The town would
also incur and they talk about this in the audit report a little bit um would incur significant costs associated with sending all resident dustable students to Groten. The district would incur greater transportation costs associated with closing the SWAL union. Capital improvements and renovation in the SWAL
union are underway as well as for the union building. Um MSDA is reviewing an application to replace the roof. Uh potential for Dunable residents to block the decision uh to close union and fail possible legal action could follow. They
mentioned this in the audit report uh and citing we do not know a solution to this problem. So my understanding my understanding based on back and report is that no solution is a good one that's going to make everybody happy. I mean clearly right so if we want to keep
swing we're going to have to pay for it. We I think as a county we've known that for for quite a while now what I'm shocked about by this part is that is how full roach is.
And if we were to make all these changes to the school district based on whatever it was, we're we're going to very gr's very easily going to outgrow Florence Roach, especially with their two public housing units that are expected to be built over
the next few years. They're going to have to come back to Swallow Union and house kids there. That's that's that's just based on my observation. So I would think that that for us to do anything like that moving forward, we would have to do yet another review of those viable
options where this is giving us an idea of what we're looking at um to really fully understand the cost to do something like this. we would have to have like kind of looking at a five-year plan of whether or not what it would look like for the schools if there
because I I know there's significantly there's significantly a lot of room in most of the schools with the exception of Florida and throat. Um we would have we would have to really look at it from a different perspective as if we were to grow because it's only looking at the current state. is actually not looking at what happens 5 years from now
when broen grows and dun you know Dunville could grow and we have space in small union uh they don't have space to flat before it fills up my that's from my observation no I mean I think it's not just your observation I think that's a fact you
know I think that there are numerous um issues with that scenario that being one of them the fact that like we would jump through all these hoops incur a lot of expense um at great you know educational expense
as well like as Jeff said it's not developmentally appropriate it's not educationally appropriate so we'd be doing all of that and then right off the bat uh Florida roach would be maxed out on its capacity leaving no room for any future growth which as you pointed out
is expected to occur in in both communities to a certain extent Um, but if you just took today's enrollment and you made this this change, you'd already be like five student plus five, you know, and so yeah, to your point, it absolutely would be
maxing out capacity. I think we're closed school. I assume we'd have to get approval from MSBA to do that. And I would imagine they'd look at similar things to say that doesn't make educational sense. Well, I So here's the thing that I want
to make clear. I don't think anybody on the school side is looking to do this, you know, and so I think the purpose for the audit was just to kind of make these recommendations which we're free to look into further or disregard.
From my my own perspective, this is one that I don't personally think is worth pursuing further. Um, we met with Rotten last night and there was not a single person on either board, Fin or select board that expressed any desire to
pursue this further. You know, there's a lot of people here, you know, if we hear that like there's interest in that, you know, I mean, we could certainly talk about that further, but I am not hearing anybody say, let's really talk
about closing SWAT union. Um, so just to make that, you know, clear like that's not something that anybody up to this point has been advocating for. Um, but in the interest of transparency, like we're providing the audit to everybody
in both communities so that, you know, if there are people that were interested in understanding what that would look like, they can really have a clear picture of the pros and cons to it. And if I'm understanding just coming out of that report, this whole union is grade
three. Four is the worst, right? And and then uh but we're utilizing it to one. So it's basically the building is falling apart, but we're utilizing to it's very efficient. That's a definite positive that we're
using. But uh obviously for sort of anyone here from from Dunible that we're not very far away from someone saying this is a grade four and we need to start talking about the replacement of that building. I would imagine. Yeah. And I think that's sort of the big that's sort of what comes like next,
right? I think from my perspective, you know, I have no desire to pursue this option further, but there is that caveat that says, you know, there's a lot of work that needs to be done in this building. And I think it would be in Dunable's best interest to really
approach that um in a well thoughtout way so that we can kind of make decisions as a community about you know is this something that we want to you know talk about doing in a multi-step you know over a number
of years or is this something we want to contemplate doing something more drastic but I think you know that is the next piece of it is you know we have our school we love our school, we also need to make sure we're adequately maintaining our school. So, so from a parent perspective, I was
actually hoping it was going to be let's move five and let's move five and six back to the elementary school where it should be and which we could do in that school. So, um that was dis that's that part is disappointing to me. I would have liked
to have seen the I would like I know when my daughter went off to fifth grade, I was in middle school. I was like, "Oh my god, that's awful. I don't want to go into middle school." um a big transition. Yeah, it's a it's a big it's more it was more of a transition for me as a parent than it was. Um but just, you know, I
would I would have liked to have seen that as an option, but clearly it's it's not it's not like you can do it just a dust bowl and then, you know, fill the kids at middle school at the at the level. But um you know I there's so many different scenarios that you could go with with with something like this that
I would you know certainly I would like to see um a cost analysis on that in addition to what they've already done. So what they did was a great job. I mean I I I do feel like it was a nice audit put together. Um but you know there is there is a lot of information in there
about what to do with Belwell whether or not you could utilize that at another location. Is there is that is that even is that a part of a serious conversation or is that also off the table completely? Do you not want to say yet?
I mean I don't Yeah, I don't I think it's premature to say that. I mean, there's I mean, the the audit really affirmed that there's that there's not any significant cost savings to moving
it and then thereby closing that well. you could sell that building, you know, have some some uh capital or some money that's a one-time thing, but you haven't, you know, you you you've you've now turned
and created costs to set it up somewhere else, whether it was Swallow or whether it was whether it was the high school where there's room. But there's a current to my understand there's a there is a waiting list to get to get in there to their full right so
so that would be the benefit to moving it to a new location would be that it would allow it to grow right I mean and then the the capacity though at either of those places didn't drastically exceed where it currently is
now. Um, how long is the wait is it? I'm just curious. Would it make sense then to maybe opening second? Yeah. as well that I mean I think that's that's the um
direction to pursue but as a community we probably are due for another study to come to be like if we have to redo that elementary school it probably has to go bigger because
there's a world that Groten exceeds capacity and there's a transition back here and we have that capacity while our own town is growing with some projects and such and the school that's got a one for efficiency but a three to a four for
quality of co what I heard was that people some people don't want to do it because they don't want to drive dun but people in dun for years so like well and and one thing to pursue would be um you know in either town or both
towns to do a long you know a long range enrollment study yeah there's some significant housing projects coming for all communities and with that comes into it along the way though I did see in here somewhere that it said that there's declining at the
moment so is that true well it has been declining but the expectation would be that with housing developments it's going to go back up no I I agree the last probably the last five maybe six years has been pretty flat a lot down um there was a pretty
big drop off districtwide in like 20 2016 2017. That's that's a co that's a co deduction, right? Well, that was precoid. Okay. Um kind of since co it's it's really leveled off last five years been pretty
pretty level as far as student enrollment. And then the only other thing that the the commander mentioned in the report was that Small Union's roof and their um and their uh playground needs to be replaced, but the playground was just replaced about I
don't know. It's it's not even 10 years old yet, I don't think. Yeah, I think so. I when I looked at that, I think that might have been a tight fact. I gave you a heads up on that. Yeah, because I don't think there was if you read through it like it definitely says that about Bwell.
there's no anywhere else in the document. They don't explain why that is. So, I actually think that might have just been a typo. Um because yeah, I don't think that there's really, you know, there's nothing structurally wrong with SW. Now, that being said, I think that are, you know, some improvements
that could be made, you know. Yeah, they need they need some shade structures there and stuff like that, but but yeah, there's no need to like replace that. the roof for sure. And as Jeff said, we do have an application into the MSBA currently. So hopefully
that for I think it's instead of a replacement, there's there's two out of five sections that I think they're considering. So, um, when it comes time it we'll know at the end
of October whether or not our project was picked to go forward and then you'll see a lot more and then if not we put a top on it the next step. You got a big tarp.
But that is I mean I will say that's the first of likely many requests that will be before the town because that building is tired. It really does need investment. So the roots the first thing but there are going to be a lot of other requests and the town really needs to be
prepared and willing to pay for it because it's not going to be I mean the the report cited 60 to$100 million. I don't know where exactly those numbers came from, but
I I can say it's not going to be cheap. It may not be that much, but it will be it's going to be a significant investment for the town. Yeah. So, I mean, to Kieran's point, I think that it it in my mind anyway, that makes a lot of sense to do a study
because then you kind of have a really clear picture of like what needs to be done and what are the potential options. um so that we can kind of decide, you know, what's the best way? How do people want to see us go about this? You know, is it like a little bit at a time or is
it like we kind of do large amount? Yeah. So, Carol, did you have your hand up? I'm sorry. Other questions. Thanks. When as a community do we start looking at fixing this? How are we
looking at coming up with really sitting down and figuring out before it's a problem? I think we're going to know if the two out of the five sections are going to get some funding that's really going to lead us to as a town have to make some
investment decisions. I may be speaking out of turn. These guys know much better, but that's my suspicion. That seems like a bandaid though. five sections. Should we be as a community saying we may get some money for two out of five sections, but we should look at doing
all five at once as opposed to having another project come up. Plus, costs are only going to go up as the years go. So, if we wait three more years, that is going to be three more years worth of expense. Correct. Yeah. And whatever damage that causes out in
the school. Oh yeah. Any sort of damage like that be putting money after that. So it would be wouldn't be usable procedurally. I have a question which would probably be for you. Um you know how would we go about initiating that process? Is that something that the
select board would do or would that come from the school committee? What's the steps that we would need to go through to initiate that study? To me, I mean, I think with the operational audit that was just completed, and I know you're close to
having a capital plan. Yeah. Pulled together. I mean, to me, that's the kickoff to us really getting our act together around Swallow Union and what the plan's going to be. Um and so yeah, I think the first step is
like a planning exercise like a feasibility analysis of what approaches, you know, what approaches could we take and which one makes the most sense and just identifying those. Um and so usually that does start with a building
committee formation. I think it's a select board function, but I'd have I would want to confirm that. We'll go one way or the other if it's a school committee select board. Um I think that should happen quickly honestly because it'll be a town building, not a
district. I think it Yeah, I think that starts with the select. I'm pretty sure it's pretty I think the law is prescriptive on who serves on a building committee, but I I just want to confirm that. But um but yeah, I think Dave, I think
you're right. I think it should happen quickly. And backing into I want to know Yeah. And you know, fundamentally, I'd want to understand the population, the anticipated growth, because I think there are probably studies and consultants that are way smarter than me
that could probably say with 100 more housing units in town, you're going to look at one and a half children per whatever. like there's some arithmetic to that that I think we as a district probably have to understand with the project in Grten, you know, the rental project by the post office for us and sort of what that means and what we
should be aiming to be towards at the end of the day. So, I have a question. You mentioned a project in Brock. Why would Dust consider a broad project? Because they'll be at they'll exceed capacity of 645 students. They're at 615
right now. They may need maybe to bring the excess capacity back over. But they just built a school. Yeah, they did. We are a regional school. So we need to look at the regional the regional impact impact of us building that you know
doing our our own thing here and what we need to do what's going to be good for the regional district. Was that considered when they built their school? It was considered in the sense the state told us that we couldn't change the current setup. we could not be a part of process but those two new developments came up after
the building committee had already started the process I served on the building committee for Roach so we we did we did look at that uh and they did a longer term study but those two projects were kind of like
potentially not going to happen and then they've come to fruition so now that they're real we have to evaluate them as a district and how what best serves that and If they do get to capacity 100% right, we're going to have uh students tracked from Groten will be over here at Dusible and then we'd have to evaluate
what that number may look like, especially with our own developments that are continuing to grow here. What our enrollment would have to look up to. Makes sense. Someone really smart can handle it and then report something.
The first seven years was just so pleas. Anybody else? Any other questions? Thank you for sharing with us. It is interesting to hear about the operational review. that that did actually say back when we
were initially going through Florence Roach that it it did reference that within 5 to 10 years of the opening of Florence Roach that Swallow Union would have to be replaced both for operational side of things. the building itself would be at a position of replacement but then looking towards upgrading that
facility as well like we have capacity now but in 5 years I don't see that as a realistic at least from those audits that we looked at was some time ago but still at the same time we we now have two developments moving forward in our own community of two developments going
on in crown and looks like might need some additional fast space Okay, question. One more question. I'm sorry for asking this, but I assume the budget forecasted.
[Music] That's that's correct. Correct. Because that would be on the capital side, right? Correct. Yes. So there's kind of there's there are programmatic things that go on and sort of put as if MSBA sort of said no to the
roof then the school district and say the roof needs to be replaced and then you have that would be part of their capital plan to look into it and then that would be a cost because it's our building uh there is a portion of that that defers back to Donald which would be capital cost that we
would have to look at which is part of the reason not to dig too far into what we on the advisory board side of things why we have been trying to plan uh for capital investments that are going to be necessary. Both we have the school, we have the firehouse, we have a whole bunch of different things that are
coming up and we've been attempting to put some money hoping that that would uh that would help out as we've uh sort of gotten to a point of better budgeting. Uh we've got some things that are lined up so that we're capable of withstanding some of this. Uh but it's obviously not
at the point of $60 to $100 million. Uh, you know, I think we got 100 grand in there. Also, you know, maybe there's a roof. We definitely don't have something towards full replacement of things, but certainly studies, those types of things
we we would definitely be looking into, but that's part of our our planning set of things to make sure that we try to limit the amount of, you know, requests for over, you know, overrides. We don't like to go down that route. Uh, unfortunately we've had you for some time and a lot of the different things we talked about some of the problems
that we've had with some of needing to reject some of the IEPs. Some of that is based around the fact that overrides have failed, right? We did pass our most recent one, but that was really to keep keep us at this float that we're at right now. Um, overrides to maintain
what we had a few years ago obviously failed. And um, if we want to have those level services, unfortunately, it has to come down to the ballot box. We can't just tell everyone in town or taxes. They have to agree to that. So
like proper tax. All right. Any any more questions from from folks out there? If there's not, then I guess we can wrap this up and Okay. You're welcome to stay for the rest of
the meeting. And thank you. All right. Thank you all for coming in. Thank you. All right. Well, if you can just jump on. We've got two sets of minutes.
Ago, I know. I'll see you later. [Music] Okay, we have two sets of minutes. One from 9925 and 9125. Move to approve the meeting minutes from September 9th, 2025 and September 12th,
202. He went downstairs, Joey. He's got a He's got a meeting downstairs. Who does? Harold. What? Advisor. Advisor. Oh, okay. They still have No, they still have We'll get you home.
All right. All right. Um, we good here. Yeah. Minutes approved. Minutes are approved. Uh, next up we have appointments. One for the Commission on Accessibility, one for the LRTA representative and Emergency Management Director. It looks
like you have more. Okay. Oh, no. Okay. It was just that's that's the Okay. Yeah. Okay. So, I'm going to walk into this. All right. I'll go I'm going to go backwards here first. I move to appoint
the following residents to the Dunstable Commission on Accessibility. Um Jane Barnes, one year expires June 30th 26. Shauna Gibbons, one year June 30th,
2026. Jeff Rosen, two years, June 30th, 2027. Anika Celiger, 2 years, June 30th, 2027. Escalad
3 June 30. Henry Fontaine, excuse excuse me, 2028. Henry Fontaine, three years. June 2028. June 2028. June 30th, 2028. All right. That's the
Dustable Commission on Accessibility. We also have two others. Um David Tully Senior to the Regional, excuse me, to the Low Regional Transit Authority with the term expiring on June 30th, 2026.
And the last one is JohnRandle as the emergency management director with the term expiring on June 30th, 2026. Second. Is there any discussion? Thank you for your service. Question.
Um is the uh the LR transit is that something new or is that been around for a long time? Long time. No, I mean for us is it No, for us, too. Yeah. And I think David's been doing it for a
long time. Okay. All right. I don't want to see any stop here. That's not the plan. Okay. All right. Oh, favor. I Thank you.
Okay. October Fest one day liquor license in public drinking bylaw or drinking outside. I move to authorize the consumption of alcohol at Lauder Field on October 11th, 2025 between the
hours of 100 p.m. and 5:00 p.m. for the Recreation Commission's October Fest event. and further move to approve the request from David Capriotti, the Beer Guy LLC,
for a one-day liquor license for the sale of wine and or malt beverages for the October Fest event on October 11th, 2025 from 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. at
Lauder Field subject to the following conditions. One, delivery of and receipt by the licensing authority of the required fee. Two, delivery of and receipt by the licensing authority of proof that alcohol will be purchased
from an authorized source. Uh next is delivery of and receipt by the licensing authority of proof of insurance and last proof that the applicant can receive
properly deliver provide storage and disposal of all alcoholic beverages purchased in accordance with the mass uh with requirements of mass general laws uh chapter 138. Second. Yeah. Um okay. So I have one concern
with the first part of this motion. It's authorizing the consumption of alcohol, but it that is not restricted to only that which is being purchased by the the beer guy. You want to add that? Yes.
No, it would be one this doesn't say this. We were there's only one license. The license is going to the beer guy. I understand that. That's it. But whatever he has, I understand that that's what they're going to sell. But if we're authorizing the consumption
at Lauder Field, that means anyone could bring their own in. Yeah, I think we've done that with that before. So, let's So, we're going to amend this to include language that the um October Fest event
is not a BYOB event. and that it must be purchased at Lauderfield for consumption at Lauderfield by by license from the license from the beer from the
beer guy LLC. Right. So I think that's kind of rubber stamp that going forward. Yeah. Okay. Anything else? No. Okay. All those in favor? Hi.
Hi. Hope it's a nice day. I know I'm going to miss it. Um, special fall special town meeting and warrant. What do we got? We're just opening it. So, just we just
need to call the meeting and open the warrant. Um, all right. I move I move to call a special town meeting on Monday, November 17th, 2025 at 700 p.m. at the Swallow Union Elementary School and to open the
warrant on Wednesday, October 1st, 2025 and to close the special town meeting warrant on Monday, October 27th, 2025 at 4 p.m. Second. All those in favor? I I
All right, that's it. Anything? I don't have anything other than what was on the agenda. Anybody else? Nothing. Nothing. Nothing. Nothing. Nothing. All right. Last motion of the evening. I move to ajourn.
Second. In favor?