Speaker 1: Welcome everybody to, it's a pretty big expertise though, so yeah. Welcome everybody to the Natick School committee meeting. It is Monday, June 2nd at 6:00 PM and we are going to start with roll call. Mr. Patel. Present Ms. Flas. Here, Mr. Brand. Present. Dr. Fugman. Present. Ms. Collins. Here. Ms. Brunel here. And I am here and I am going to make a motion to enter executive session for the purpose of conducting strategy sessions in preparation
for negotiations with non-union personnel or to conduct collective bargaining sessions or contract negotiations with non-union personnel. Speaker 2: Second. Speaker 1: And we'll take a roll call Vote. Mr. Patel. Yes. Ms. Lathers? Yes. Mr. Brand? Yes. Dr. Fugman? Yes. Ms. Collins? Yes. Ms. Brunell? Yes. And I'm a yes. So we are now in executive session. We expect to return to open session at approximately 6:35 PM So thank you everybody. We've returned. This is the Natick School Committee. Monday, June 2nd. We are returning from executive session at 7:06 PM So
before executive session we did roll call. So we'll now stand for the Pledge of Allegiance and a moment of silence. Sorry, Kathy. Speaker 2: Two seconds. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation on under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Speaker 1: We take that moment of silence to honor our service people who have served us here and abroad. So next on the agenda, we have announcements. Speaker 3: I have a few busy time in Natick right now
and we actually have a little slideshow if you'll permit. Absolutely. We need some celebration. So Linda has it up. We graduated 373 students on Friday, May 30th. The weather was great and the celebration was beautiful. Kids' speeches were fabulous. It was just quite the privilege to be there to witness it and be part of it. So just wanted to recognize that and recognize the fantastic work of the school committee. All of our educators, even the first grade kindergarten teachers are, they know the kids in this crowd.
So well done. Everybody was a beautiful ceremony. Okay, on Wednesday, May 28th, the high school hosted more than 50 districts for the MIAA unified track and field championship. Once again, Natick High clinched the top spot and were named the 2025 MIAA unified track and field D one Champions. I understand this is a three-peat, so this is fabulous. Am I stealing your thunder? No. Okay, good. The next one also, there were unified games held at Ben Hem
and Brown last week, and there's more events to come there. You can see Nick Deton and Aaron Harris. There's Nick again. I wanna take a moment to recognize Nick Deton, who will be inducted into the Special Olympics Massachusetts Hall of Fame this very evening. I said I can't go because the school committee, Aaron Miller, is there. This honor reflects his years of leadership, service and unwavering commitment to inclusive athletics. Nick is a true prize. He's humble, generous, and relentlessly focused on students. We are so lucky to have him in Natick and I'm grateful to Special Olympics Mass
for honoring him in this very well deserved way. This is a picture of our NHS musicians who performed at Lincoln Memorial in Washington DC on the Saturday of Memorial Weekend. They did it right there on that plaza. It's beautiful. They had the sun with them as well. NHS Junior Grace Zang earned second place at the Massachusetts State Individual Tennis Tournament. This is a huge honor. There she is. Very strong. And lastly, for the WOC Na Natick Town takeover event. This Friday, MPS administrative assistant, Robin Slattery is being honored as Natick's hometown Hero.
I think she gets to throw a pitch, right? Yes. So also, I don't have a picture here, but our very own, Nathan got his driver's permit today during open session. We're very proud of you, Nathan. Speaker 4: I'm having surgery soon. I may meet you. Speaker 1: Got your first job too. Thank you, Dr. Stash. Any announcements from anybody on the committee? Okay. Alright, we'll move to public speak. Public speak is scheduled for a period of 15 minutes. Each speaker will be permitted a maximum of three minutes during which time they can speak about topics within the
scope of responsibility of the school committee. All remarks will be addressed through the school committee chair. Public speak is not a time for debate or response to comments by the school committee. So I did receive one email request for public speak. Is anybody in the room other than Dr. Mackenzie who emailed me here for public speak or anybody online? Yes. You're here for public speak as well. Yes, please. Did you fill, put your name down? I don't think I, okay. If you just mind signing in, that'd be helpful. Thank you. Do you mind timing? Are you able to? Thank you.
So Dr. Mackenzie, you're the first person I know. If you'd like to come to the podium and you have three minutes, Speaker 5: Thank you. Imagine you are a single parent or a homeless parent, or a parent with overwhelming costs for an ill family member. Your student comes home excited about a trip to France or Peru that their teacher has been talking about in class and sends out emails to the school community about those trips. While there is no question that international travel would be an amazing opportunity, when trips are close to $5,000, you have no choice
but to tell your student that you can't afford it. Although such a field trip is not required, it re, it creates a serious inequality when those who can go, when the haves can go in, those who don't have cannot. This is a public school system where creating equal and fair opportunities is critical. And actually part of the Massachusetts State Constitution. For some families, there simply isn't ample time to prepare for the cost of a trip like this. This is not a private school district
and I see no need for a public school district to sponsor field trips that some children can't afford or can't even consider Participating in. The affordability ought to factor into the approval process. Parents can send their kids on these trips with privately organized groups. Why does a company like EF Educational Tours get to use all the emails and marketing tools for the district when not every child will be able to participate? And who is compensating? The teachers who are chaperoning and for how much?
I share with you briefly an edited version of a letter I sent to the school committee last week. Dear School committee, I respectfully request that you receive from your, you removed from your consent agenda permission for the out-of-state field trip to Peru in April of 2026. I have serious reservations about the cost of the trip, which is projected to be $4,729 and how this aligns with the district social justice goal. That includes educational equity. I have no doubt that a trip to Peru would be an amazing opportunity,
but I'm concerned that by the district sponsoring this trip, you are contributing to unequal and unfair opportunities within a public school system. 30 seconds. I Pardon? Speaker 1: 30 seconds remaining. Speaker 5: Okay. You have read this letter. I have sent it to you. I got a response today. And I do wanna say that other districts do have policies about field trips such as Brookline, Plymouth, and Hopton. And those policies include attention to scholarships in federal, in assistance for children
who cannot afford these trips. And I seriously ask you that you come up with some kind of policy and that this isn't about, I'm actually ashamed of our district. Thank you. I end that. No, I'm ashamed of this district for not having any support. Speaker 1: Thank you. Next speaker. You can bring it up here. Thank you. Thank you. So if you just wanna go to the podium. Yeah. Thank you. So if you'll just go to the podium and then just state your name and your relationship to Natick and then you'll have three minutes and we'll give you a 32nd warning. Thank you. Okay.
Speaker 6: Shall I start? Yeah. Hi, my name is Soham. I live in Natick. I'm here representing my truth as a decolonization activist and Natick citizen. I have a couple points in regards to the, I think it's in the Israel Palestine conflict. The res like reading that will happen later. So I take issue with it. Some of the language used in the reading as far as my skim through, there's no mention of genocide despite the ICCJ and the international scholars largely being in agreement that Israel's committing a
genocide against the Palestinian people. Our students should be presented with all information, but there are, there can be bias in language and we should vet for that. If we represent our compassion for the loss of life in Palestine, without mentioning that they were killed by Israel in parentheses under and occupation and air, land and sea blockade using an arsenal of weapons banned by the Geneva Convention, then we are using passive voice to give moral consent to the deaths by depoliticizing their deaths. There is a, this is a fact-based analysis that people
who are killed, there are people who are killed or starved, we're under occupation. And that the is and that is the Israeli occupation. They do not simply roll over and pass away. There are, they are slaughtered by all academic metrics. And we, we would not educate our children that the idea of the Jewish people in Auschwitz simply died just as they are killed. Just as they were killed and worked to death or starved by the Nazis. That is what is happening to the people in the GA on the West Bank. Point two, the A DL is being cited as a valid resource in defining Zionism in which they conflate Jewish identity with Israel
and the political movement of Zionism. This is a fig leaf. The a DL does not condemn, does not condemn known white supremacists under the Trump administration and actually hurried in defense of Elon's Nazi salute. It focuses majority of its efforts on s silencing pro-Palestinian protestors and speakers. While there is a rise in actual Nazism under the Trump administration and this And why are they ambivalent? They are in lockstep with infrastructure of the AI pac, a oil defense and tech complex funded lobbyist group, the largest lobbyist group in America, which is used as a,
which used the social taboo against antisemitism incorrectly to prevent any material action against the military occupation. And incredible of an incredible, an incredibly valuable colonial state. 30 Speaker 1: Seconds remaining. Speaker 6: We would never say that the Native Americans simply lost their lives in the trail of tears. They were killed. We would also not ask slave owners to define the political movement that enables them to oppress those they occupy. And we ask the victims of the o, we must ask the victims of the occupation. In summary, antisemitic antisemitism is
real and is horrible. Zionism does not represent all Jew Jewish people as the A DLA biased source asserts. And the use of passive language gives moral consent to kill innocent people. Thank you. Speaker 1: You Thank you. Anybody else here for public speak? Is there anybody online? Okay. Alright. Public speak is closed. Thank you. So we'll now move to teacher rep. Speaker 7: I think we're just in that process of winding down the school year, trying to celebrate while still getting in every learning minute we can. And in some ways the weather being how it's been has helped a little bit with that
because our kids aren't too into summer mode. As long as it's not too, too warm and sunny. Speaker 1: Okay. Thank you. And our student rep. Nothing. Okay. Thank you. Do we have our METCO rep online? Speaker 8: I Speaker 1: Do don't think so. Okay, so nothing from her. Okay. So then we will move to our consent agenda. If I could have a motion. Speaker 9: Motion to approve the consent agenda. Speaker 8: Second. Speaker 1: Okay. All in favor? Any against anybody? Abstaining. So that's 7 0 0. Thank you. And do you mind if we just move to the subcommittee liaison
and then, okay, so we'll move to subcommittee liaison. Cell phone policy. Speaker 9: Is that me? Speaker 1: That's you Mr. Brand. Speaker 9: So Dr. Pash, do you want to start or do you want me to start? Speaker 1: Either Speaker 3: Way. Speaker 9: Why don't you start? Yeah. Since Dr. Ferguson's not with us today. Yeah. Speaker 3: So I can give a little bit of an overview of this. In the fall, we discussed cell phone. Really we discussed what was happening in the middle schools and the high schools as part of communication outreach that started in the spring prior to me being here around new procedures for cell phone use in the schools.
And we gave a report in, if you remember, I think it was November with how that was going. And it's been going very well. I, we could ask for another report, but when I'm in the schools it looks pretty good. I'm sure there's one-offs where kids have phones, but in general, I rarely see a phone out when I'm walking around. So, so grateful for the good work. And so we asked the, all of our principals to work with Dr. Ferguson to develop a proposal for a policy for cell phones that we wanted to put in front of you. This is the first read of it. So we can actually go through and read it. But it really tries to take out things
that are outdated such as MP three players. The intention is to be all encompassing and allow, not be too compliance oriented. Like you have to put it in exactly this locker, but more around that it wouldn't, we wanted to match the purpose of not distract being a distraction for the learning environment. And so the idea here is to sort of modernize it, but also to name the purpose of it. You'll see there's a section on definitions that really gets pretty clear around what we mean by personal electronic devices. What we mean by use the school day and non-academic time. And then there's general guidelines now
that really wraps in pre-K two 12, what those expectations are. So I think anything else, I'd almost have to be reading the policy, but that's where the spirit of this comes from. It is reflective of the principal's viewpoints on what would be good. And it has gone through the subcommittee, Speaker 9: I think. I think that's the, I mean, I don't think I have anything I would add to that. We had a, a good discussion of the policy subcommittee about this. Dr. Ferguson was with us as was Ms. Baloni and Dr. Bash. So it was a, that's what we came up with here, I think. Yeah, we added it to the agenda to vote,
but I don't think we have an expectation that that will happen. But if we do, we put it, I think it was there. So we had the option. But the idea here is to get this read now and then perhaps address it again at the next meeting. Speaker 1: Okay. Any discussion, Ms. Collins? Speaker 10: Thank you. I wasn't able to be at the subcommittee, so, but I have a question. So I have this little receiver, it talks exclusively to a sensor on my body. It has an alarm on it. It's an important alarm as it's my sugar levels. Yeah. I couldn't tell whether something like
that is an accommodation prohibited or just not anticipated. Speaker 3: I think that's addressed. Were you done? Yeah, I think that's addressed on page two, but we Is it three number number three? Yeah. Number three on page two at kind of top half of it where it says medical and educational accommodations. Students requiring personal electronic devices for medical monitoring. Example diabetes devices or educational accommodations. Example, Bluetooth enabled hearing aids must have a written
accommodation plan on file. The plan will be maintained by the principal or designee and adjusted as needed to meet the student's needs while minimizing classroom disruption. Okay. Speaker 10: I guess I, I apparently I wasn't, I wasn't clear. Do I as a parent or an older high school student need to go through like five? Oh when I think accommodations, I think 5 0 4 when I'm not asking for any accommodation other than to keep it with me. Is that the same process or what do parent,
how do parents navigate this? Speaker 3: Yeah. To me, I'm gonna clarify that because I think it's a good question because we're using the word accommodation and it could be confusing. So I actually think based on this feedback, I would go back and change that wording. I don't think it has to be a 5 0 4 or an IEP. We have to understand that a person, they could have it on file at the nurse. Right. Which they would have it on file at the nurse. So I think the word, I think the feedback is the word is confusing and could be conflated with a 5 0 4 or an IEP process. Is that fair? Yeah. Speaker 10: I just don't want parents to think they have to go
through the 5 0 4 process when in fact they just need to write a letter to the nurse. Great feedback to say, 'cause I mean it only the two talk to each other. They don't talk to anybody else. Yep. Yep. Speaker 3: We'll make that adjustment. Speaker 1: Okay. Thank you Ms. Collins. Any, any other questions or comments from the committee? Okay. Alright. So we'll see this again in two weeks for a vote. It sounds like. So thank you policy subcommittee for moving that along. We've had a lot of questions from parents on this topic, so it'll be good to have this wrapped up.
Oh yes, Ms. Bru. Speaker 11: It was taking me a moment. I yeah, I I was taking me a moment to get here. So in middle school it says, number one, that they remain off and securely stored during the entire day. We provided that storage this year in the homerooms. And so I'm curious if you just don't want that specific language in this policy about where they will be stored. Because you want the freedom to change that location Speaker 3: And what the device may be. Yeah,
Speaker 11: Because couldn't it be, would this give middle school students permission to store their device in their pocket, for example? Speaker 3: I don't, that would, I would wanna ask the middle school principal that, but I don't think that's the intention of this. The intention, there's a gradual release of responsibility and phone use. So what could be at the high school may not be at the middle school and at the middle school, they're storing them in a locker or in some other device Right now through their homeroom, I've been a middle school principal and at times switched my homerooms up. So we didn't have a morning homeroom. We might've had it after the first block.
I'm not suggesting that's happening here. Yeah. At all. I hope that's really understood. But what I'm trying to say is when we write a policy, we don't wanna write it again for a very, for a long time. Hopefully we'll want it to be something that can, can match, you know, our intentions right now. So I'm interpreting there could be a reading of this that it's opening up where kids might store their device, which I don't think is the intent, Speaker 11: But the word securely maybe could be defined in a certain way. Yeah. Anecdotally, I, I don't know how many middle schoolers are now storing their phone in
those, the things that were built at the beginning of the school year. So I, I think it's really important that we get the phones out of the school. Out of the middle schools. I can understand the, the ability for high schoolers to have them, but I'm absolutely think that they need to be outta the middle schools. Speaker 1: Do you mean like not on the student's person? Speaker 11: Yeah. And I think that at the beginning of the year we saw, we heard from teachers, I heard, I heard eight, I heard parents clap at parent night when
they told, when the, it was explained to them that kids were gonna come into the homeroom, put their phone in the locker, and then get their phone. At the end of the day, parents literally clapped at that moment. And now what I was told at a recent conference was that almost no students put the, put their phone away. That they're still not out. Right. That, that you can't see 'em in a classroom. But it's not like students are storing them in the teacher provided area. Again, that's anecdotal, but, so I don't, you know, we'd, we need more data on that,
but I don't think we should, I don't think our policy should be so vague that we give the kids permission to split their attention. I mean we, the research is there that like, just by having my phone right now on the table, half of my brain is like my phone, my phone, my phone. Just 'cause it's a device, right? Like it's a dopamine thing. So I think we, we need to give our kids the privilege of a cell phone free learning space with a stronger policy. Speaker 1: Okay. Ms. Collins and then Mr. Brand, I just,
Speaker 10: I know we normally don't do crosstalk, but I, I wonder, I I had the same question and I wondered if adding the words after securely stored and before, during as directed would solve your concern. And I would personally, I would change during to four the entire school year. But they, but that's Speaker 11: Funny. Speaker 10: Show off fall Speaker 11: Asleep. That was so funny. Speaker 10: Show off. Speaker 11: My cell phone just went off. If an you and didn't hear it Speaker 1: Very timely. Speaker 11: The school committee needs a policy too. Speaker 1: Mr. B, Speaker 9: Only if Kathy, because of the alarm.
Did you Finish your Yes. Did I write? Yes I did. I I, the discussion that we had at the policy subcommittee about this, one of the things that we were sort of talking about, I guess is the gray area between what the policy should define and what a handbook at the individual schools. So like what the implementation is at this school versus that school and not being too prescriptive at the policy level. I think there's probably, to Ms. Collin's point, perhaps opportunities to wordsmith and to, to Ms. Purnell's point to make it a little bit more specific. But I would be wary to get to, to, I would, I would like
to find that balance and not get so specific that it's really challenging to implement at one building differently than another one. And, and leave it to the handbook to say there is a policy about usage of devices. There is a policy for, for instance, at the middle school that says that the, the device has to be stored for the entire day. It can't be on, it can't be like, but then the way we implement that at the Kennedy Middle School or the Wilson Middle School is we put these, they're not allowed in the classroom at all and they're not allowed in your locker. So, you know, I don't, you know,
but I would sort of feel like that feels more like an in the walls thing of each building. Different that's different than a district ballsy, but there's probably a middle ground where we can make it a little bit tighter, a little stronger. Speaker 1: Yeah. Now that I'm reading, did you want to respond? I can go after you. Okay. Yeah. Now that I'm reading it, I'm curious too, during your discussion on the subcommittee, the difference between pre-K and elementary and middle school is a little, so in, in, for example, in the pre-K elementary students may store
the phones in their backpacks or in a designated secure location, but it's not spoken to at all at middle school. I'm curious about the, in the intention of that difference in language Speaker 9: Dr. Pass, what was the, you used it at the beginning of the, I don't wanna get the phrase wrong. The responsibility, the, Speaker 3: Oh, gradual release. Yeah. You're, you're saying why not force the storage in a centralized place for elementary? Speaker 1: No, I'm just wondering why that's missing from middle school when it would be essentially the same if we're telling, if we're just saying they need to be stored, they could be in your backpack,
they could be in a secure location. We've, we've specified that for elementary, but we've been super vague for middle school yet. What would the other options be for middle schoolers? I guess, yeah, Speaker 3: I just, I'm going to say it, it's a bit of the elephant in the room. I just think sometimes the temptations are bigger in middle school to kind of use the phone. I think it's just the more kids have 'em, it's more prevalent. It's more part of their social lives. And so to me a little stricter kind of centralized expectation for that is needed. Whereas an elementary, I mean the, I actually have some questions for principals based on this conversation to see
how many elementary school principals are seeing devices even coming in because otherwise we're kind of talking about something that's actually a low frequency right now, which I do think it is the piece. So I'll ask the principals that. But I think it's about a ramp up in usage by kids. It's often a milestone to get the phone when kids are going into middle school and just more kids with it and need the need for that space to answer. Just to reply to the things I was gonna say earlier, I think there is something for the middle school one to talk about as directed by the handbook in terms
of like where it's stored. I think, I think going to the handbook allows, like if you switch it up and you don't use these boxes and you use these pieces or it's not during this time of day, it's during that time of day, it would allow it to flex inside the handbook but still be defined for parents and still be something that we would review here. Speaker 1: Okay. Ms. Brunell, Speaker 11: I guess that, so to that point, under the high school section, you have one, three and four, maybe a typo, but number three specifically talks about the handbook, right? Is that what it says? The high school shall determine? No, no. Where's the handbook? It's,
Speaker 1: It's, it's three. You're right. Speaker 11: It, it's three. Okay. Yeah. Okay. So, so I think some, some mention, I guess when you were talking about it, Matt, that I, I like, I felt a little more relieved that the school was not just washing its hands of this, I feel strongly that cell phones should not be like we, the book that we were recommended all to read, you know, anxious generation, like when you give kids a cell phone free place, they feel better and they feel less anxious. So like given everything that we've had presented at this committee, everything that we know about mental health, I think
that we should have a strong, we should have the intention of getting cell phones out of our schools. If that means that that's a combo of policy and handbook, I'm fine with that. But I would want to make sure that I assert that I think cell phones should be out of our schools and especially in the middle school, I can understand the use and the ability for high schoolers to discern and to grow in that. But I think what Dr. Sp just said about mentioning the handbook, at least in policy in this policy could help the middle school piece.
I personally would like to see the middle school piece stronger. Speaker 3: Yep. I think the high school piece where it does mention it is specific to non-academic time, just to clarify for people. But I also think that I wanna recognize and thank our parents and caregivers who have been partners in this. And we cannot do this alone in terms of we want, if we want cell phones out of our middle schools, that is more than just teacher or principal effort that is in, in partnership with parents. And that's a really important point because I can imagine the,
sometimes the stricter more compliance base we make these policies. I, I would think the teachers might struggle with it if it gets to be a challenge. And so I want, I'm just gonna name that we really need the partnership of our families and we have it right now. So I'm, I'm grateful for that. But we need it to be ongoing with this policy. Speaker 1: Dr. Sson, Speaker 12: Just to add a comment about that. So I know that Spark Kindness, which is an important partner here in town and works a lot with parents, is dedicating some planning to a series of events around social media, cell phone use and parenting just to have that conversation.
So I think that would be, that's gonna be a helpful thing for us to know about and partner with. Speaker 1: Yeah, no, they put on the, they are screen screen ages a couple years ago. Right. Yeah. Which is I think an excellent documentary. I wonder if how we can get the kids to watch it. 'cause I feel if they saw that they might really relate on their phone, put it on their phone advisory, stream it to them. Yeah. But I, I wonder if that's something, you know, if we can share some of these resources with the students themselves. 'cause they're smart right. And I'm sure they can feel it and they might resonate with some of
that information. So thank you. Speaker 12: I can also add, just to that point, Natick is part of the Metro West Regional catchment air for the Metro West Health Foundation. And there was a workshop which Natick administrators participated in on that. So there was, there were some different strategies that were discussed. So I know there's a lot of discussion about it. Yeah. Speaker 8: Okay. Speaker 1: Okay. Any more discussion on the cell phone policy? Okay, so it sounds like we'll still see it back in two weeks, but we found a few typos and flow changes
and there'll be a little bit of update of wording to clarify some things. So, great. Thank you. Okay, so I thought if we can I, if we can get our non superintendent evaluation items done, then we can close with that. Does that work? Yeah. Okay, great. Super. So perhaps we can move on to talking about two topics together, planning our summer retreats and I think Dr. Fugman, you've had some update on the plans, potential plans for professional developments. Maybe if we can talk about that and then we can talk about how many retreats we might need.
Speaker 12: Yeah, so I reached out to Ted Aman Jackson who as we've discussed before, has been working with Natick administration for maybe three years now or so and is well loved here and loves our team in Natick, our administration team. And as we all discussed, we wanted to invite her to do some professional development development with us as well. So she's happy to do it. We did discuss what that would contain and we had, we went back and forth including the idea. Ms. Elli, you had asked about this too,
the, the overall purpose of the retreat of the, sorry, the professional development. We really, is it really gonna be how we can bring an equity lens into the purview of the school committee? So what does it mean to look at budget through an equity lens? What does it mean to look at policy et cetera? With first starting a conversation around data. How do we best process data and ask data questions or questions of the data that looks at equity around related to the prison, the workshop she did at MASC for the School Committee Association. She is working on a scope
of work which will detail all of this. And as soon as I get it, I will send it to the rest of the committee. We did talk about two different sessions. She is gonna be out of network, out of commission August and September. So we are hoping that we can schedule this either June or July. And she said she's has plenty of of availability in June and July. So I was recommended to Ms. Goeth and maybe we can start a doable just to get a sense of some dates and times that might work for us and then we, I can send that to her. I did email her asking her about her dates and she, I haven't heard back from her yet,
but, so we can go either way starting with her dates or starting with our dates. But again, it's, it would be two sessions, I think about two hours each. Okay. Or at least that's what she's proposing and I would recommend we go with that. Speaker 1: Okay, great. Thank you. Any questions about the, the work we're gonna do with esa? Anybody? Okay. Super. And thank you Dr. Fugman for working, working on that and we look forward to that scope of work. Okay. So then summer retreats. So we only have one school committee meeting left, so I was hoping that we can
finalize sometimes next at the next meeting for our summer retreat. So it sounds like we're gonna need two, two hour retreats for the two profess or the two sessions of the professional development. We usually have summer retreat where we talk about norms and planning for the next year. So that would be three. Any other thoughts about the need for retreat time this summer from either committee members or Dr. Fash? No. Okay. Well Speaker 11: When you say norms in planning, you mean goals?
Yes. Goal setting. Yeah, Speaker 1: Goal setting and reviewing our norms and planning out our year. Yeah. Yeah. Dr or Mr. Brand. Yes. I Speaker 9: Just promoted, I wanna be a doctor. Yeah. Promoted team. Last year we did a meeting, a joint meeting with the select board as a retreat, which I thought was, Speaker 11: They owe us dinner actually. Speaker 9: Remember that. That's also great. But like, I think that would be a, that was towards the end of the summer, right? That was like almost like a kickoff of the year. Yeah. So if we could do that again, if they're up for it, I think it would be great. Speaker 1: Okay. Alright. I'll ask them about that. That's a, that's, thank you for remembering that.
That was a really good meeting actually. Speaker 9: And good dinner. Speaker 1: Yeah. You must have been in charge of the Speaker 9: I was not. Speaker 13: Someone brought cookies I think wasn't Did you bring cookies and soda? I think you carried all Speaker 1: Of it in. Okay. Okay. So then I'll set up a, I'll send out a doodle poll for July and August. Is anyone available for the end of June? I guess I'm, I'm not, I'm gonna be away the week, the last week of June. So I guess we can only really do this in July or you can, guys can do it without me for this first session, but I'd like to be there. But let's wait
Speaker 9: For you to be there. Speaker 1: Okay. Alright. So I'll send, I'll just send a date for all possible evenings in July and August and let's just see where we end up and hopefully we can find four days. Oh and we have somebody online who has a question. Ms. Vickers. Speaker 14: Hi. Yes. Thank you so much. When you guys were bringing up retreats and topics for retreat, can you hear me? Speaker 1: Yes, we can hear you. Speaker 14: Okay, thank you. I'm on my headset so I'm never sure I I, I think there are many of us that would hope that potentially there would be an opportunity to
look through an environmental and sustainability lens as well so that instead of it being an afterthought or a catch up, that it could be a part of how we look at everything with our policies. And I feel like maybe a summer retreat time is a perfect opportunity. I know that that was a question that came up during the eco forum that they had during election time and I think that it would be really great. I think that there are a lot of people that would be on board with supporting that
and it seems like a perfect summer retreat conversation. So if there's any way for something like that to be given in the attention, that would be great. Thank you. Speaker 1: Okay. Thank you Ms. Vickers. Dr. Fugman. Speaker 12: So that actually got me thinking thank you Ms. Vickers. I'm wondering if we wanna expand that to setting goals school committee goals for the year. 'cause that's how it came up the first time was around sustainability, sustainability goal. So I dunno if we wanna set new goals or, or or just even focus on the ones that we have, you know, sustainability and engagement. Speaker 1: Yeah. So you mean have that discussion at our goals
slash norms retreat? Yeah. Yes, I had the same thought. Okay. Yeah, so I, I do think that that is something we spent time talking about last year, whether or not we should have one. So that does seem like a good time to include that in that agenda. Yeah. Okay. Alright. So keep your eyes peeled for a doodle poll and get that done. Okay. And then just wanted to talk briefly about an upcoming select board meeting. So on June 25th the select board is hosting our state delegation.
So Representative Linsky and Senate President Spilker will be there to hear I think to hear and listen at that meeting. And I recall that we, did we do this last year or two years ago? Last year? Two years ago. Two years ago? Speaker 12: No, it was last year. 'cause I remember Dr. SP came before, technically before she was, she started. Oh right, Speaker 1: That's right. Okay. She was our guest so last year. Yeah, so I, it was earlier in the year I think. Yeah, March. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. So we've been invited to submit questions and to attend.
So I wanna put that out there for everyone that that will meeting will be scheduled and will be kind of included as a joint. I guess last time we did as a joint select board school committee meeting. So I thought I'd have that set up again that way I see a lot of nods so people seem to be in favor of that. I will be away that week. I'll be on vacation. So Ms. Brunell has agreed to chair that meeting as her capacity as vice chair. So we'll collect questions in advance like we did last time. 'cause the rep representative, they,
they do want the questions in advance. And I think we did that last time too. Did we not Dr. Kingman? Yeah. Yeah. So we can send out, or I guess Ms. Brunell if you can send out maybe did we do it by a Google poll or just by email or not Google poll but like a Google sheet last time for questions? Or did you just take emails from folks? Speaker 12: I think we just took just emails. Yeah. What I will add is last year, maybe this year too, we were asked we there was a deadline for it. And the reason just to be transparent is there's tons
of bills in the state legislature and obviously no one center or house member knows the update of every all of them. So they just want to know what topics are gonna come up so that they can research them beforehand and be prepared to talk about Speaker 1: Them. Okay. So I'll ask Ms Coughlin what the deadline is for that. Yeah, Speaker 3: I think I actually have it in this memo. Oh do you? In the email. Super. Okay, Speaker 1: So Speaker 3: We got the email on May 27th. What day was that? That was Thursday. And it says also in advance of the meeting we collect questions to get them over
to the delegation in order to prepare for the meeting. Please send over any questions by the end of next week so that we would be June 6th. Okay. So that we can get these to the delegation to prepare. That's from the town administrator. Speaker 1: Okay, super. Thank you Dr. Stash. So yeah, so if you could send any questions that you would like to ask or have asked of the representatives at that meeting by Friday and send those to Catherine directly and then she'll send them over to, I guess Jamie. Is he? Yep. Okay, thank you.
Alright and then we have another agenda item. Oh let's vote on the non rep schedule. So could I have a motion and then we'll have some discussion Speaker 9: And move to, to approve the updated non-res schedule. Okay. Speaker 1: So earlier in the executive session, oh thank you. Sorry, jumping ahead. Earlier in the executive session we did review and vote on an updated, a couple of changes to the non-res schedule. So I'm just gonna ask Dr. Stash to give us a, a short overview of those. Speaker 3: Sure. Thank you. There's three main updates.
All of them I want to emphasize are budget neutral. And this is very important. In light of our budget discussions all year long, we, part of this introduces or reopens the deputy superintendent position and in tandem with that eliminates the assistant superintendent for teaching, learning and innovation. Again, that's budget neutral. It also moves the assistant director of athletics from a 0.6 position to a 1.0. So we'd have a full-time assistant director of athletics, again a budget neutral position.
And then it adds longevity payments to our afterschool ASAP program. This is a, a very popular program. We have a nice long wait list and we'd like to maintain and retain our talented folks who work in that program and who take care of our kids after school. And so this implements some modest longevity payments that are tiered for depending on years of service from five up. Speaker 1: Thank you Dr. Stash. Any questions or comments? Okay.
Alright, we'll vote the changes to the non-res schedule. All in favor? Anyone against? Anyone abstaining. So that's 7 0 0 for the vote. Thank you. Alright, so our last agenda item before we get to the superintendent evaluation is an item that I'm gonna ask Dr. Fugman to speak to. Speaker 12: Sure. So I had, I'm proposing a resolution pertaining to the MTA materials, the Massachusetts Teacher Association materials around the Israeli posting conflict. You have the draft Ms.
Corset and I were assu making the assumption or the decision to have a for initial discussion or brief discussion today and then vote on it next time just consistent with our policies and processes. But, so just to give you a bit of background of why I think this is a resolution worth discussing and voting on in the past couple of years, the Massachusetts Teachers Association has taken a couple of steps that have made many people in the Jewish community and beyond found that many Jewish people in the Jewish community beyond have found controversial, one-sided
and even harmful, particularly to Jews, Israelis, and others with deep connection to Israel. For example, in December, 2023, the MTA board decided to put a, a motion that among other things, asks President Biden to SU to stop the support to what he, what they referred to as Israel genocidal war. Not mentioning anything about Hamas or the massacre of over 1400 civilians, including school-aged children. In March of 2024, the MTA anti-Racism task force hosted a webinar on racism against Palestinians, which was filled
with historical inaccuracies and presented only once had the conflict. And then most recently the MTA published a list of educational resources in their members only section about the Israeli Palestinian conflict that are heavily biased towards the Palestinian perspective on the conflict with some resources questioning the very existence of the state of Israel and con containing rhetoric that many find inflammatory and offensive beyond this being just a matter of historical accuracy or about balance instruction. These kinds of one-sided materials are linked to broader
national increase in anti antisemitic incidences. So literally just yesterday there was a peaceful rally for release of Israeli hostages in Boulder, Colorado, very similar to the kinds of rallies that we have just down the street every Sunday here in Natick. And add that rally an individual through two Molotov cocktails into the crowd injuring eight people. And when he was arrested, he said that he was trying to kill all Zionist people. The term Zionism, by the way, is misrepresented by many MTA resources as quitting it with racism
and colonization rather than a national movement like many other movements across history. And just two weeks ago, two individuals were murdered in Washington DC they were gone down outside of Jewish museum. Also the shooter was, when he was apprehended, talked about doing it for the Palestinian cause. So this, all these issues are raising concerns with the Jewish community, including here in Natick. Many of members of the Jewish community are concerned. So just to be also transparent and and clear, this is part of a series of conversations
that multiple school committee members have had across multiple DI districts led by Dr. Jesse Heffler, who is a school committee member in Brookline. Brookline Marble had both passed similar res resolutions. Other districts, including Newton and Holliston are considering them as well. So we're not the only district considering such a resolution. But the reason why I'm proposing it is not because of what's happening outside of Natick, but just because of what's happening here in Natick with many families and students expressing concern, fear, and distress with the idea that some
of these inflammatory materials might be used here in Natick. Many community members have expressed their concern here, Natick and know certainly for to me directly to other local leaders. I know that EAN has received many concerns from people as well. I wanna also clarify what this resolution is and what it's not. I'm actually gonna start with what it's not. First of all, just relu resolution is not a con, it's not a condemnation of the MTA as an organization or the critical work that they do to support educators across Commonwealth. And as a result, improving and increasing the, the quality
of education in Massachusetts, they play an important role in our state in imp in in offering high quality education. And so this is not kind of nation of MTA, it's certainly an absolutely not in any way criticism of our local EAN union. Of course, in fact they have made statements even right here in school committee about their concerns around some of these steps. And I have made sure to communicate that directly to Theen to let them know this is not in any way a condemnation either of the local union nor of their, of the MTA. It's also not an attempt to resolve the Israeli Palestinian conflict.
If I could do that, I would, but this is not what this is gonna accomplish, nor is it even going to accomplish solving the complex political debate here in Massachusetts about the complexity of teaching the Israeli conflict. This is a resolution that's focused on natick our schools in our students. It is also not about switching from a larger pro-Palestinian resource list to a larger pro-Israeli list or to silence the Palestinian experience. It's about creating balance between the two sets of experiences and two sets of narratives. It is also not an attempt to ban any books or to dictate to our teachers how or what to teach.
Rather, this is a resolution that is meant to emphasize our values as a school committee and as a school district about how we believe that all students deserve to feel safe, respected, and support in our schools. It is an active it proactive measure to foster learning environment where every single individual feels welcome regardless of their identity in our schools. So this is what it's about. Again, I drafted the resolution, it is based on some other similar resolutions, but I made it na natick fi it to make sure that it's consistent with our values
and our existing policies. I also did include in the same document, the bottom, the entire list of resources in case anyone wants to look at it. And I'm happy to answer any questions if anyone has any. Thank you. Speaker 1: Thank you Dr. Fugman. I appreciate that quest. And again, we're not voting this today, so this is just an opportunity to discuss, ask questions, anybody from the committee. First we'll see Ms. Bruno, Speaker 11: Thank you Shai for bringing this forth.
And I just want to, I guess my question is, based on the constituents in Natick, you are proposing a resolution because there's concern about inflammatory materials in Natick public schools. And so the need is to make sure that our students feel safe and that we've communicated that wholly to the parents. And the request is that we state from a school committee perspective that our students will receive an unbiased education.
Speaker 12: Yeah, I mean there's three operative clauses in the resolution. So just very briefly, I'll say. So one is strong encouraging district staff to critically review and exercise caution when considering any materials. In fact, any materials anywhere, including those by MTA. So it's put, you know, it's, it's respecting the professionalism of our teachers, but just asking them to exercise caution. It is also to reaffirm our commitment to being an inclusive place of, of learning in this particular context. And also reaffirming both our own policies and US depart of education's office of civil rights statement around the importance of
creating inclusive spaces of learning, including for Jewish students. So those are the three operative classes. Speaker 11: Yeah. Can I continue? Go ahead Ms. Brune. I, I just wanna think about it. I, 'cause my question is, who do they, who do, who will it be most effective coming from for our Jewish constituents? Constituents and students and for friends and families, you know, that are not Jewish and that support all of our students, obviously. Do they need to hear that from the school committee or do they need to hear that from the teachers themselves in the classroom? Do they need to, you know, hear it from the superintendent?
And I, the reason I'm asking the question was when, when the book discussion came up previously a different discussion, totally different topic. We were, the school committee was quick to put that in the administration's hand because curriculum's not in our purview. So that's the only reason I doubt, I don't deny that a, that a statement should come and that all of our students should feel safe and we should a hundred percent reaffirm that we are about an unbiased education. We wouldn't be preparing students for the future of their life.
Right. If we weren't doing that. I'm just curious as to who that statement should come from. So that's my question, Speaker 12: Dr. Yeah, I'm happy to take it. I mean, I think the, you know, we are the school committee, so we are, we can only speak on our own behalf. I will appreciate, you know, the fact that EAN has made statements similar in tone. Again, I'm not, I don't wanna speak for on behalf of EAN we can always go back to previous statements that EAN has made. But the EAN has made very supportive statements as well. I think this is an opportunity for us as a committee to reiterate that again, the resolution in no way
gets into the details of curriculum selection. There's nothing in the resolution that speaks in any way about school committee getting involved in curriculum selection. It's really about reaffirming our, our policy, which comes from us and our general commitment to inclu inclusion. So I-I-I-I-I don't feel comfortable asking anyone else to make a statement nor, you know, and I wanna acknowledge that such statements have been made from others, not from the committee. Yeah. Ms. Lathers. Speaker 15: Yeah. I will say seeing that this was a first reading, I didn't do all my homework
for today in terms of like language. 'cause I wanted to hear kind of context. You did a nice job contextualizing it. I think I just had that same first reaction was we don't dictate curriculum. And so that was just the piece of that kind of, I had that same impression of, I I I would never want, I wanna make sure, it would never seem like we don't think that the teachers and administrators would make the right choice. And so that's where I just wanna do a careful read of it so that that's not the case. Speaker 12: And the one thing I'll add is this is not only a first read, but it's a draft.
So if people have suggestions for changes in language, that's, Speaker 15: And I just wanna make sure we're not setting a precedent where there's some sort of, you know, passive assertion of curriculum in this. Like, to your point, we didn't, you know, it's the balance of saying reaffirming our values without threading, you know, tipping over. 'cause what's to say, you know, you could have a totally less if you, you could have statements around your feelings, around other curriculums, even science of reading or other things.
And so I just always wanna make careful of precedent. 'cause I think making a statement of support is hugely important. We just wanna make sure it's the right one. Speaker 1: And I think it behooves us to review the source materials too. I'll, you know, the, the actual materials that are in question here, because I will say that, you know, we're just discussing this now, but when those materials first came out and I looked at them, I'm like, why are they making fake propaganda? There's real propaganda you could refer to. Like there's actual source documents that you could look to, to get the same information.
You don't need to recreate some of these things. Right. It felt like it, it crossed the barrier between, or crossed the line between, you know, identifying, you know, truth and, and how language is used and then creating documents that didn't need to be created. So I, I felt like that coming from an educational institution was very concerning for me. So that's where my, my support of this is, is that I think that there's, you know, we should be teaching kids the truth using source materials and providing all sides of, you know, situations.
Which I think we do. And I, I, I hope that we would see this as affirming what our district's values are and not asking, making a new ask of anyone. It's my thought, Speaker 15: The only thing I differ from there is I don't have any faith in my ability to do a professional, like I'm an engineer, like in the nuances and I, I'm reasonably well educated, but I would not consider myself the expert to be able to, you know, fully have a statement or have the time to do the, you know, I would feel before I could say that I've done any kind of evaluation of actual materials like I, I would
to spend weeks on it. And so just the fact, and I don't think that's our purview to do it. So I just wanna Speaker 1: No, I agree with you. And I, I do think we can look back 'cause we did have a statement from Mr. Wood, I mean, when this first came out right? He did make a statement about the actual quality of the materials themselves. So we could, if you wanted to review that, you could Oh, that'd be great. I can hear it from an educator. Yeah. Yeah, we could, I can exactly what it was. I can find the minutes where that was. Yeah, that'd be great. That'd be super helpful. Yeah. Ms. Brunell, Speaker 11: So I I one question to, I spoke
to a couple people about this over the last couple days, all who were in support of it, but they, the concern was something that I think you shared today, shy, the concern about inflammatory materials potentially seeping into the curriculum. Is there a concern that they're already in the curriculum? Have we have like, has, have we had constituents come to us and say my child was in a class that was not present. It wasn't unbiased, Speaker 12: Struggling to answer that question. 'cause I, there was one case of one person coming to me Yeah.
And I actually did agree that was inflammatory. Speaker 11: Okay. No, that's interesting. Yeah. I, Speaker 12: 'cause I am trying to be objective. I'm not Speaker 11: Trying to put you on the spot there. What I'm saying is Speaker 12: Like, but I think yeah, but I think that actually would be a better question for the administrators. Yeah. 'cause I'm assuming parents would come to the principals first if they were concerned. So I don't know if that has happened. But th this doesn't imply that though. Okay. The resolution does not imply that it's already happening. And I don't know if that's, Speaker 3: I mean, I'd be reckless to answer that without talking to the schools and the school leaders. I feel like I'd be going from one person's knowledge. So I'm gonna, I'm gonna say that I'm not aware
of any related to this topic. Speaker 11: And could I just provide some context? One person I spoke to, a school committee member in a different city, they decided not to go move forward with this resolution because the superintendent re just reaffirm the policy that they have. So I think it does the same thing, right? I mean, it doesn't do the same thing because people need to be heard. So I, I wanna acknowledge that. But their, their decision in a different district was, this isn't happening. We have this policy, you know, this. We will continue to monitor it. Speaker 3: Okay. I wanna name that some of the context here is
that these materials are coming from a big union. And so that's part of the context here, there, you know, educator created materials. Like I appreciate you're saying this isn't sourcing up out of Natick is what I'm hearing you say. I cannot confirm that this is sourcing up out of Natick. I think it's worth asking the principals and I will, and the curriculum leaders, but I wanna mention like, I think I'm taking like the very first piece discusses where these materials are coming from, which I think is very important context. Speaker 12: And I'll also add, neither does this resolution
nor I personally think that nor educator should ever use the MTA entire list. There's a lot of resources there. Some of them I actually would highly recommend, not that I'm in the position to highly recommend anything 'cause I'm a school community member, not a teacher. But, so this is not about saying don't use the MTA list. It's about it. It literally says, what it actually says is to exercise, encourage district staff to critically review and exercise caution when considering externally developed resources, including those disseminated by MTA. So it's not even saying only MTA, so it,
it's not even saying don't use the MTA list. It's literally just please exercise. Caution. Speaker 3: Can I mention that that piece I feel like should come from me Like that is if I'm the instructional leader of the district, which I am, that is absolutely a message I, I send and do send and our principals send every day. I just wanna mention that like, I, I actually think our educators use, use incredible care with reviewing materials and being very intentional about inclusivity. Speaker 1: Okay. Any other questions or comments from the committee before we, or from anybody before we move to the public?
Okay. We have a member of the public who wishes to speak. Please approach the podium. Speaker 5: I'm Donna Mackenzie. First, I wanna thank Shai for doing this. I, I think we do have a problem with antisemitism and I think in Natick we have a Jewish community that's incredibly frightened and fearful, and I understand that. But I also read these materials and I was actually very moved by the rabbi who wrote the conclusion to this, who talks about the mezuzah and how when you put it on a doorway, it's put on a slant to hold two opposing viewpoints. Because I find that we are so black
and white about so many things and we can't hold opposing viewpoints. And that's really a problem. And when I think about this too, I think about, you know, palace, and this is hard for me. 55,000 people dead from Gaza, right? And I know it's hard for my Jewish friends too. I mean, reading the other day of the Palestinian woman who lost nine of her 10 children in an, in a bombing strike, it's, it's not okay. And I'm a pacifist and I, I admit that,
but there are things that I would die for and I would die for Jews who are being treated in unfair ways. But I mean, I, I think we have a responsibility to Muslim children too. And I think some members of the Muslim community, they're too afraid to even come and participate in this discussion. I mean, they're, they're, they're like the people without money who can't participate in the field trip discussions. And I think you have to make room, I mean like the mezuzah, you know, on a slant to hold different viewpoints. And I, yes, I think
that there should be a strong statement from this committee about anti sem antisemitism and a, a recommitment to that. But, and I may be wrong, I wonder if it has to be tied to the MTA document. I mean, I, I wonder if the superintendent could say something about that, or, I mean, I, I just didn't, I don't know. I I wasn't as angered by those sources or whatever. And, and I, I, I think it's well nuanced and I think we have to do something
because there are members of our community who do not feel safe, especially the Jewish community. And I've thought that for a long time, like, when are we gonna say something? When are we gonna do something? And we didn't under the previous acting superintendent. And, but I also wanna say like that Susan, on a slant, we have people in our Muslim community who are, do not feel safe either. And I mean, everybody loves their children, right? And I do children's ethics and I, I think that sometimes if we just focus on the
wellbeing of children, that that will take us, that will take us to good places. Thanks. Thank you Dr. Fugman. Speaker 12: Yeah, I'd like to just comment on that because I, I, I think, I wanna make sure that this resolution is not misunderstood. So I personally am Jewish and I'm actually a dual citizen, citizen of Israel and the us but I'm not writing this resolution because I think, you know, this is kinda what I, I tried to emphasize in my presentation.
This is not about taking, switching over to a very pro-Israel approach. This is not about denying the Palestinian experience. This is not about not giving Muslim students a voice. This is about balance. It's about both. It's about hearing the different perspectives. It is about creating a, helping our students develop critical thinking and complex thinking of a very complex conflict. So nothing in this resolution implies that somehow this is gonna take anything away from anyone
who feels a strong connection to, to the Palestinian experience. But just to give you a few examples on the list, and first of all, there's, there's two issues. One is it's a very biased list. So for example, there's a section on visuals and arts. There's two Palestinian sources, zero sources about any part of the Israeli, the, or the Jewish experience. Documentaries and film section has 17 movies listed. One about the music festival in which Israeli youth were murdered. And then 13, sorry, the rest are all about the Palestinian experience. So like one to 16, some of the books, articles, et cetera.
There's just a very, the number is just very biased. And then some of the specific materials are just inflammatory. You know, when you refer to, you know, Jews who long for Israel as a, as a sin, as a crime, you know, you're basically condemning a lot of people here in our community. So this is just, and I think Ms. Brune, you made a, a statement that I, that point that I think is a good point, which is part of this is not, maybe it's less about the teachers and more about the families, reassuring families that this is something that the school committee cares about. That when they see these inflammatory materials on the MTA
list, that they know that we are as a committee, that we are hearing them and hearing their concerns, seeing their concern. But in no way is this meant to be a switch over from one extreme to the other extreme, from one side to the other side. It is about making sure that we have that complexity. Yeah. Speaker 1: Thank you Dr. Fugman. Okay, so we're just gonna take one, one more question and then I think we're going to put a pause on this and we'll continue in in two weeks. Please approach the podium. Speaker 6: So I think that, Speaker 1: Could you just restate your name? Sorry. Speaker 6: Thank you. My name is Sohan. I'm resident Nader.
So my personal belief is that I disagree with the conflation of the Jewish identity and its relationship to Israel and Zionism. Israel is Israel, Jewish people are Jewish people, there can be overlap. However, majority of Zionists are actually Christian and the majority of Zionists actually received funding from multi-billion dollar corporations and organizations. The reason these organizations are backed by oil money in order to overtake land in the Middle East, we all remember the Iraq War.
Actually, I don't, I was a little too young for that, but the, there was a fabrication of details with regards to what was happening in the Middle East and the fact that there was a weapons of mass destruction. We all look back upon that and we know that we fabricated in order to commit atrocities in that area. There are atrocities that have been fabricated in regards to why we should occupy and why we should continue to send money to Israel. And I personally think that there will be a time in which we will all have regretted this. However, a a to get to the point of the principle of
why the discussion here today, I don't necessarily think that it is useful to provide the opinions of German over the, as equable to the opinions of the Jewish people in the Warsaw ghetto. I don't think that it's quite important to provide the opinions of a white South African when we're talking about the apartheid in South Africa. I do not think the issue is that complex. I think that it is given complexity intentionally fabricated in order to make it about both sides. I do think that the actual state of Israel makes it unsafe
for Jewish people by conflating their barbaric actions with the identity of Jewish people. Jewish people are not bad, inherently Jewish people are just people. Antisemitism is horrible. The i the politics that go against the idea of Israel and the idea of Zionism is against the idea of a colonial ethnostate that exists within the Middle East in order, as in as an apartheid state, as an occupation of the Palestinian people. And my thought, thank you. Speaker 1: Thank you. So, and and just to, just to reflect,
so we just had a discussion about a proposed resolution that is really about review and care taken in reviewing educational materials. And that is the scope of this resolution. So we'll revisit it in two weeks. So thank you. And let's just take a short, like three minute recess before we continue the rest of the meeting. So we'll be back in three minutes. Alright, we're back from our recess. So the last item on our agenda today is to conduct the superintendent evaluation. So we'll turn first to, I'll just give a little overview of what we're gonna do here.
So everyone on the committee should have access to the draft evaluation document that we can look at it together. And our MS McGrath is also going to, oh, but it's up on Novus, so, or Pegasus, we don't have Novus anymore. So the public can follow along and see what we're talking about. So Dr. SP is just gonna give us a little introduction to the evaluation materials and then we'll go through the document and I will collect any comments from the committees and we will assign rankings to the different topics.
And then at the end of the meeting I will go away, compile the document and we'll bring it back in two weeks for review and voting. Does that sound like a plan? Okay. Turn it over to Dr. Stash. Speaker 3: Hi. So before you begin your discussion, I wanted to briefly just introduce the self-evaluation materials that I submitted for review. They're also posted to the agenda tonight in case the public wants to take a look. But that was sent on May 26th. And the purpose and context of that was, this is a really foundational year. It's my first year in the district and my focus was very much on building trust,
listening deeply, and setting a clear direction for our next chapter. The materials reflect progress toward those agreed upon goals and indicators as well as evidence of alignment to the superintendent rubric. The structure of the submission is a memo, 14 page memo. It has an executive summary that outlines the major accomplishments and challenges it has goal by goal reflection. So I have three goals with supporting evidence as well as going through the standards. Standard based analysis aligned to the Massachusetts rubric for superintendents. I've also included a couple pages of supporting documents
that are all accessible to people. They're organized by goal and indicator and I'm happy to review and answer any questions on those materials if you have them. Key themes that are worth noting. We engaged more than 3000 stakeholders and surfaced a shared understanding of where we are and where we need to go, which is a very standard practice for an incoming superintendent. We maintained instructional momentum. In fact, I'd say we had major accomplishments in that area and increased coherence across school improvement plans, evaluation and coaching. We stabilized finances and with the help of the school committee
and so many advocates of the schools, we passed together with the town of $7 million override while aligning investments to district priorities. And we laid the groundwork for a stronger, more equitable system of support for students, staff, and families. I'm really excited about what we started and grateful for the partnership that's made it possible. And I look forward to hearing your reflections and feedback and continuing to strengthen our work together. Speaker 1: Thank you Dr. Stash. Okay, so the first section that we'll look at is the performance goals section. I don't think that has a number. Superintendent's
performance goals, which is page, sorry, I can't actually see page numbers. Do you see that? If you can scroll down a little bit, Linda. Yeah. Is that the, A little bit further? Yeah, little yeah, right there. Perfect. Thank you. Superintendent performance goals. Okay, so I thought we could look at each goal in individual lee, each goal one by one and we can talk about any questions we have or any reflections we have on the evidence
and then give a ranking. Does that sound good or did we, last time, did we go through the individual focus indicators first or after? I don't remember what was easier last time. I don't think it matters. Okay. Alright, so we can, let's start there. So let's start with the professional practice goal. Anybody wanna lead us off on reflections there? I can, and you should have the document too if you wanna look at it. Everyone should be able to take a, take a look. So we can go around the room if we want or we could just raise hands.
Okay. We'll do raising hands. Yep. Ms. Brunell. Speaker 11: So the professional practice goal to complete the new superintendent instruction or induction program, I just pulled out a quote from Dr. SP's memo. I'm quoting. I attended an, I attended all 11 full day sessions, offered exceeding the eight session requirement and participated in 25 coaching sessions with my assigned mentor averaging more than two per month. Her goal was to go to one per month and in addition, she created her own AI rubric to
understand or to evaluate her progress in the superintendent program because the superintendent program does not have its own evaluation system. And so doctors created her own. So in my mind she has exceeded this goal. Speaker 1: Okay. Speaker 11: Is that what you want us to say? Speaker 1: Sure. Okay. Dr. Folkman. Speaker 12: Yeah. Similarly, I'll be very honest and say, when I first was thinking about the goal, the overall goal is to participate in this induction program. I was thinking, well she either did it and that meets expectation or she didn't do it.
So it's not, you know, it's either met or it's not met. But then when I read what she actually did as part of the program and especially the part about the, you know, that is what exceeding expectation is about. You know, when you not only are invited to participate a program, but then you go and you create your, you use AI to create your own rubric in order to, to actually develop your own reflections on the, on the NEP criteria. That's more than meeting. That's certainly exceeding. Speaker 1: Okay. Thank you Ms. Lathers. I agree with that. Okay. It's a lot of work. Okay. Any other discussion of this topic? Do we want to go then let's go down to,
sorry, did we do this to you? This McGrath? So I think it's, I just wanna look at the continuous learning indicator, which is under the professional practice goal. Speaker 11: Can I stop you there? Yes. We didn't choose continuous learning as an indicator. So we chose specific, we, we chose six standards and so we don't have to evaluate every standard. Speaker 16: No, but continuous learning goal three. Speaker 1: So that was one of Speaker 12: Standards. It wasn't, it's one of the three goals that, yeah, not, not the, it's Speaker 11: Not one of the standards below though. Speaker 15: It was one of the standards at the top, but it was not one, you did not have the su the supporting documentation around it. Yeah, we
Speaker 3: Didn't choose it. Can I weigh in? Yeah, it's actually just the one that the goal aligns to. Okay. So it's more of a, I read it more as a reference point. It wasn't the indicators that the committee said we're gonna evaluate these indicators. Those are the ones that are in the section three I think of the memo. But this is just for alignment. So we could set any goal and if it's not associated with the rubric, that might be silly. So this is just to say like continuous improvement is the one, this is actually out of the NSIP program where they would say this, this goal relates to continuous improvement of practice. Does that make sense?
Speaker 15: I had the same confusion because in the draft superintendent goals final, I didn't see anywhere where the four related to three were listed differently. Speaker 3: Where I had to find those was was actually to have, Linda went back and looked at which ones we selected and it was in the minutes from sometime, I think it was September 24th in those Florida. It was the ones that are in the bottom of the memo. But this is more like what the goals refer to in the rubric. Just to ensure, just to ensure the goals aligned to the rubric. But they weren't ones that we voted would be independently evaluated. Speaker 15: Your memo had evaluation, but not continuous learning. But when I asked ai, AI told me as well
that the continuous learning was justified in the rest of the material. So I was like, okay, Speaker 1: You can't argue it. Chad, should we, with ai you cannot, Speaker 11: I'm just, I'm just trying to shorten our process tonight and not have to go through every indicator. Speaker 15: Okay. Speaker 1: So then let's just go through each goal and then we'll go through the indicators. Just the ones that we are gonna evaluate. Okay. Alright. So would somebody like to propose a rating for this goal? It sound, I thought I heard exceeded expectations exceed. Okay. I think we just need like a thumbs up. Everyone agree? Okay. So we'll put that as exceeded.
Alright, the second is the student learning goal. Any thoughts or reflections on that one? Ms. Lathers Speaker 15: Super impressed with the all when I went through all of the, you know, the individual items with the templates, the focus, it's been on new ways of evaluating. I know that was one of the items that seem very uniformly, everyone wanted evaluations to be stronger and, and so the only question I have is it feels like some of the results are still kind of coming in.
Like a lot of it was established to get, to get the right things done and, and I think for the right time, I think some of the templates that send your feedback by the end of May, it's due by the end of June. So I feel like all of the early work were also exceeding, but it'd be hard to press to put exceeded. 'cause we haven't seen, like this is one area where I don't think we've seen all the results yet. But I don't know how other people thought. Definitely, definitely met. And this is, this is like judging between whether it's a, in my mind, a meets are exceeded because in this particular area, some of the, it feels like
unless I miss some stuff, it feels like some of the results of all the hard work is kind of a little bit forthcoming. Ms. Collins? Speaker 10: I agree. Are we on? You need to put your, yeah, now I'm on, didn't hear myself. I agree. And the debate that I got into with myself was, okay, we set the goals next time, maybe we better be better about not creating them goals with dates that are passed when we're going to do the evaluation. So the, I thought that the templates were very helpful in that situation because although I don't know, you know,
and if I look at who's been evaluated, only two people have been evaluated. One of those was today for the, for the summatives. But the formatives were all done. Speaker 3: Can I respond? Desi doesn't require that until June 30th. I Speaker 10: I get that. Okay. Speaker 3: Just wanted to clarify people Speaker 10: Coming out. But I think that, you know, we need to think about our timing and I'm hard pressed to ding Dr. Stash for following the law. Speaker 3: For what it's worth. I can tell you I've never ever, not, this is a double negative, finish my evaluations,
but I get the timing. To me, I think that the, I will say I've not seen a formative for principals done here before. So that is very new. And I think it set up for good relationships, good meetings around evaluation. I'd also ask the committee to consider the meetings I held with people that was coaching throughout the year, which I think is far more than most superintendents ever do. Certainly in their first year. So we're, if we focus only on a summative report that honestly Desi requires and done does reports on me for whether it's a binary,
you finished them all or you didn't. I feel like I'm a process over like that checkbox at the end. So wherever you land is fine, but I, I would advocate that this, this to me was pretty strong. Speaker 10: I, I agree. And that's what I'm saying, the outcomes, we don't have anything documented, but the formatives have been done, which sets everything up for a summative. 'cause if you don't do a good formative, you can never do a good summative. You're just making stuff up later on. Unfortunately they've lived that life. But the number of meetings, the number of visits to schools,
the monitoring, the frequency of the principal visits to schools, all of those things say that, you know, the goal here is, has, has been exceeded in my mind. Although some of the t's may not have been crossed. I believe that the process has gone, been gone through, even if the outcome isn't in my little grubby hands. Speaker 15: Okay. I was gonna respond. I yeah, I could go either way on it. That's what I was trying to thinking about. 'cause I know part of it is just this, this sense of wanting to know, I guess it's when it, there's there's this, it was rolled out really strongly
and it feels like it was rolled out really strongly. I just don't have a sense of like how the numbers are there. But it's almost like the reflection that happens at the end of this, like how do the teachers and and administrators feel about the process and how it's been stronger. And that's just be, which you are not in a position. Like that's not something you can give us right now. Like that's part of what some of these are in multi-year fashion. Like how you begin to know how successful, I mean you've had a ton of processes in place and I could absolutely get on board with and exceeded in this too, just because of the strength of the numbers and meetings
and the rigor and the rigor and the templates. And it sounds like, it sounds like what we're hearing is that the teachers, administrators are appreciating this, this additional level of kind of evaluation. Speaker 10: Okay, Speaker 15: Thank you Ms. Azar, Mr. Brand. Speaker 9: So I would be in favor of an exceeds exceeded here based, and I, I agree. It's, it's, these are challenging, particularly in our first year because we sort of set like a year as a complete thing. However we're doing the evaluation
before the year is complete. And so we have to base it on the evidence that we have from the beginning to right now. And for me, and I was reading the, I have the DESI rubric that has like, has four different things but has like the definition of exceeds for them has met is great. And that's the other thing that I think for people who are tuning in for the first time to the evaluation met has this like connotation that it's like not great, but it is. But the big difference between met and exceeds according
to the DESI rubric is models this process through the superintendent's own evaluation process and goals. So I would say as a piece of evidence for me is the memo itself, which I thought was like a really well written, really well organized, put together self-evaluation and you know, we've seen a variety of different self-evaluations over the years. That to me is exactly what the desi, like. The one difference between met and exceeds is that evaluation, the self-evaluation, the way I interpret it. So that's why I'm an exceed for that.
For this, not that this. Speaker 1: Okay. Dr. Fugman and then Ms. Collins. Speaker 12: So I promise not to comment on each one 'cause we'll be here all night. But, but in reading this particular goal, especially as it's written in the description, I believe we had the beginning of the year. Like this is what we're evaluating Dr. Sp on. In many ways I think of this goal as probably being the most important goal of the, of the eval of the process because it's the one that focuses directly on student learning, which is kind of what all of this revolves under. And as I was going through all of, you know,
the entire memo from Dr. Sp, I kind of picked out what specifically resonated with me. And in this specific goal, the emphasis that Dr. Pash has brought on coaching is so important because in a way I always think about, you know, learning happens in that interaction between the student and, and the teacher and between students and students. But, you know, one of the important roles therefore of the principals is to coach teachers. And therefore, you know, so then you move up the superintendents to coach principals. And that's something that Dr. SP has, has made a priority and has done really well and
therefore has modeled and the evaluation cycle that she's introducing. So there's really an emphasis on increasing the quality of, of instruction across a district that I think Dr. Stash brought. That is, you know, so critical. So I, I'm also succeed. Speaker 1: Okay. Thank you. I think Ms. Collins was next. Yep. But I'm gonna save it for the next goal. I think it fits more. Okay. Alright. In this next goal, Ms. Brunell, Speaker 11: I, yeah, this process is also helpful.
'cause I will say initially I wasn't, I was thinking I was thinking of this in a different way, but it was helpful, Matt, to hear what you just said and, and it what HAI just said about coaching, the two, the things that I would, I agree that this is the mo one of the most important goals and what you did with a school improvement plans this year was nothing short of artful. So thank you for taking that time and seeing, we've talked about ensuring that our students are seen and you made that possible through data. It's amazing. So that
was just, I just remember like thinking, like being so excited in the fall when I saw those school improvement plans thinking like, oh my God, we're really gonna do this right now. And I I, I just have like so much hope right now. And I tell, I said to Mr. Patel, I was like, I would be so happy to have a preschooler entering this Natick public school system right now. I'm not gonna have a preschooler just so everyone knows, but I would be happy to have one. Don't start over. So that the school improvement plans and then also just your relentless focus on tier one instruction. It, it shows that you were a teacher
and it that how much you believe in our teachers and how tier one is everything. So I say exceed. Speaker 8: Okay. Speaker 17: For the record, I am very happy to have a preschooler start in the Speaker 1: As you should be, Mr. Patel, as you should be. So, yeah. Okay. Any more discussion before we pick a rating? Would anyone like to propose a rating? Speaker 10: I would propose exceed. Speaker 1: Okay. Can we have a thumbs up to see where we're with that? Okay, great. Okay. Okay. And moving on to district goal, effective entry and direction setting discussion on this goal,
Ms. Brune? Speaker 11: Well, I, one thing I just wanna say is this rubric and this session this year will, is will be different than next year I think because in the dis the district goals sometimes are ver much more like we saw in the school improvement plans and we acknowledged that in August. Like, you know, so I think that, I just wanted to say that here in this meeting that I found it hard to do this piece of the evaluation because they weren't like the typical district goals that we, but we knew that in August, right? You were a new superintendent.
We were, we were not gonna recycle the district goals that we've had in the past. And so that's why this one looks a little different. Speaker 1: Okay, Ms. Collins? Speaker 8: Yeah, I, this is where I Speaker 1: Get a little microphone. Ms. Collins, thank you. Speaker 10: Thank you. This is where I get a little conflicted. I'm not particularly happy that we won't be seeing the strategic piece until next meeting. However, that said the number of people you met with on the entry plan, the number of
findings that you came out with, which were really meaty findings, I guess I'm not happy that there were meaty findings, but I'm happy that you found things to focus on the shepherding the budget through in front of this committee in front of the select board, in front of the finance committee in front of the public, in front of town meeting. Very impressive. Extremely impressive. And so I guess I can put my pride of place
aside for not seeing the district piece until next meeting. Because the other things that you have done, oh, one that I forgot, I, Kristen, please tell me if I'm talking outta school here, but it will be like a little too late, the number of unit A and unit B members that took a moment after negotiations was finished to tell me how impressed they were with both what you focused on and what you said unprecedented in my experience.
So I hope that's not speaking well. Over half of the people on the union side in that room said gushed about the process. Yes, it takes time, interest based always takes more time. But the, the thoughtfulness and the acknowledgement and some guidance, that's all we could do was the acknowledgement. But it was really appreciated. And so I just wanna be sure you know that I didn't know. Thank you. No, I've Speaker 8: Held it. Speaker 1: Dr. Fon. Speaker 8: So all that.
Speaker 12: Thank you. I've only done this for six years. How am I supposed to know? Just add one specific thing again, just to call out. 'cause I, I agree with everything that was said, but I'm looking at the description and it says by district will, by the spring, the district will have broad agreement from key stakeholder group about the district's most critical needs. And if I were to summarize the success in that with one word, that'd be override. Obviously we, many people worked really hard to get the override passed, but the fact that we got so many people in this town to give, put in us the trust to pay more taxes
in order to support the schools, one wouldn't do that unless they trusted the leader and the, and felt that it was absolutely needed and that there was agreement around critical needs so that the override alone proves that you exceeded that springtime milestone. Speaker 1: Yeah, that's an excellent point. Dr. Fma. Yes, Mr. Brant. Speaker 9: I guess I would say on this, this one is the easiest exceeds for me. I, and perhaps I'm supposed to be a bit more objective about all of these,
but on this one I'm having a hard time not thinking about being a first time superintendent in the first year and establishing a new culture and doing union negotiations and having a really complex budget and override situation and still progressing all of the things that we would've expected to be progress and not just like doing it in an average way. And so for me, you know, maybe I'm not supposed to say like, well, it's a first year and so there's like, we're not grading on a curve here. I think if, if you took, look, I guess the way I would sum
that up is if you took a totally, if you took a person who had no context about anything that was going on in native public schools and you showed them this evidence and then you said, oh, and by the way, this is the first year, they would be shocked. I think they would be shocked. And so for me, Speaker 15: I, Speaker 9: That is an, this one's a no-brainer. Speaker 1: Thank you Mr. Brand. I Speaker 15: Agree with that. And I think it just also, I think it's important to acknowledge and add on to the fact that there, it would be very easy to come in and just sort of try to get the lay of the land, but very hard decisions are made at the beginning of the year to say we can't focus on all these things
and, you know, trust the people. You talk to former relations very quickly and say, we're gonna pull back on some of these initiatives and we're gonna focus on these five things. Like, like that was, you know, right, right from the beginning saying we have to do all this, you know, a full analysis. But we are going to identify, you know, with, with a lot of things that have been happening, we're not gonna be able to, you know, start a full curriculum selection for literacy, but we'll do a literacy audit. So I feel like from the very beginning, there were hard conversations that were made in your retreats, working with the teachers, work at the administrators, say, these are the things we're gonna focus on this year,
bring those back here, getting agreement from us so that in the midst of doing all this entry planning, there was actual like strong work being done to very specific goals at the same time. So, Speaker 1: Yep. Anybody else? Yeah, and I, I just wanna add there that I just think that like often when I meet with Dr. Bash, she'll be, you know, really excited and really warm and she'll be like, we're landing planes here, we're landing planes and it's the, we, you know, not only are we landing planes,
but she has somehow lifted up all of the administration and all of the districts so that we're landing planes together. And I think that that is just exactly what we needed here in Natick. And I am just so excited that this is happening. And I agree with everything that everyone said before. Certainly better than Newark. Yes, we're doing a better job lending Speaker 9: Airplane people as an airport team. I Speaker 1: Mean low bar Dr. Fon, low bar Mr. Brand. Speaker 9: I just had one thing that I think is probably obvious, but for people, I think Dr. Sp will be the first to, in the, in the we is what triggered this for me. Obviously there's a great team
and a lot of hard work from a lot of people. So I don't want anybody to confuse, like Dr. Sp I, I think is great. She did not do all the override work by herself or any of this work by herself. And that's like the, to the, to the we. And I think that's a really important part. So I just don't want anybody listening, sitting in the room to think that we think it was, I think that it was only one person. It's just to acknowledge this is the superintendent evaluation part, not the other people's evaluation part. Speaker 11: Thank God Speaker 9: We're gonna do all of them Speaker 11: Tonight. Speaker 1: Tonight. Speaker 11: So
Speaker 1: Yeah. Any last thoughts before? Speaker 15: Oh yes, we, one sentence to add on to that in that same vein is that, but what's also very impressive is that there's like a lot of demonstrated trust in the team and trusting the expertise of the members of the team and strong ability to delegate to the team. And I think that's really reflective in the amount of work that's getting done. Speaker 18: Okay, Speaker 1: Thank you. Okay. I think I'm, I'm hearing that we might be willing to entertain and exceed it. Little show of thumbs. Okay, great. Super. This is going well. Okay, so it sounds like when we go down
to the standards now, I put in too many, right? So we should just be looking at some of them. Yeah. So Speaker 11: If under instructional leadership we would be doing one A and one B. Okay. So evaluation and data informed decision making. Okay. Is this for a, for the standards, so, oh, you know, I may, I I may have, I may have the number wrong. So that 'cause my A Speaker 1: It's 1D, right? Yeah, Speaker 9: D and one Speaker 11: E It's D, yeah, Speaker 1: Sorry, D and one EI Speaker 11: Created my own outline. Okay. Outline. I have those. Go for it. How convenient.
One A and one B. Okay. Speaker 9: First two. Speaker 1: Okay, so, Speaker 11: But it's evaluation and data informed decision making. Yeah. So Speaker 1: If you could scroll down just a little bit, miss the graph so we can see 1D and one E. Yeah. The top of that next page Speaker 11: Right there. Speaker 1: Yes. Okay. Perfect. Okay. So we, and here in this section we have choices of, what did these stand for again? Speaker 9: They stand for unsatisfactory. Speaker 1: Exemplary. Unsatisfactory. Needs improvement. Needs improvement. Proficient, exemplary. Thank you. Left to right, left to right, yes.
Exemplary, unsatisfactory needs improvement, proficient or exemplary. Okay. So we'll start with standard 1D evaluation. Any thoughts? Do we have a proposal for a ranking? Mr Brand? Speaker 9: I I this, I used this rubric before for the goal and so I was an exemplar. I have such a hard time saying that word and the, the the far right one, the exemplary one. I'm not exemplary at saying that word. So I, I would stick with that for here for all the reasons that we talked about before. Speaker 1: Okay, Ms. Brunell. And then I think Ms. Collins, Speaker 11: I agree. I noted that when Dr.
Stash came in, she created a year long professional development for evaluators that, that was a smart plan right from the beginning, setting goals aligned to district priorities and sharing the progress transparently, kind of what Kate was saying about those five, you know, coming in and saying, we can't do everything. We're gonna do these five things. We're gonna set goals to them, we're gonna align them across the district. And then several times our meetings that we, that those slides came back, which was helpful to me to help remember things. I'm also the mid-year evaluation of the principles. I think that's where you use TeachPoint is that, yeah.
So that just that you have created that system and that that didn't exist before you were here. That will forever change Natick. Just that the fact that principals are getting a mid-year evaluation that is documented and is a useful tool for them, I think is key. Yeah. So I, I think exemplary. Speaker 1: Okay. Did I see your hand Ms. Collins? Speaker 10: Yeah, I, I was also gonna say exemplary. I'm always believed that if you don't tell me what I'm doing wrong, I have to believe that I'm doing it right.
And the midyears important opportunity for people to know that it's not quite working with time to fix it as opposed to getting to the end and you're like, well if you told me that six months ago, I could have done something about it. So I think laying it out in the beginning, measuring it once, measuring it twice I think is important. Speaker 1: Okay, thank you Ms. Lathers. Speaker 15: And as, I mean I think I'm being repetitive to Matt at this point, but when I looked at the actual rubric, the only two language differences between proficient and exemplary, one was sharing best practice
and success with the district community. And I think there's been a lot of really proactive communication and the other was models as process through the superintendent's own evaluation process and Speaker 1: Goals. Speaker 15: So I would agree Speaker 1: Exemplary. Okay. So it seems like we've had four people speak and we've had four exemplaries. Is that where we're landing on this one? Thumbs. Okay, great. Alright, so one E data informed decision making. We've Speaker 10: Never had so much data, Speaker 1: Dr.
Speaker 12: Fon, I can go first. So since I skipped the last one. So again, I, I tried to pick a specific example of like what about data informed decision making Dr. SP did? Well I think data is one of those terms that we keep throwing around along with equity and we don't really, really know what we mean by data or what do we mean by or utilizing data. You know, collecting data is one thing, using data for decision making is a very, another is is another thing. And one of the things that Dr.
SP did in terms of elevating the entire, her entire team is coaching around not just, you know, looking at data people can do, but actually using data, including using a lot of the data that DESI makes available. There's a very, some, some sophisticated data tools now out there that DESI provides for the contract negotiations that, what's that company called? The, A rcx arc, ed arx ed, to really use data in a, we very,
in a very thoughtful way in decision making. And again, as the rubric ex explains the difference in proficiency and exceptional as proficiency, you do it really well. Exceptional, you enable other people to do it well. And so that's why I think I would give her an exceptional, because again, it's the coaching around data, the use of data and decision making that was especially impressive and important. Speaker 1: Thank you Ms. Brunell, Speaker 11: That just the, again, back in August she had an emphasis on data
literacy for the whole staff. It's something that I, I hope our school committee does with issa, but you modeled that for the staff in August, so I thought that was excellent. I noted, I've said it before, the the, your making your own rubric for nsip is an example of your data informed decision making. The school improvement plans, as I've mentioned also the unit B restructuring of the contract. That was all because you had taken the time to dig in and then the amount of stakeholder data that you interpreted. I know you use tools to do that, but like that's, that's genius level
to take 3000 level 3000 interviews and touch points and be able to distill them down into a coherent entry plan that is actually practical is, yeah, is definitely exemplary in my mind. Speaker 18: Okay. Speaker 1: Alright. I, I'm seeing a pitch for exemplary. Anyone in, I see a lot of thumbs up. Speaker 11: Can I say one more thing? Speaker 1: Yeah, sure. Go Speaker 11: Ahead. Just in her memo. Sorry doctors. Okay. Sorry. Alright, fine. In your own memo though, I thought it was a very humble way
of describing what you did. You said this year marked a shift in how data is used across the district. It is now central to planning, evaluation, communication, decision making and will continue to guide our work. I would say you actually initiated the use of data in a real way in this district. So I think you were very humble in your memo. Speaker 8: Okay. Speaker 1: Okay. Alright, let me just scroll down. So, and then for this one we need to give an overall rating for the standards.
So we had two instructional standards that we rated both exemplary. I'm assuming we are wanting to give exemplary for the overall rating as well. Oh, Ms. Collins. Speaker 10: Oh no, I was getting ready for the next one. Okay, sorry. Alright. Speaker 8: To be exceptional average, yeah, Speaker 1: Yeah, just double checking, you know, Speaker 8: I'm just kidding. Speaker 1: I can do math. We weren't making fun Speaker 8: Of you. We were just big silly math. Speaker 1: That's okay. Okay, so moving on to standard two. Management and operations. The one that we are evaluating is fiscal systems.
Speaker 8: Okay. Speaker 1: And Ms. Collins, Speaker 10: That's the one I was getting ready for. Speaker 1: Okay. Speaker 10: I'll go with exemplary only because there's not one above it. You're working relationship with Mr. Gillis has been amazing to watch a new budget book, creation of two budgets, explanations for how you're thinking, what you're thinking, willingness to work with us where we had some disagreements,
like field trips, you know, the ability to get answers in negotiations without going well, we will come back to that four weeks from now because that's how long it takes to get the answer that didn't happen. And, and so I hope some of this flows over to Mr. Gillis because it's just been a pleasure to watch Speaker 8: We get along. It's okay. Language Speaker 1: Mr. Brand. Speaker 9: I'd just add to that list, which is not just it like the, the participation in various town processes. I, I don't even like 700 FinCon meetings town.
Like, like, like just a lot of, of willingness to answer questions and, and I, I think that that's a challenging process and so I just wanna add that to the list. Speaker 1: Dr. Fugman, Speaker 12: So given the year that we threw at you just surviving Natick this past year would've been proficient. I think we should call, basically what we did is fiscal hazing Speaker 1: That's going in, can't use that word that's Speaker 12: Going in here. Can't use that word of that fiscal I can use, I'm just kidding. I'm kidding, I'm kidding.
Speaker 1: Yes, it's dirty word. Speaker 12: Yeah. Contract negotiations override tons of meetings all happening the same time in one year and you navigated through all of it so graciously and so thoughtfully. It was just a pleasure to watch every override forum. 'cause one thing is being able to sit in front of Excel spreadsheet with, with Mr. Gillis and figure it out and that was amazing too. But another thing is to then take it and explain it to such a, a range of, of constituents, which she did, I can't say that word either.
Constituents in, in a way that that was just really amazing. And again, the override passing is, is just one piece of evidence of of that. So yeah. So you passed the hazing, Speaker 1: It's a one time thing, right? Yeah. Mr. Brand, Speaker 9: If I could just add one other piece like of anecdotal evidence. There was a, during the whole override thing and we went, Catherine, myself and a former school, I can't remember the other school committee's name, I don't remember her, but we, we, we went to the community and senior center to
to talk about the override and I think it was the three school community members and Mr. Gillis was there and Dr. Sp was there and Dr. Ferguson was there. We outnumbered the number of community members. But to sit there for I don't know how long without ended up being I was there for part of it to just answer questions from people about complex financial and fiscal topics. Just like in the middle of all of the other things that were going on to make time to do that and answer questions in a way that people could understand. I just think it's another piece of evidence
of like willingness to just go and sit with four people from the community to talk about these topics. Speaker 1: Thank you Ms. Brunell. Speaker 11: I wanted to just pull out a theme that I see in a lot of your work and you are willing to do the groundwork and like plant deep roots that will continue the work along. So for with this fiscal systems here, we took time in the budget subcommittee to create, you know, to look at model budgets. Even the Wellesley one that I brought up that was 8,000 pages long, right?
You, but we looked at those and then you had the idea of the, the budget priorities and so this the, the items that you brought here, not just in our fiscal responsibility to taxpayers but in so many of parts of the district, it's like literally just the beginning and the foundation is laid and so that's like, I just am so impressed and I see that theme that you're willing to do the work. I just have this like image of a garden that if you put like, you know, it's a $10, you dig a hole
and you buy a $10 plant but you put $50 worth of soil in the hole and then that $10 plant becomes like this, you know, amazing plant because of the work that you've put into the soil. And I just think you've put so much into the soil this year. Speaker 15: I think everyone knows how I feel about budget and the progress we've made. I think that's not hidden but I think just a word I would wanna make sure it gets written into the narrative is just the transparency side. Just the fact that there is, I mean, you know Matt, I saw you onboard last year and just struggled to wade through lots of things and I think, and you were still through last year just sort
of digging out and then Melissa that you coming onboard and partnering just took it that we've dug, we've aligned and now we've learned how to communicate about it so that both sides of the, you know, the budget, the expense actuals, all have that kind of really clear alignment that you can both communicate at a high level but then also ask a detailed question and get dig in very easily as well. Speaker 1: How about that chart of accounts? Okay, Mr. Patel, Speaker 17: I'll just add on to everyone's comments agreeing with them and obviously this was my first experience with Dr.
Bash being at the meetings and I think much like most of the community, that's where we saw you for the first time really just sell the budget even though without knowing the vision at the time, right? Because you didn't know whether or not the town was gonna vote for it or not. And you sold both the budgets responsibly fairly and I thought was very diplomatically explained to everybody. So yeah, exemplary on that too for me. Speaker 1: Okay, so are we ready to evaluate? I, so I heard a lot of exemplaries. Yep, that's where we are. Okay.
And then that would give, we had only one indicator in this section so that would make our overall ranking for this section management operations also exemplary. Everyone's in agreement. Okay. Alright, so moving on to standard three. Family and community engagement. I just wanna make sure I've got the right Speaker 10: 3000, Speaker 1: Sorry. Three B shared Speaker 15: Responsibility. Speaker 1: Shared responsibility, perfect. Who's gonna lead us off Speaker 10: 3000 touch points? It doesn't, you listened to all sorts of opinions, doesn't mean you could make everybody happy, but people felt heard and,
and I think that, and that includes people on the second floor when you disagreed with them in some ways. For instance on the, whether we used zero based budgeting or not, you heard their concern and you went forth with what you believed was right and di i I happen to agree with you. So 3000, that's enough words. Speaker 1: Okay. Ms. Lathers, Speaker 15: I agree with that. I agree with the, the act of the listening to get into the entry plan. This is one that based on the rubric that I would,
I mean I could be overruled. I'm not that precious about it. I was putting mentally at proficient more because I just don't think this was the priority for this year. It's like when I look at the rubric, like monitoring our policies and practices for collaboration, like you've demonstrated your desire to collaborate. So all very strong, all doing that work and, but what I'd like to see was we set goals moving forward, you know, under exemplary or how we would move forward is, is empowering the administrators for more regular collaboration with families. Like I don't think we've done a ton of work this year
that I've seen as evidence and maybe there are other things. The focus with all, we had a lot of things to focus on is that focus on do we have the right collaboration mechanisms, you know, have that really fully been evaluated. Like it's, I just dunno whether, whether fixing, 'cause I do think there's still quite a bit of work that needs to be done in terms of how communication with families is happening. I think there's still a lot of work to be done there. So this one I was inclined, I was exemplary on all the ones prior to this, but, Speaker 1: Okay,
Ms. Brunell, I, Speaker 11: I agree. I also have proficient for this and I think that that that piece of shy, you mentioned coaching, you know, the, the groundwork that you've laid. I think in the future there, there will be, you will easily achieve exemplary in this. I think that it's now, it's like bringing everything that you've done into the district, it's bringing it so that the principals are doing that stuff with their staff or the principals are doing what you did for families. The principals are also doing that.
So it's, it's just adding one more layer. Okay. Speaker 15: Mr. Brand. So Speaker 9: I struggled with this one because just reading the rubric, my expectation, and here I go again with the first year thing. My expectation for a good leader in the first year would be like, the best you could do, the best one would do is to monitor what's going on, learn the culture, not come in with a sledgehammer right away. I just think culturally that's challenging as, you know, any of us who have ever, you know, had a boss. When a new boss comes in and immediately starts telling me
what it's, it's really challenging. It's like my expect, like a good boss would come in and monitor what we're doing and collaborate and communicate with me and learn the system in that first year. So for me, what the rubric lists as proficient would actually be, what I would say is exemplary, given the context. However, when I read the, the exemplary in, in the, that box in the rubric empowers all administrators to regularly collaborate. I also believe that that has happened. I, I think a lot of that has happened too.
So, and and sort of specifically as we gone through policy subcommittee meetings throughout the year and every issue that we've discussed in the policy subcommittee has not been in a vacuum. There's always been, we had a guest that comes to the policy subcommittee meeting and they were meeting, they were sort of charged with meeting with whomever the stakeholders were. Parents, principals, admin, different administrators. And so there's like a lot of, that's the people who have come to speak with us have been empowered to go
and find the data, have the conversations that they're supposed to have. So like I've experienced it, so I guess I'm looking for somebody to convince me I could we put a line in the middle like on, on what the right thing to do is here. I don't know. That's so super helpful. Speaker 15: I guess, I mean I'm just following the rubric. I mean part of it's for following the rubric the same way you wouldn't expect like my expectations, you're right. Monitoring in that first year makes sense. But again, in the same way that I wouldn't expect, I wouldn't expect a first year superintendent in their first year of school to be exemplary across the board either.
Like the way I generally have, you know, viewed it when my reviews within organizations that I run is, you know, when you're so far off the charts and everything, then you're already ready for a new job. Like I, I don't think it was an expectation that the work that this particular set of work, I don't think was a priority for this year. I fully believe like Catherine does that, that this is another set of work that will get prioritized and the the broader administration chief will like knock it outta the park. But it wasn't work that I think we had a lot of evidence of that it was proficient.
You did everything we needed done to get through this year and this year. Okay, Speaker 12: So I mean, I'll be honest, I going, coming to the general evaluation, I was thinking the same thing as Kate, which is somewhere we have to give you room for growth. You know some place, we have to say I couldn't, I mean, this kind of purview to the end for me is I couldn't find a place that that should happen. Not because I don't think you, there's room for growth. There's always room for growth. But because in this particular given context,
this too was something that I thought, I know we're not using exceeds. That was a previous set of goals. Exemplary. No, I know, but, but, but my point is, in my mind it's, she, you exceeded the expectations for what to do in a first year, because I think you did move to that next step of actually bringing the team together, coaching them, supporting them. You know, I'll use a specific example that that, that specifically impressed me was around the concerns
that parents raise around gender identity issues. Where, you know, previously superintendents here talked directly to the parents, which was good, but I felt like you took, it took it a step further to say, actually these are conversations that should happen with principals. But you didn't simply say, Hey principals, it's your job. Here it is. You brought them here together, you worked together to establish a collective approach. And then said, okay, now you can take this collective approach and have these conversations individually in your schools.
So it wasn't either, I'm gonna do it and let the principals have a pass, nor I'm just gonna have the principals do it and I'll have a pass. It was, we're gonna do this together. So that, that to me was impressive. So again, not that I'm against proficient 'cause to just for the sake of giving you something to work on, but No, but I just wanna say that was impressive. Like it's not, yeah, for what it's worth, Speaker 15: Ms. Collins. Speaker 10: Yeah. I think that the way we continue to challenge Dr. Bash is through the goals that are set, not through
the indicators in a vacuum, because Desi is very regimented in that way. I didn't expect what we got. I was pleasant. I mean, I had very high expectations. Not kidding, but I was still pleasantly surprised. So I just, I think that that's how we continued motive. And by the way, we've told her she can't go anywhere. So take that off the table, Kate. Not, not allowed. Speaker 15: I mean, I, you know, I will, we'll we just vote this one out, I think, and people can land when they land.
I just feel like this is a relative area of weakness. Like, I agree with your example Shai, but I do also feel like that was a, something happened to precipitate a response. And I think we all would agree that Melissa's great in a crisis and she's gonna figure out how to like get resolution to it. But I think we've got a lot of proactive work to do. I mean, I guess in speaking, like, you know, in special ed and with certain populations, like there's proactive to your earlier your earlier reference Catherine is like putting that scaffolding in place and, and I think you did everything that we could have asked of you this year. So I guess it's just a matter of whether people, you know,
want to follow like my reading of the rubric or not. Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean if I just weigh in with, with my thought here, I mean, you know, the first part of communi communication right, is listening. And I feel like that was just done at such full force this year. Like every single member of our community was listened to, had an opportunity to provide feedback and that feedback was heard in incorporated in the entry plan. And so I wasn't expecting that
to, to happen within, you know, six months of the start of school. So I thought that that was, you know, over and above what was even really possible with a first year superintendent. So that's where I would be leaning towards exemplary. But I see the arguments for proficient in terms of like, sort of long-term delivery. So yeah, I, I suggest if it, okay, so we look like we have Mr. Brand and Mr. Brunel and then we might as well just vote after that if we want to. Speaker 9: I've resolved my decision on this. Okay.
Great news. The for here's my thinking based on listening to everybody. Did Dr. Pash monitor based on the rubric? Did Dr. Pash monitor adherence, district-wide, blah, blah, blah, blah. All the things under proficient. Yes. Did she empower all administrators to regularly collaborate with families, yada, yada, yada. I also believe the answer is yes. So based solely on the rubric, NNI don't have any delusion that we're done with any of these things, but based on the rubric, I'm an exceeds exemplary because of like, because I believe based on it, what I've experienced,
based on the evidence, all that stuff that she has empowered. So based on solely on what the, how the rubric is defined, that's where I am. Speaker 1: Okay, thank you Ms. Brunell. Speaker 11: Yeah, I'm, I'm moving over to exemplary for that. And because of this, the number of times I've, I've heard said that's a principle issue. That's a principle issue. Like I'm not this, I, I can't take this all on or you know, it's, that's not the, I'm putting words in your mouth, but just like how you would push things in a good way
to empower the leaders that are in the school system because they're the ones who are face-to-face with families and need to, need to have the trust of their community. And then the monitoring of the processes, the piece that of all student needs being met. That's the hard piece, right? Because we're not, we're not gonna ever meet all student meet needs. The goal is there, but I do think that you have empowered our administrators this year. So I'm gonna move to exemplary. Speaker 1: Okay. Alright. So let's just get a sense check.
So if, who would be comfortable with exemplary and who would be comfortable with proficient? Okay. Alright, so I see 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 exemplary and then two proficient. So we'll make it exemplary. Speaker 8: The floor moves up. Speaker 1: So then since there was only, see moving Speaker 8: Up, Speaker 1: One indicator will also make the overall exemplary. Is everyone in agreement with that? Okay. Alright, last indicator, professional culture. And so here we had two. So the first is continuous learning
and the second is shared vision. So let's start with continuous learning. Do we have two? Yeah, Speaker 8: We had, we had two. Oh we said continuous learning wasn't one them. Oh that was wonderful. I thought it, Speaker 10: We was Speaker 11: Just wonderful. Was it? We chose it in August. Just shared vision. Speaker 1: Okay. Alright. Oh no problem. Let, let's do shared vision. You Speaker 9: Mean one less thing to discuss? Speaker 1: Yeah, so what are we gonna do with all the free time? Okay, so shared vision. Okay, go ahead. Shared vision, Speaker 10: Come on, Jamon, start us out. Jump in. You had it before. Speaker 15: I mean this is where in the previous one where I would say profi, like a lot of the,
what I heard talked about in the previous one in terms of communication, I actually really bucketed in here. Like I think the leadership of leading administrator staff, like developing, internalizing the shared educational vision. Like that's where I feel like I would say exemplary here. A lot of that good kind of communication work and collaboration work, I definitely see in this, you know, bring together a shared vision. Speaker 8: Okay, Speaker 15: Ms. Collins Speaker 10: $7 million and she got this committee to work for it
and she got the union to work for it and she got people off the street to work for it. She got the second floor to hope for it. That all depended on sharing a strong vision of what this system could be. And convincing people that, yeah, economic times aren't great, but this is what I plan to do. And anytime she's deviated from something that we were told, this is what I plan to do, it's come back to us first for a check-in and the possibility of us directing her.
Otherwise, those have been few and far between. I don't know how you $7 million, Ms. Brunell. Speaker 11: So in this, the rubric, it has two phrases in the sentence. I forget what that's called now. But the first piece is continuously engages all stakeholders in the creation of a shared educational vision. You have done that, you have more than done that the rubric says focused on student preparation for college, career readiness, civic engagement, community contribution, and responsible citizenship.
And that's where I think our high school needs to grow. And so I am a proficient on this, just the way the rubric is worded. Your shared vision was excellent and now I can't wait to see what it's going to do in the high school. Speaker 8: Dr. Fugman. Speaker 12: So I know we've talked before about the, the entry plan in the what started as 90 90 90, right? Which by the way, I've said this to you before, I did during the interview, I didn't, I mean I was impressed and wasn't happy to select you, but I didn't think you were gonna do it. And you did it and you more than did it 2 35. 2 35. Yeah.
And then you kept going. Yeah. Well I mean that's why you kept going. I mean that's how you got to 2 35 is 'cause you kept going and your entry plan was an amazing piece of work. It wasn't just that you met people. 'cause anyone can meet people. But hearing people and analyzing, synthesizing, figuring out, I mean, you described it as pretty much another dissertation that you wrote to me. That's, and it really ranged every, you know, different demographics, different and, and the topics covered, covered everything under the district.
So to me that, you know, when I was thinking again, what's the one example for each criteria? This, that is the example also, this is the last criteria. And I was trying to figure out where to fit this one to fit something that I was very impressed. And I dunno if this is the right criteria, but it's the last one so I have to say it now. Yeah, exactly. It's now or never one specific, you know, I i I've al for always I'm gonna be appreciative of the honor and privilege that I had being the chair when you came in and, and to watch you hit the ground running. It was so impressive. A specific thing that,
I don't know if we ever talked about it publicly or it was school committee, but there was an incident in Natick where some of you will remember, or you remember, flags were stolen from a church, pride flags. And this was in a Sunday. And I remember Catherine Coughlin, the slug board texting me and saying, Hey, the slug board is gonna put a statement out the school committee should too, or the school system should too. I texted Melissa on Sunday, she was already on it. That alone would've been impressive. But that's not even the part that was impressive. The part of that was impressive is besides the statement that was developed with Corey's help,
so engaging Corey, so, you know, again, shared version, the same moment, you also create the protocol for how to handle these situations in the future. It was a, you know, it's like, and the protocol was reflective of a shared process. You could have waited until at least a week or two after the incident to develop it. But no, it was developed the first time it happened. Like, you know, it, this incident happened. Clearly we need a protocol. We don't have one sub at one right now. And, and it's, and it's on paper and it's forever gonna be a process, you know, it's there and it's gonna make communication much better. And I, I was just impressed by that.
And so, again, I don't know if it fits into this criteria or now, but I just wanted to say it anyway. Speaker 19: It's right there. There you go, Speaker 1: Mr. Brand Speaker 9: For the last time tonight. I think for me, for me the distinction or the difference between proficient and exemplary is the, the verbs at the beginning continuously engages versus leads. For me, and there are a couple of things, but for me, one of the qualities that I really appreciate in Dr. SP's leadership is her
ability to have strong opinions loosely held. So having and I listening actively hearing what people are saying and then having her own vision is what I think a good leader always demonstrates as opposed to just the listening part. Because I have to feel like when, again, when I'm working for somebody, I want to feel like I can, I can speak what I need to say, I can have my own opinions,
but that the leader will ultimately be able to guide me and I will feel heard. But also we can work together to come to a decision. So I think that that, that leads word is really important for me. And then at the end of that rubric definition ensures alignment of school and district goals to this vision. I just keep thinking back to the entry plans and the, what's the crosswalk like, every principal came in with the, the same template and was able to link their entry plans to the district goals. That is not, I don't think Dr Pash making slides
for people, I think that is leadership, Speaker 20: Just Speaker 15: They would be Speaker 9: Like, right, but this is, but that to me is the modeling and ensuring that the schools that that, that the, that leaders, the administrators in the district are following her lead and then linking what they're doing. I mean it is to me the definition of a shared vision, the, or the, the operational nature of sharing a vision. So that puts me in the exemplary category.
Well it puts her in the exemplary category in my opinion. It doesn't, it doesn't put me there. It puts me, Speaker 11: I was actually wondering if your boss was watching this meeting. 'cause you keep telling your boss what you need from them. Speaker 9: There's no chance that he's watching meeting Speaker 15: Ms. Lathers. I was, I won't repeat that 'cause I was looking at the exact same thing. I mean both proficient exemplary talk about the same curriculum pieces that were just not even there. I mean I would actually, in some ways, and I agree everything you said, the continuously engages versus the leads models, this practice for others. So all those parts for exemplary, I honestly think we probably just picked the wrong one
for this year. And probably in retrospect, I like the communications one better 'cause it has a similar proficient as demonstrating strong interpersonal written verbal communication, whereas the exemplary utilizes and models, strong context and audience specific interpersonal. So I feel like that one was actually a better indicator for the work that was asked of you this year. And so we can, so I would grade based on that as well. Like the distinctions across all of these different indicators between proficient and exemplary. Lean towards exemplary. Speaker 1: Okay. Alright.
Are we ready? Okay. Yes. So I heard 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, I guess exemplaries. So who's in agreement with exemplary and who would be more in agreement with proficient? Speaker 11: I'm gonna abstain. Speaker 1: You're gonna abstain. Okay. Exemplary. I mean it's, yeah, no problem. We don't have, it's not a real vote. It's a's, I mean right? It's not, it's not official. It's not official vote. Speaker 11: So no, but what Kate just said, like I, to be honest, like I think it wasn't the right indicator so I, yeah, yeah, Speaker 1: Yeah. Okay. Alright. So then that brings the overall rating for standard
for professional culture to be exemplary as it was the only one in that section. So then I think we just need to go back to page two. Go back to page two. Okay. So we'll add in sort of the overall one. Oh yes. So, and yes, overall one step three rate overall summative performance. That is on page one, page four, page three. Speaker 11: Can I say something really quick? Speaker 1: Yep. Speaker 11: So I just wanna acknowledge that this year, like I said, was a little bit different and I just admire the work that
happened immensely. We haven't talked a lot about student achievement tonight in an evaluation of a superintendent and eventually that is, I know where you wanna go and to see those student achievement improve. And so I just, I think this is a very special, unique evaluation of a sup of your first year. I think you did excellent. And I know that the work that you've done will, will lead to student achievement and that we're gonna be talking about student achievement in the future years of your evaluation. So spoiler alert,
but it's just funny to do an evaluation. I know for you, even as a professional, right? Like you, the way you evaluate the, your colleagues and administrators and you know, everyone that you, on your team, you go back to numbers, right? And so it's like, I want to acknowledge that that is something that you are modeling for us that I hope we will be able to do for you because it's for the kids. Speaker 1: Okay, thank you. So end of, so step three, overall summative performance.
If I look at all of the indicators we have, it seems to fit into the exemplary category. Is that where we are? Okay. Alright. Thank you. That is, yeah. Thank you so much. Can I speak? Sure, yeah. No, thank you. It's nine 30 now. Speaker 3: I'll be quick. Speaker 1: Take your time. Speaker 3: It has been my absolute honor to do this work with you all this this year with our principals, with our union. I honestly feel emotional getting this. It's, I don't take it lightly. The ratings, I understand this is a special year.
You've seen who I am and who this district is and is capable of being. That's not gonna stop. It's just gonna keep going. The work is, I said it in my interviews, I think the work is the work, it's deeply relational and it's de deeply procedural and sort of system systemic. So I'm like, I'm very, very humbled. But thank you for seeing our district, not just me. I know today was my eval, but it was really a commentary on our district and where we're moving. So this, I really see it that way and I just wanna make sure people hear it,
that this is team, this is a hundred percent team and we, but thank you so much for your thoughtful kind of discussion. The feedback and the, and the outcome. Thanks. Speaker 1: Thank you. Mad chair, move to ajo. Should first it's a little light now. Okay, move to adjourn. Second. All in favor? Woo. Okay, we are adjourned.