Welcome to the July 28th Lakeville School Board meeting. Um it is 6 PM and we are um kicking off here with the pledge of allegiance. You can all rise if you're able. >> I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the
republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Um, all right. We'll start with roll call to my far right. >> Tony Reenberger, >> Matt Swanson, >> Harley Anderson.
>> Oh, Amber Cameron. Sorry, >> Michael Bowman, >> Paul Carbone, >> Brian Thompson. >> All right, thanks everybody. Um, I've just been informed that we are skipping good news for tonight. And there also is no um board communication um separate from um our discussion in 5A when we're
going to talk about uh the board vacancy. Um but we will get to that. So with that um uh could I get a motion to approve the agenda? >> I'll make a motion to approve. >> All right. First by Carbone. Is there a second? >> I'll second. >> Second by Anderson. All in favor or
sorry any discussion? >> Okay. All in favor? >> I. >> Any opposed? All right. Motion passes 6. With that, we'll move to public comment. Um, if I'm going to read this, uh, public comment information. Uh, the
board opens the floor for 30 minutes at every uh, formal meeting to allow the public to address the board with comments and concerns. To participate in public comment, individuals must have registered in advance using the form provided on the website by noon on the Monday before the scheduled public
comment session. There will be no board response during the session. Public comments framed as complaints and or concerns about students and our staff are not appropriate in a public forum due to data privacy laws. These comments should be addressed to the administration outside of a public
meeting. Likewise, complaints about schoolboard members should be privately directed to the board chair and/or superintendent. No formal action will be taken on a topic presented during public comment. As necessary, the administration will follow up with the appropriate personnel on any concerns that need to be
individually addressed. Also, if necessary, the board will follow up during board communications at the next regularly scheduled board meeting. Individual remarks are limited to 3 minutes. The board will provide a signal when the participant has 30 seconds remaining of their time. Please try to
keep audience noise to a minimum to allow everyone the opportunity to speak uninterrupted. All right, with that, we have one speaker tonight. I'd like to invite Rex King um to the podium. >> All right. Thank you all for having me.
Um some of you I know um I'm a father to three children. All three of my children attend Eastville Elementary. Um, one of my um, obviously CO has changed the world, but last year my youngest came home and said
at 6 years old said there's a man at our school who wears a wake bright red lipstick um, and puts bubbles in his butt and his boobs. So that prompted me to ask my older children like what is what is my youngest talking about? My
older two children did say that there is in fact a person who works at East View who does wear wig and lipstick and um and other features. So next day I called and I spoke to the principal or I asked to speak to the principal. Principal
told me that the district attorney basically limited said that due to uh client confidentiality or something like that that he could not answer a lot of the questions I had. He was very nice and we had a discussion. Um, I then noticed when last spring when
the yearbooks came out, um, that we have a staff page and it lists the staff members. Some elementary schools, um, Oak Hills Elementary list the staff members and it also has a not pictured portion of their yearbook that list in
name who is not in attendance for the pictures. ECU Elementary School. People are not pictured and people are not listed. So, I know it's kind of a a hot topic in 2026,
but my question is why are the staff members It's very hard to have access to our children's school. Safety is a big part trying to get in, trying to get access. It's not the way that we grew up in the schools. But my question is, how do we know who is
working in our children's school if they're not listed in the yearbook and things like that? How do we know who exactly is being hired? If my children's school has before and after pictures or employees who are primary, not non normal hour employees, but they're
pictured in the yearbook or they're listed in other schools, not pictured, but they do list a name. Um, I I also question what we have as age appropriateness. The fact that my six-year-old came home and is having
this discussion with me. Um, it it's tough as a father. It's tough to to be here and love the community and and have to answer those questions. That was a question that I anticipated from my 15-year-old. Well, we're 9 years early and we had to have the discussion. Um,
so I wonder about what happens there. What happens with people who apply? What name is used? And how do we know who is working with our children in our schools specifically the undeveloped brain of our elementary schools and how do our kids respond or
how do they act? Um and how are we supposed to parent that discussion that we'd never anticipated having to have. So, just some things I wanted to bring um to attention of who is in fact there. Uh why are we not listing them in the
yearbook so us parents can know about them. I appreciate your time this evening. Thank you very much. >> Great. Thank you. >> All right. With that, we'll move to consideration of approval of the consent agenda. Um is there a motion to approve
the consent agenda? I'll make a motion. >> U first by Anderson. Is there a second? >> I'll second. >> Second by Reichenburgger. Are there any items in the consent agenda um that board members would like further discussion on?
>> Prior to approval. Okay. All in favor of approving the consent agenda say um yes or I. >> I. >> Any opposed? All right. Motion passes 6. Uh next um we are moving on to item number five, reports and discussions.
Um so since our last uh schoolboard meeting in June, uh Kim Baker informed the school board and Superintendent Bowman that she um is resigning from the school board effective June 29th. That was her last day of service to the
district and in her um formal capacity on the school board. Um this is our first board meeting since uh that resignation. Um and so as part of that um first we acknowledge that Kim has um opted to resign from the from the school board as is her right or any anyone's
right. Um and also um we need to then acknowledge that there um her resignation results in a vacancy on uh on our school board. Our school board is intended to have seven board members and right now officially we have six. Um, and so, um, this, um,
we needed to have a discussion tonight about how we want to deal with the vacancy, um, to fill Kim's seat. I think it's important for the board, I think, knows this, but the public to know that, um, the seat that's vacant from Kim Baker's resignation is up for election
in November, um, with that role starting uh, formally in January. Um, I had a couple of different conversations with the Minnesota School Board Association with Terry Morrow about um, what happens in a situation like this. And um, if a school board
member resigns when there's less less than two years left of their term, but um, [clears throat] no more sorry less there's less than two years but no more than 90 days, which we are in. There are two options.
um the board is required to attempt to fill the vacancy um because we're in that window. And so the board could either establish an application process where we take nominations from, you know, the community um and have some sort of interview process and um see if
four or more board members agree to um someone who has applied. Or we could go through a board nomination process where we uh solicit names ourselves and um discuss the n discuss our nominations and see um if we can get um a majority
of the board to agree on someone to fill the vacancy from the nomination process. Um either way, whatever option we we choose as a board to kind of pursue um we would go through that determine that process. What do we want to do? we would go through that process and complete it
and identify the person and then um at the the next schoolboard meeting after we've agreed on who the person is um we'd have a resolution filling um the school board vacancy by appointment and so we'd formally vote on that at that point and then once we um vote on the
resolution and assuming it would pass, the board is required to wait 30 days for the public to petition um about um our appointment. Um and so um yeah, it takes 30 days before the person could then formally be part of the the school
board. Um any questions about that before I I go on to what Terry recommended or what other boards typically do? Yep. Director Carbone. >> Yeah. Um, Amber, so if somebody was appointed
>> and it would take a minimum of 30 days because basically what you just said is the public has >> has to have time to uh respond if they wish, >> right? >> Then if that person's not an existing one of the I believe eight candidates who filed
for um uh for the election in November, then January 1st that person is null is null and void. Correct. >> That's correct. Right. Unless >> can one of the candidates apply >> or try? >> Yeah. So, I think the first step would
be deciding if we want to do an application process or a nomination process and and either way, I suppose a a bo a person who has filed to run who is not currently sitting on the board >> um could either be apply or be nominated by the board and yes, they could serve
in that role. But if they then lost their election, they would be off of the board January one. Of course, um I asked Terry Morrow from Schoolboard Association, what do most boards do in a situation like this when we have like 3 to four
months at most of filling this vacancy? And he said in most cases with our timeline, a school board would invite back a previously elected board member who has resigned just because they they could step in pretty much right away. they know what what it means to be on
the school board. They know how to read financial documents. They, you know, they know they know the work. Um, and so that was his recommendation that um we might consider that just because of our timeline, but we we still have that option of either deciding a nomination
process, an application process. Um, I'm in favor of bringing of of of me personally considering bringing back a retired board member. Um, just for education per like they will know how to hit the ground running. Um, and we wouldn't have to onboard someone for
just like a very minimal amount of time. Um, but obviously this whole board needs to decide how we want to approach this. So I think first it's a discussion on what do we want the process to be and then after we decide that then that would warrant the next steps and and how
we approach the vacancy >> any thought what are people thinking what questions do we do you have >> the the first question that pops into my mind considering that we do have an election actually and the filing just closed less than an hour ago um
what is the possibility of just leaving it open and whenever if a non board member wins a seat because there's going to be one one person at least one at least one person who uh because Kim's seat is open we just
elevate them immediately following that election that the whoever gets the highest vote total for non board non-board seat members >> we could have that be part of our decision. So if a non if a board member who's not currently sitting wins, which
at least one person will, right? >> Has to, right? Then um we could take that person. I think we could make that our our plan. However, between now and November, we would need to attempt to fill the vacancy. >> But if we regardless, >> but if we appoint somebody to that
position, do they not have that position until January at that point? Unless >> but we need to we need to start the vacancy process now. We cannot per state statute. We're not allowed to wait until November to name the person.
>> Yeah, Matt. >> I mean, I think the statute requires us to attempt to appoint someone, right? So, it doesn't say what that entails and how much effort we have to put into it. Um, >> yeah. >> Yeah. Director Thompson, >> what what does this what does the
statute say specifically? uh and because I recall uh it doesn't say you have to make an attempt. It just says here's the verbiage and and I also want to be very mindful that there is no schoolboard police department. There is no governing body that that that tells the school
board, you know, you're doing it wrong or you mean like we are a independent body to make our own decisions, our own policies. And so, uh, I've had the unfortunate to to go through this process just once, but uh, we elected
what was it the fourth vote getter or something I think from the last election. Uh, we also, uh, previously to that there was a vacancy and the previous board elected not to do anything. Uh, and >> they did a nomination process. >> They did not do >> they Carly applied. [laughter] >> Oh, >> yeah.
>> Well, that was actually was that towards the end or was that towards the beginning? I thought for some reason the previous board elected not to do >> anything right away. They waited. I'll have to double check. I feel like I I like to uh I don't know if it's appropriate to have it to have this discussion now, but I would prefer
prefer I would prefer if we discuss this at the next working session in more detail cuz I don't have the statutes information uh in front of me. Um, and I'd like to do a little bit more research on kind of like how we've done it in the past
cuz I know that we had an appointment process. Um, and then I I well that's the only one that I've done. I haven't done a candidate. >> I can read the state. Michael just brought it up. It's very short. >> Perfect. >> So, I think it's easy to understand. >> Yeah. It says any vacancy on the board
other than a vacancy described in subdivision 4 which is about uh if someone has to step away from the board because of a personal illness they m the board um or the sorry the vacancy must be filled by board appointment at a regular or special meeting. The
appointment shall be evidenced by a resolution entered into the minutes and shall be effective 30 days following adoption of the resolution resolution. Can can you repeat that one more time? Because it says the board the board says you have to appoint someone through a
board meeting. So when we identify a candidate, it says that to acknowledge that candidate, it must be done through a board meeting. Is that my understanding within that sentence? >> So what Terry said from Minnesota School Board Association is that the school
board, the six of us, >> would have to vote on candidates. >> Agree. But read the previous sentence that you just said something about the school board must what >> any I'm going to read the whole thing. Any vacancy on the board other than the illness must be filled by board
appointment at a regular or special meeting. >> Can you pause here? Okay. So how again how I interpret that is that once a candidate has been has been identified or whoever that individual must be appointed through the board by
the board at a board meeting. Okay. All right. So, so, so how I'm interpreting that so far is that it doesn't say when you have to get someone, how you get someone, who you get someone. It's just that when an individual has been
identified, it has to be appointed uh leg legally or whatever you want to officially through a at a board meeting. If you want to repeat that one more just if that if that's how I'm understanding that. >> Correct. So the board has to vote and and have a majority agree on the person
who will fill the vacancy. >> So within so within that state statute it says again making sure we're on the same p if no if no one else is aligned with me. >> Go ahead. >> All right. It says that you want to repeat it one more time. [laughter] >> Okay. >> Sorry. >> Basic. Yes. I'll repeat it. But what
it's saying is the board has to vote if someone can fill the vacancy. >> No. Well, they're two separate there are two different things. any any vacancy on the board must be filled by board appointment at a regular or special meeting. >> Got it. All right. So again, how I'm how
I'm interpreting that is that when a candidate has been identified officially, they cannot be on the board unless it's done through a at the board meeting. Okay. >> Well, yeah, of course. Yes. Yep. This board has to vote totally >> with a minimum of four elements. What is the next?
>> It addresses the what, not the how. >> Exact. The what? Yep. So then it says the appointment shall be evidenced by a resolution which would have their name of course entered into the minutes. Yep. >> And shall be effective 30 days following adoption of the resolution
>> because we need the petition period where the community could say nope we don't agree with the board. You know they can we don't like exerson. >> Okay. >> But would sorry go ahead. >> I mean Brian am I understanding you
correctly? you're arguing it does explain the how. >> It doesn't explain that we actually have to do it, but if it's done, it's by >> um an appointment at a regular or a special meeting. So, if you're going to fill it, >> that's how I'm interpreting it. And so,
because it gives the board the latitude to decide how we want to operate and how we want to govern as a board. And if we >> What do you mean by that? What do you mean by operate and govern? Well, if we want if we believe that it's in the best interest for our community, the best interest for the school board to have
seven board members for a very short period of time, then the board gets to decide if that's what we want to do. The state statute says if you want to have that role filled, then we will not acknowledge that individual unless it's
been uh voted on through or at a board meeting. So I think the state statute does not give our board the ability to decide if we can fill it or not. The community voted I forget what year that we moved from a six to seven member
board and we are obligated then by state statute to have seven board members. So I think the the word that I'm which Terry stressed and what says in state statute is any vacancy on the board must be filled. It's not could be filled
>> but must but let's finish the sentence. >> Must be filled by board appointment >> at a regular meeting. >> There's not a number of days. >> There's not a number of days because four of us have to agree. And if four of us can't agree, they can't. >> It's not about it's not about the four. It's it's it's the question agreed agree
that they're you need the majority. But >> yes, >> but it's also stating that it doesn't say you must hire you. I'm sorry, not hire. You must appoint someone within 90 days, within X period of time. You must show evidence that you're trying to hire someone. It just says that if a board
makes the decision to add and fill the vacancy, it must be done at a board meeting and a resolution needs to be approved to acknowledge that individual. And so, >> back to what Director Rekenberger asked, >> again, this is where I'd like to do some
more research on. Do other districts do it differently? And again, this is what you know, Terry Mororrow shared on uh through MSBA. Um do we discuss with legal already as well? Did they say that we must do it? And if we don't, what happens if we
don't? >> I don't know legally what happens if we don't. I think personally we have an obligation to the community to have this conversation and to and to fill it, right? Sure. >> Um I think from a community perspective,
the more time we waste talking about a vacancy that we potentially could fill, I'd rather use our time to work on other projects. But we can just continue to talk and never make progress. But it is required that we >> Well, I don't think it is required. And I think that's
>> you must fill the vacancy. >> You must you through but let's finish the rest of that sentence. You must fill the vacancy at a school board meeting. Correct. Correct. That's where you would vote on the person. >> Right. >> Right. So, let's >> What am I?
>> Yeah. Director Swanson. >> Yeah. No, I mean I think I think what we want to avoid is us wasting a lot of time not appointing anyone. Um, and to that end, I'd be in support of Director Reichenberg's idea of, you know, let's just agree that whoever
the, you know, the newest board member that's not currently serving that score gets the most votes in the November election, you know, we'll move forward with appointing them. They'll be on the board a month earlier than normal um than they would otherwise be. then we'd
be satisfying the requirement that we it must be filled at a special meeting or regular meeting and then we don't waste any time trying to see if we can get a four vote >> you know four votes to appoint a prior board member so >> would you need to wait 30 days I don't
know so if the election is start December which would be a month a month earlier than be seated >> be seated in January >> oh because it is an appointment >> yeah and I think my question with that only I don't I don't disagree I mean I think it could work is I think it's hard
to be onboarded separately. So, if we're going to onboard three new board members potentially or four four new board members potentially or no, could it be I I don't I haven't done the math. Three or four. >> Um then we just have to think about how we train
them. >> Could be one, >> right? >> Or it could be one, right? It could be one. >> Director Rikenberger. Yeah. Um kind of getting back to what um Mr. Mororrow said um there's 30 days to petition an appointment. Is that correct? Is that
what you said? >> What occurs when if the public comes up, offers a petition? And what's what's the ramifications at that? What are the consequences at that point? Do they get the the seat? Do they not get the seed? Where where do we go from that
standpoint? Um that offsets the timeline then, doesn't it? >> Yeah, I would assume they wouldn't get the seat, >> right? They want to get the seat. Yeah. >> Right. You have to start your process over in terms of identifying the person. >> Yeah. >> I think what's the petition look like?
Like like how many names do we need? Is it like >> they need a thousand thousand? >> Okay. >> Yeah. I I only want to encourage us to think about we've had basically opinion provided that Amber has done some good investigative work here um in terms of
MSBA providing some input as well as our legal team. So at this point we do have input from both of them that we should attempt to fill. >> I let me sorry >> y director Thompson. So our our legal
council says and they interpret that par that statute saying that we have to attempt to fill even though it doesn't say the word attempt. >> Attempt. No attempt is not part of I I think why the word attempt is being used is that if we are unsuccessful as a
group of six in having at least four or more of us agree on a process and then also agreeing on a person, this could go on forever. It could go on for 100 hours, right? where we're just talking and talking and talking. I think we've seen this happen in the state, right, at other school boards.
>> And so I think that's why the word attempt is being used, but the state statute is that we must fill it. >> Yeah. >> Oh, you're done. Sorry. >> I'm sorry. Go ahead, Brian. >> No, I I want to be cautious because yes, the word said must, but I but how we are how
how I'm hearing you you uh you communicate the word must is saying that we must fill it. Whereas, as I'm reading, the statute says I must fill it at a schoolboard meeting. So, it it doesn't state that I must fill the position and then you then you need to
vote on it. If if it said that I must fill the I must fill the vacancy period, then I then then I'm on board on that. But it doesn't say that. And so, >> how are you seeing it as different? I guess I don't I don't understand how you see it [clears throat] as different. >> Got it. So, so if I was having um this
I'm a terrible analogy. Let's say I'm going let's say I'm going to u uh I'm going to Subway. That's a ter I'm getting some food, right? But then it say I must eat food at Subway. [laughter] That's a ter that's I'm not thinking right right now. I'm sorry. >> I'm following.
>> Uh but how I'm reading again, it says that um if you want the vacancy filled and you want it to be official, it must be done at a board meeting. it how I read it is or how how I'm hearing it.
And this is why I I I apologize. I'm not prepared. I I would like a little bit more time to just read the state statutes to say um I don't think it's saying that I must fill the position. It says if you do fill the position or if you want the vacancy filled, it must be
done at a board meeting. That's how I'm interpreting it. >> No, that is definitely not that is not accurate. That's not how legal or MSBA would advise. Okay. We must fill it and the process to fill it has to be a formal vote of the board. >> Then can I can I get like can I get
correspondence on that from legal because I don't think that's accurate. Uh because I know there are other districts that have not filled right >> their positions >> because they can't get a majority to vote yes >> other than and ch and and I don't know if we've got past presidents at our
school board not filling a vacancy or choosing to delay when to do the vacancy [clears throat] because what like what's the timeline like >> so maybe this is also helpful um so uh Terry Marorrow from MSBA also sent me the time frames if we were if if the
resignation had happened at a different time. So if you are less than 90 days until the seat is up for election, you do not need to fill. You can just leave it open until the election and then that person who wins the seat takes over. >> Yeah. >> Uh 90 days before the end of the term.
>> Yes. Sorry. Yeah. Yes. >> We're in that window of 2 years to 90, right? >> Yes. If it's more than two years left in the term, which is our school districts had this situation with region
um the school board is required to run a special election. So it's like it's it depends on the time frame by which the the school board has to do certain things. Does that make sense? >> I agree. Yeah,
>> I I I understand that that two uh that two year to 90 90day window. Yes. >> Okay. Director um Carbone. >> Yeah. Um Director Cameron, August 3rd roughly, which is about a week away
brings us within the 90-day period and before >> the election before the election, right, which is >> No, it's of of the term ending which is January whatever January. >> So, it's not to the point of the election because Okay. So, let me say this a different way. >> Yeah.
>> Ultimately, we do have a deadline that's coming and it's November 3rd. >> If if tonight we voted on somebody, we'd need to do a 30-day to the public. So, now we're down to about excuse me, about two two and a half months before
the election. I mean the window that we have and assuming that we're going to have a vote or two that's going to be 3 to three 3 to three 3 to three and then we go to a 30-day we're really close to November 3rd I think personally. So that
being said, would it not behoove us to have a work session and see if we can as a group of six even identify people who might be um uh who might be good candidates. And number two, we don't
even know if they would be interested in coming back. >> Well, >> yeah. And I should say my goal tonight was not to to identify the person that we should vote on or I understand that >> to talk about what process we want, >> right? I'm just making a point, not
necessarily like we should pick somebody tonight, right? [clears throat] >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Director, I mean I I don't think any of us really wants to do what we have to do. I that's my read on the table, but this is like where we have been told what we are supposed to do. Um, so
Brian, I think it's fair to get additional information that maybe has been shared or we can share that out. >> Yeah, I can. >> But my sense is or I guess my perspective is we have legal counsel from MSBA. We have our own personal legal counsel both telling us the same
thing. Um, so I think to be respectful to our community, we should generally follow what the guidance is. I don't think the school boards of past have consistently taken the same approach necessarily. And so to me that
doesn't necessarily mean that we should not follow the guidance. Like at this point we have guidance. So, I would say if we we can certainly talk about it more tonight or talk about it
at um future meeting, but it does feel like we have to move forward with something. >> When's our next working session? Is that >> 11? >> August 11. >> Okay. I personally am liking the idea of the
fourth or the top vote getter who does not currently serve on the board could be brought forward to the next board meeting which would be um probably end of November. I don't know my dates off the top of my head. Whatever the next meeting is after the election >> 10th >> or it could be November 10th. We can
make it a special. >> We could. >> And then if the board agrees to that person, we still have to agree to that person, then do the 30 days. So they they could start early December. And in the interim, I would be
interested in having a conversation about bringing back a a retired board member um because I think that satisfies the state statute, but also then they'd be here for a very limited amount of
time um and could could participate. >> So, Director Anderson, >> did you so did you get the sense did this get floated at all to legal counsel as an option? the former of what you're talking about and did they say that would be
>> consistent with statute >> former meaning the election agree the election >> yeah I mean we could appoint anyone at any time um to the board so I think there can be an agreement that the
person who gets that vote or that we could vote on that plan and that can be the plan >> but then we are sitting with a sixperson board for the next which I I want to make it very clear. I'm not I'm playing devil's advocate here because I feel like that's probably the most straightforward process. But is that
consistent with the statute in terms of we must appoint a member because we're a seven person board and otherwise we're going to operate for the next uh four month five months with one. But that's what I'm saying is that
appointing in November, we could have two appointments basically appointing the person in November who's the highest vote getter who's not currently sitting on the board and in the interim between now and then asking >> Oh, so we're still having a prior board member. >> A board member
>> that that was what was missing. >> Yep. I'm researching but what but are we going to disc could we just discuss this at the next board meeting or the next working session or are we need or are there more discussions on this?
>> Um yeah we can opt for that. I mean I think it would be helpful to know what what additional information besides having it in in written by our legal council what I just reported. Um if there's other things that people need to know. I
>> Yeah, director. >> I um I I think it you know the the election is a very practical way of of elevating somebody to the board. You know, it it seems like it's the timing that that works out well. In the
interim, I personally don't have a problem with how we want to handle this either by an appointment or by a nomination process or or what have you. Um the problem that it does have is that I don't know how I mean even even among past board
members um if we're all going to have enough people to agree on a particular person to bring up to the board. Um I'd like to have that if it's possible but I don't know if it's plausible. Well, and I think that's we have to try, you know, I think that's where you bring
forward ideas and see if people are comfortable with that or not. Yeah. Director Swanson. >> Um, I don't think we can do an interim and then a second one from the election because you'd be, you know, appointing somebody and then saying, "Hey, but guess what? Your appointment's only going to last until, you know, December
7th and then appointing a second person." So, I think it has to be one or the other. Yeah, I can ask that question and ask our both Terry and our legal to answer because if that's the case, then we can't do our November election plan.
>> We could. >> Not at the moment. We couldn't. >> Why? Why not? >> Because because state statute says we have to fill this position >> if it's more than 90 days [clears throat] before January, whatever the day in January. >> Correct. But you'd be filling the
position with the highest vote getter who's not currently on the board. >> But not now. But it doesn't say you have to do it now. >> That's what we were just talking about. It does say, but it says we must fill it. >> Yeah. When we'd be filling it, right? >> Eventually, we would be.
>> Yeah. Can Can we adopt the idea of it with an unnamed placeholder? I mean, it's basically whoever wins that non board non boardseated person who ends up with the highest votes. And we phrase that and then have if if there's a
petition period, have the public come forward in that 30 days and just the uh petition whether or not the plan is sound or not. >> Um rather than >> it's about a specific candidate. >> Yeah. It's about a specific name. >> Okay.
>> Yeah. Not not petition about the process. Yeah. Dr. Swanson, >> I mean, can we use that as the fall back and then just not waste as much time on because I mean, like you said, there are school districts that waste tons of meetings on this and never come
to a consensus or get four out of the six people to vote on somebody. So, I'd hate to be here until 2 in the morning like some districts and uh still not get a candidate. >> Dr. Anderson, >> what if we because I feel like the
messaging we're receiving from legal counsel is we need to be making reasonable efforts toward fulfilling the vacancy. So, what I really don't want to do is two things. One, like you're saying, have a very drawn out process and nominations and interviews and that
just takes away from the work that we should be doing. And I also don't want to be really discussing why or why not people want certain past board members to be on this board. So
one idea as a we're continuing to show good faith effort is to bring one person forth every time we meet and we just vote on that person. Yes or no. We don't talk about it.
We just felt >> I don't like that. >> I um >> I mean >> that Well, I totally get your I I understand your point of view and why you would want to do that, but every board member
here has their obligation and their and their right and it it's like they should have a voice on who they want. Yes, there's six board members and and I want to be super candid like that seventh board member may weigh in on a weigh in
on significant conversations or topics that we might have between now and end of December. And so I by not being able to have a voice around around if if I like or don't like or whatever on a candidate, I'm not aligned on that. So
just voting yes or no just like we need to be able to share a point of view in my in my opinion as part of uh as part of the the process. >> So you want to spend time digesting for everyone why a past board member would be a good addition or not.
>> We talk about $230 million budgets. We talk about positions. We talk about curriculum. We're talking about a seventh member to be a representative of our community. Why wouldn't we want to talk about them? >> I think we could like not necessarily
like if we were to consider a board member, they could submit something to the board about why they would think they would be a good candidate. But just based on behavior I've seen at this table with past board members, I don't necessarily know that I want to engage in that kind
of process, especially when we think about what our role as a board member is in terms of talking about previous boards. There's policy on that. So I want to be really careful about and I don't know that that would be possible.
I think why I think why MSBA suggested that some boards choose to bring back previous board members is because the community at one point at least had elected that person into this role. So it gives it more validity than just a random person who's you know the
community's never um vetted. So I think that's the reason why they suggested that is that Lakeville has voted for these people before. >> That's right. >> Yeah. Brian. Yeah. >> And again we don't have to go with a previous board member. No. And and and I don't know. I mean, it sounds like some
folks might be aligned in in a previous board member. Uh we don't even know if these previous board members may are may are may even be available or not. And so, uh there's no voting going on right now or are we deciding to make a decision or are we going to have conversations around
how we want to do this process now? Or are we going to discuss it at a working session? Are we going to how how are we going to formalize whatever what what we're doing or are we just having this dialogue now? >> My hope is we we would get to a vote on process tonight, but it doesn't sound
like people are able to do that tonight so we can gather more information and bring it to a work session. I can find out specifically about um appointing the the
top vote getter who's not currently serving if how that would work in terms of the state statute and timeline and and have both MSB and our legal council write an opinion on that um to be shared at our next work session and then the
board can continue talking about process at that point. >> Yeah. But I I think I'm I'm too light, Carly. I think I think within reason I would like to focus on the work rather than the vacancy. And we could spend as much time
as you want talking about the vacancy. Um uh and so if we can make progress, I think that would be helpful. But >> and I don't see it as a listed as a recommended action for today in any approval of that. So we can discuss it at the next session.
>> Yeah. Okay. Okay. And then and I'll do some more research cuz again candidly I'm interpreting the language differently but if if legal says this is how they would interpret it then so be it. >> Right. So >> um Carly asked a question. Do we have to
vote on the process? No, it's not required. We can just come to consensus. However, I think I personally would feel better if we voted just so that it was clear where the majority of the board would like to go in terms of filling the vacancy so that there's no gray later.
Um, >> I think it's just clear then. >> We've talked about whether or not we can have votes at work sessions, which >> we don't have to vote on the next work session necessarily. >> Yeah. that just but then what this is doing is kicking a can a month down the road which perhaps everyone is perfectly
fine with given the conversation tonight but that is what would be happening. Um I mean an alternative is we at least make it very clear what um yeah different perspectives are but >> you want me just nominate Brent
Nicholson I mean he was just on the board seven months ago >> and we just be done. He was not elected previously, >> but he was a board member. >> He was appointed. They've advised elected by the community. >> So, we're going to >> I don't think we're at the point of
throwing names out. I think other board members have clearly said they don't want to do that tonight. >> So, I mean, if you want to start doing that, we can and have votes, but I I'm hearing that people want more time to digest to bring it to a work session. >> Yeah. Director Swanson.
>> That means that we're at some point we're going to get to the point where we're throwing names out and probably voting if you want to do it that way. Um yeah, I'm guessing we're not going to do an application process. I don't think anybody's interested in that. Um or an interview process. >> Well, I think that's important though to
talk about like I think some of us might know that our feelings on that. I don't I don't know as a whole board our thoughts on that. And so I think that is the first decision is do we want to have an application process where people can apply and there's a you know there's a
res or um a form they fill out and I have a sample form that MSBA sent or do we want to do a nomination process and our board has done both. They've done when Brett when Brett Nicholson came it was a nomination when um Robin Richards came it was an application process and
when Tony Reenburgger came it was an election. um that's not an option for us right now, right? But there's been all of these methods to fill vacancies. Um yeah, so I'm interested in hearing from the board how they want to handle that
first before we get to names, I guess, cuz if they want if if the board wants to do an application process, then there's no point in discussing names. >> So, does anyone want to do an application process? Yeah. Well, >> would No, I I have a comment. I'm not
I'm not raising my hand to do an application process, but >> did we not just go in an application process which ended 5:00 today to find people who actually want to run for a four-year term. And I think I think it
hit the wall at 8. Correct me if I'm wrong. I haven't looked at it like it I didn't look at it at 5:00. So I I think it would be very difficult to troll the community again and see if
there are people who would want to put an application in for 3 months or whatever it is. Um when when I think we probably got as many people stepping forward as possible the eight for a four-year term. I mean that just seems
like a very low probability to me. You mean low low probability somebody would put their name in? >> Yeah. For for two, three months or whatever it is. >> Well, I mean I mean to play de I'm not in favor of an application process myself, but to play devil's advocate, I do know people for both city council and
for school board who did apply through a nominate or through an application process because they didn't want to campaign. They don't want to be part of that, but they they felt called to step up through an application process. So there's multiple people I know who have done that, but they would never run for office. So, right. But, but I think it's
it's the time span, >> right? And I'm not defending the same. I don't know if it's always it's the same crop of people who would apply for different processes. Yeah. >> Director Swanson, >> is is your preference to go prior board member?
>> My personal preference is I'm interested in can we appoint the person who's the the top vote getter. Also, I'm interested in like can there be a dual thing here? I'm not sure. we and maybe that's something for sure to find out before the next
conversation. Um, and the only reason I think that is because I think they don't need to be onboarded. And I think I mean I'm hoping we could maybe agree on one person who served previously. Um, I think there's many we probably won't agree on, but I I
don't know. Yeah. >> So, okay. We will I will find um I'll get the legal opinion in writing for you or for the whole board but especially for director Thompson. I'll find out about this highest vote getter option
and how that would work both if that became our sole option and how the timeline then works um from now until then and also if we're and then are there other options related to that. So, if we could
fill the vacancy earlier and then switch to that person at the time after the election or if we or if we're unable to do that. >> Okay. Director Thompson. >> Yeah. I would like to maybe go back and and look at when was um uh the previous
appointment done, just the the the days because I believe we had a vacancy sometime in August and then we had a an extended period of time until the actual election, I believe, right?
Because I think uh former um it early August or something like that. And so I'm just trying to think through the dates and the because early August through August, September, October, we the previous board, you and I, we waited
90 days for that vacancy to be filled because we elected not elected. We we wanted to wait until the vote getter position, the fourth vote getter, right? >> Yeah. And I believe in that situation, the person who vacated vacated within
the 90. So within 90 days, you'd have to vote. You'd have to stop your you'd have to October 1st, October, November, December. So if she resigned, I believe early August, we as a board waited all
of August, October, no, September, October, and then November. So we waited more than 90 days and decided, hey, we're going to go with the fourth vote getter. And then Brett Nicholson, I believe. When did he
start early December? Did we wait 30 days for him? I would assume so. Okay. So, so now there's I'm not saying there's precedence, but the previous not the previous we were on the board. We waited 90 days. >> Well, I think we have to be careful. I don't think precedence. There's state statute, then there's precedence. So,
maybe the I don't want to say your board didn't follow state statute, but it's possible. So I think we should just make sure that you know we are complying with law. Um
I think we did that and now we have very clear guidance from two sources that I don't think we should ignore. >> Well, did we get in trouble for doing what we did? >> I'm not saying we're going to get in trouble. I'm saying we are reporting out what has been shared with us by two s
two legal council sources. >> I'll also find out the the answer to the question. What happens if we don't right like turn into a >> Yeah. Hopefully not turn into a >> Yeah. It's so I want I want to acknowledge >> I'm not trying to I'm not trying to not fill the vacancy but I just want to
understand what are our options and what pathways can we go >> and we can discuss it more at the next working session then we've got another board meeting we can vote on the process or on the individuals whatever it may be um and whether it be the application
process or a former board member I mean we we also have to agree that there may And I don't know, I mean, we still have six more months or five more months of this particular calendar year. And and again, a seventh board member, let's be
candid, may sway a decision. And so, I want to make sure that we are uh aligned on the individual that we select uh and whoever it may be, because there's going to be important decisions that still need to be made. We've got a what $11
million levy, operating levy. Is it 11? We have an $11 million operating levy that we as a board can decide on to vote to approve just through a voice vote between now and November if that's if
that's the timeline, right? I think and so like we have to vote on it this year. Am I mistaken? >> Um I'm looking at the date. >> Well, maybe that's next year. >> I think it's next year. >> The next year. Okay. >> I think this year we're kind of >> I don't think we have to
>> we don't have anything this year. >> I'm trying not to. >> Okay. Yeah. Well, I think you're I think you're right because we probably should have we might have had needed to do it in in June or July. >> And I think where I'm coming from, Brian, is that [clears throat] I don't to director Swanson's point, I
don't want to spend unnecessary time filling the vacancy. I think we should be thorough and and and comprehensive, of course. >> Yeah. And I want to I I would love to work towards a solution that we can all get behind and support. Yeah. >> So that's my goal. I'm not coming in
here with any agenda. I'm coming in my agenda is to create a plan that all of us feel good about and hopefully identify someone that we all can feel good about. >> Um that's that's my goal. Yeah. Director Swanson. >> Yeah. I was just going to say it seems like our legal council is saying this
this is the best practice, right? I mean the statute we can all look at it you know 123b.09 09 subdivision 5 does not specify, hey, this is how you have to do it. You know, the appointment must be made at a regular or special meeting, but it doesn't say you have to do it in this time frame using this mechanism.
So, Brian, to your point, I think we can do what we want, right? And if you don't do anything, are you in violation of the statute? Yeah. And that's where it's like you should try, but uh what that looks like and how long it takes, you know, is up to the six of us.
And so I'm I'm on board with whatever's efficient. If we can't come to an agreement, I think the election idea is a good way to just break that and then we don't have to worry about a split and then we can get on with our normal business and get more done than arguing
about whether or not we want to see this person or that person. >> Okay. Anything else for tonight on this topic? >> Okay. Um just one item knowing that um we're going to be discussing this a little bit further at the coming work session.
>> Um >> it might be helpful um for people to prepare and circulate some names, maybe even contact some of these people to see if they are interested in doing so if they're appointed. um just so that when we discuss this at
the next work session, we know who's in, who's not, and can talk a little bit more in depth about how we're going to proceed. >> Sure. I mean, I think individual board members can have conversations about this, but not as a, as you know, not as
a and I'm saying this more for the community, not as a collective. Um, we cannot have those conversations. But you see what I'm saying is maybe you know circulate names to you of people that might fit that role. >> Yeah. Or individually you could >> think about this and bring ideas forward
if you haven't I mean we've talked about some options probably not all options tonight obviously. So if something percolates between now and then um bring that to the work session for sure. >> Okay. Good. >> Mhm. >> Okay.
All right. Um moving on to 6A. We do however need to elect a new schoolboard clerk um because the resignation left that vacant too. So with that um is there anyone is there any nominations self-nomination or otherwise uh for the
position of clerk? Yeah, director Swanson. >> I nominate Paul Carbone. >> All right. >> Oh me >> I seconded by director Thompson are and I have to do I have to do this process right. Are there any [clears throat]
other nominations for clerk? Are there any other nominations for clerk? All right, hearing none. Uh, Director Kone, you are elected by acclamation to clerk. >> Thank you. >> I have some work for you after the meeting. >> Would you like this? [laughter]
>> You're going to need that. >> And you're going to need to sign a bunch of stuff. So, don't do not take off the old country. >> But I'm not I haven't signed it. Okay. >> Make sure he he knows you got to sign this >> this evening. >> Yeah. You can't leave. >> Can I just sign? You do have a job. Actually, you do have to. >> All right. Um, we'll move to 6B. Um,
approval of the Lassa contract. Um, Director Alrech, I assume you're coming forward. >> Thanks. And can you again say what Lassa stands for? >> Uh, Lakeville. Lakeville Association of School
Administrators. >> Okay. Thank you. [laughter] So, those are principal. >> Principal, assistant principles. Yes. Okay. Yes. Uh so you have before you this evening a tenative agreement reached with LASA which is our school administrators. Um the agreement
includes a 2.5% increase to salaries year one of the contract and a 2 and 1/2 increase to salaries year two of the contract. Uh language also included is an increase in longevity uh an increase to higher ed stipens and HA
contributions. Um, this is a package that falls within board parameters and is recommended for approval by administration. >> All right. Is there a motion to approve the contract as presented? >> So moved. >> Uh, first by Rekenberger. Is there a second?
>> A second. >> Second by Anderson. All right. Questions or discussion? >> Uh, Dr. Thompson. Go ahead. Go ahead. >> Oh. Um, I didn't see a copy of the actual contract in our board book. Um, I was just wondering if you could highlight I mean the the description
that was provided I mean are those the only changes of consequence in the agreement? >> Um, I'm not sure that contracts are typically attached in the board minutes. Um, but I can go through what I have in the tenative agreement if you would
like. >> That'd be great. >> Yeah, that'd be helpful. Um the let's see for longevity the continuous years uh of service longevity that is increasing from $2,000 to 2500
and at 16 years from $4,000 to 4500 and then there was an added step at year 21 of 6,500. Um >> sorry what was that? 6,500 um for the let's see the higher
education degree stipens um for the 2627 school year that is in also increasing 5500 so from 5,000 to 5,500 and from 2500 to 3,000. Um, and then
a I'm sorry. [clears throat] >> Can you explain what the higher ed stipend is? >> It is that the higher ed stipend that's for like a a it's a separate degree higher degree.
>> So if they have like a PhD or ed >> a doctor in education rather than a principal license, >> right? It's like when the teachers move across uh the salary schedule, this would be the equivalent for administrators >> cuz they're required to have a principal
license but then not required to have a >> some of them get a superintendent's license or superintendent license. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Does that make sense? >> Yeah. >> Okay. Um and then another um $500
increase for 2728. Um, and then the early retirement increase that is currently at 13,500. That is increasing by $500 to 14,000
with a a max cap contribution of 140. And then the second year of the contract, it goes up uh by another 500. And the total package is 8.23%. Total package is 8.2. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Georgia Thompson. >> Yeah. Uh as I read the agenda and so
thank you for that. Um the 8 point is it 8.23 8 something like that. So at the beginning of all uh negotiations the board generally sets uh core key parameters uh financially or percentage wise and each union kind of works within
that percentage. And so the Lassa contract, it falls within the percentage that everyone else is in. Is that accurate? Or >> when I when I settle these contracts, unless there is a necessary need for a market adjustment, I try to get every
contract settles as settled as closely as possible. I'll never be able to get them all settled at exactly the same package amount. Um, but I try to get them as close as possible. >> Okay. And this is like within the range.
Okay. So very close >> from the teachers contract >> from the teachers contract to everyone else's everyone else's contract. Got it. Got it. Y >> Director Thompson. >> Uh so so not not not on the contract specifically, but I do think that as a
board uh we may want to try to uh we may want to review kind of our process and how we do contracts in the future. Um while having them come at a board meeting and and and approving it, uh I
think there may be value in having uh higher frequency in cadence and and un in hearing the progress and the status and and having well unfortunately more meetings uh but to hear kind of where things are at beyond just Lassa with uh you know LEAF and and all the others as
well. And so, um, I'm I'm I am good with this contract, but I think operationally it's something for us to look into. That's all. >> I think I've heard that from a few board members now. And so, um, definitely discuss that going forward. I know. Are there upcoming contracts that we haven't not settled or
>> we have uh so the the Lassa contract and the custodial contract, they are on an off-year schedule. So, their contract is 26 to 28. Y >> um the only one we have left are custodians. Okay. >> Um, and just for context, uh, we met
with Lassa two meetings >> total of maybe 2 and 1/2 hours combined um, to get this settled and LEAF was gosh, I think we met, yeah, three times to to get the contract settled.
>> Okay. I think I've heard from some board members that it' be helpful to just um hear maybe a report and it could be in Friday notes, but maybe also have more closed sessions about what contracts are coming up and here a reminder here the
parameters that we're working within and um and kind of updates on on how it's going. So, I think that that works. Yeah. Director Swanson. Yeah, I I'd love to see the the contract with the draft or proposed amendments to um similar to what we did with the teachers union contract. So, just so we can track with
it and see what the offers are and the counter offers have been. >> Yep. Yeah. Once we get that updated, we can get that sent out to you. >> And then this might be a question for Bill just for context. You know, what is the total what is the percentage of the loss of contract that it percentage of our annual budget roughly?
the the total the total contract lasted right around 7 million. >> Okay, >> Dr. Anderson. Yeah, the only I mean I'm I'm all for all all the information us being informed, but I also think like how like you're saying, how much of that can maybe come through um the
superintendent updates as opposed to like separate meetings just because it does seem like the teachers union contract is the one that gets done first and like we have to operating these parameters and then that kind of sets the stage for the rest of the negotiations. It feels like Yeah. as
your uh executive director, I I wouldn't want to see something that would potentially slow the process down, right? Especially for LEAF and Lassa. I mean, we we did this so quickly. I would hate to have to put that off to be able to schedule a session to update the
board on on what is happening when we're we know we're going to get it settled really quickly. Um but that's just my opinion. That's if we can get it through another means that might make that might satisfy all parties in terms of like we have the information
>> and also we're not dragging the process slowing it down. >> Yeah, >> Dr. Thompson Wson. [clears throat] >> Yeah, I think you're right. U but the board did give a financial percentage parameters how and what gets done between the union and the agreement.
It's really in my mind like what this is what we have. Here's what how this is how we're sharing it with all the other unions as well. Uh but if I heard correctly, $7 million is total. So 3% of our $230 million budget is allocated
towards this union contract. Okay. >> Superintendent, I >> I would just say uh I acknowledge your request for maybe u more cadence in reporting. I will make sure you have that. Great. Thank you. >> All right. Any other questions or
comments? All right. [clears throat] There's a first and a second. All in favor of approving the Lassa contract, um, say I. >> Indulge me. I think, uh, it's good to talk about our kids and what they're doing, our staff, and what they're doing. So, I'll start with the, uh,
Cougars. Uh, they took second place um, in the 2026 Clay Target state tournament. So, congratulations to Lakeville South uh clay target team and some uh interesting news there. Standout
team performances include class of 2026 graduate Drake [clears throat] Fritz who shot a perfect score of 100. >> And then class of 2026 graduate Mitchell Kelie and incoming senior Connor
Buchanan who both shot 98. and incoming seniors Ruby Folkstead and Dylan Hutchinson who each shot 95. Uh in individual competition, Folkstead placed seventh in the women's division, making
her second consecutive year on the podium. And uh she was also named to the female division allstate team. So congratulations to our uh performers there on the Clay Target state tournament. [applause]
Lakeville South alumni shine at the 2026 USA Games. Lakeville Area Schools is proud to celebrate two Lakeville South alumni who excelled at the 2026 USA Special Olympics Games held here in
Minnesota from June 20th to the 26th. The USA Games brought together more than 2,800 athletes from across the country. So, Brandon Gangal, uh, class of 2008, brought home two gold medals in team and
doubles. Botchi, I I actually could pronounce that word. >> Botchi ball. >> Yeah, botchi ball. As well as a bronze medal in singles. And then Kaden Rosth, class of 2024, earned a bronze medal in singles tennis and a fourth place finish
in doubles. So, congratulations to Brandon and Kaden on an incredible national performance. And then just a little plug here. Uh you know, annually as we get ready to go back to school, um we have our Ready,
Set, Achieve. And I want to highlight an important upcoming event that will occur on Thursday, August 20th from noon to 4:00 p.m. where we will be hosting our 13th annual Ready, Set, Achieve at the
Lakeville North High School uh location. And this event provides free school supplies, immunizations, and other community resources for students enrolled here in Lakeville area schools. So, we value our community partnerships
uh to make this event a success. You can support Lakeville students by donating funds, new school supplies, or volunteering your time. We ask you to visit our website at isd194.orga,
which stands for ready, set, achieve, to learn more about how to get uh involved. and we uh appreciate any and all help that we can get for that wonderful event for our students. That madam chair is my report. >> Great. Thank you, Superintendent Bowman.
All right, with that um I think we're at the end of our agenda. Is there a motion to adjurnn? >> So moved. >> Moved by Rekenburgger. Is there a second? >> I'll second. >> Second by Thompson. Uh all in favor? I. >> Any opposed? We are adjourned. Thanks everybody.