We're good. Okay. Uh the North Hunter and Vorhees Regional High School District Board of Education meeting on Tuesday, February 17th, 2026 is now called to order. Uh I'll begin with the mission statement. The North Hunter and Vorhees Regional High School District empowers all students through innovative
and personalized learning to achieve their full potential, embrace lifelong learning, and contribute responsibly to a changing world. In accordance with the requirements of the open public meetings act uh NJSA 104-6 adequate notice giving
the time uh date location and to the extent known the agenda of this meeting was sent to the Hunter County Democrat Star Ledger and Courier News on January 7th 2026 and published on January 12th 2026. In addition, notice of this meeting has been posted at North Hunter
and High School and Borhees High School, provided to the municipal clerks of Bethlehem Township, Califon Burough, Town of Clinton, Clinton Township, Franklin Township, Glengardner Burrow, Hampton Burrow, Hybrbridge Burough, Lebanon Burrow, Lebanon Township, Tukesbury Township, and Union Township, as well as other interested parties and
posted on the district website. Fire exits are located in the direction indicated. If alerted to fire, please move in a calm and orderly fashion to the nearest smoke-free exit. Restrooms are located uh to through the doors
behind this desk and to the right as indicated. At this time, please silence all cell phones and roll call. >> Miss Ays here. >> Mr. Chapman >> here. >> Mr. Hanley >> here. >> Miss Hint here.
>> Mr. Lordy >> here. >> Mr. Matthews >> here. Miss meappa here. Mr. Morgan >> here. >> Miss Reyes here. Mr. Spans is absent. Miss Stein >> here. And Mr. Mcisac >> here.
>> All right. We have our flag salute to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands one nation indivisible with all. So, I have our first item, a call for a
motion and second to adopt resolution uh 21726-1 for an executive session to discuss matters reflected in the attached resolution. The board expects to be in executive session for approximately 30 minutes and upon return to public
session, action will be taken. Uh can I get a motion and a second? >> Uh okay. Uh Nicole moved. Andy second. Okay. All in favor? >> I opposed or extensions. No. Okay. We
will recess and be back in a little bit. Just one minute, folks. or as soon as we're ready. Okay. So, we're ready. Okay. Okay. Um All right. Can I get a call? We're good. Yep. A call for a motion and
second to reconvene public session. Can I get a motion, Tara? Thank you. And a second. Andrea. Thank you. All in favor? >> Any opposed or abstensions? All right. You have the motion written out.
>> I do. I don't have the number though. Just had to fill in. Let me just get you real quick. B. Yes. Yes. Is this a voice?
>> Or a roll call? >> Um, let's do a roll call. >> Okay. Um, I need a motion uh and a second to resolve a uh board that the board denies an appeal of HIP number
299678. Can I get a motion? >> So move. >> Move. Thank you, Nicole. A second. Tara. Thank you. Second. Uh, any discussion, clarification? We are denying the appeal
of HIV number 299678. So, this is going to be a roll call vote. >> Miss, >> yes. >> Mr. Chapman, >> yes. >> Mr. Hanley, >> yes. >> Miss Hits, >> yes. >> Mr. Lord, >> yes.
>> Mr. Matthews, >> yes. >> Miss me? >> Yes. >> Mr. Morgan? >> Yes. >> Miss Reyes? >> Yes. >> Mr. Miss Stein? >> Yes. >> And Mr. >> Yes. Okay. Uh, our next item, we have our
minutes from January 20th and January 27th, our working session or training regular meeting session. Uh, any questions or clarifications on any of those, otherwise we would approve them officially next week.
Okay, that brings us to our chief school administrator's report. Uh the only thing I will mention as I said last month I'm going to do my full report at the next month's meeting in the interest of time and things that we have scheduled for this uh but if there are any questions on either the listed
there that will officially be reported um and voted on next week or the monthly school reports I can answer any of those questions right now. >> Okay. Thank you. Uh as far as my updates there's a few items excuse me. The first
one is the um superintendent evaluation process has officially begun at this point. Uh Rich is the first one in receipt of that information and he conducts a self evaluation. That self-evaluation then comes to us and we'll get the information from the board
to do our evaluation. Um, I know for folks joining the board in uh, January, uh, it can often seem strange to be already evaluating the superintendent. Uh, but that can be certainly part of the conversation and you have the opportunity to indicate there are things
that you do not necessarily have feel like you have the scope of knowledge and information on, but we'll go over that some more when we get to that point. The uh, second item is the SR grant. It's the feasibility study update. This is
the request for us to participate in a um districting or a um um what's it called? >> Regalizations feasibility study. So if you recall there was an incentive on the part of the state for districts to express an interest into at least
conducting the study. We have several of our sending districts who I believe are joining us in this process as well. Clinton Township, Franklin Township, Union Township and Hybridge >> and the study itself and the grant is that is paid for by the state to conduct
the inquiry. >> Correct. The grant is applying for the funds that would be incurred for the feasibility study which then will be conducted presented to um our board of education and anybody interested. Um and then addition that doesn't mean that we region regionalize it just gives us the
data to determine whether or not we want to take the next steps. So >> um and then last item, our regular board meeting. >> Oh yes. Is the is there an update like are we that we've moved forward in that process? >> So they did open up the grant um about a
month ago. Um we have been working on getting all the pieces of information you're looking for. Um we're probably about 95% of the way done. Um I'm waiting for one other a couple letters that I need of support from different agencies and then once I have that we'll submit the grant. Hopefully I'll be reporting that to you in March that we
submit. >> Okay. So, so we aren't even we haven't yet received the grant. >> No, >> we're still applying for the grant. Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you, Brian. Uh beyond that, we have our regular board meeting February 24th at 7 p.m. next week at the
district administrative office. All right, we have our opportunity for public comment. During this portion of the meeting, the public is invited to address the board of education with comments. You are requested to sign the register provided and to state your name, municipality of residence, group
affiliation if applicable, and direct your comments to the school board president. While all comments will be considered by the board of education, and a response may be forthcoming if and when appropriate, individual school board members may not respond to the speakers at the time of their appearance. The public comment period
will be a maximum of 30 minutes in length unless there are unusual circumstances. You will be allocated three minutes to speak and no one will be permitted to speak more than once on the same topic until all others who wish to speak on that topic have been heard.
Please keep your comments respectful and non-defamy and maintain the level of decorum appropriate for a public meeting where students may be present and in the audience. So at this time I would like to welcome any folks to come forward who would like to speak.
Good evening. My name is Steven Lley and I'm a resident for 40 years in town and uh I've I've got some notes here but I think I'm going to be a bit contemporous. Um, I'm very happy with our school district
here. I think you guys do a marvelous job and I'm not sure the general public realizes how much work and effort you put into it. Right. I think that's so I think that's important to put on the public record. One of the things I'd like to talk about is how important I
think both keeping our library uh very effective for the students. Uh to me, I'm a big reader and always have been. Uh, I think reading takes you to places you cannot go to, to times that
no longer exist, and to meet people you'd never get a chance to meet, which I think is broadening. My belief is that the role of our education
system is to develop our all of our students to the greatest extent possible to make them as best as they can be. So that includes all students. You know
there was a a political phrase no child left behind which has become rather hackneed but I would say this that phrase has a lot of sense to it. You know we should not let any child feel
left behind whether it is in the classic issues of academic performance but also many of the other social issues. You know, children spend an enormous percentage of their childhood waking hours in our schools. That should not be
a time where they feel excluded. You know, I think it's really important that they feel that they're part of this community and have value. Uh we should not waste that time. I mean in in many respects
uh any form of discrimination on basis of color, religion, race, wealth, sexual orientation must be excluded. You know, we need to make sure all our children feel
uh wanted and feel empowered. That doesn't mean that that that children don't fail things because they do. You know, we all have. I was a terrible student at school. I
think the most important thing that our teachers and how we can do as a as a community is to teach children that to fail is human and it's part of the learning process. But everybody should also learn the other part of that process, which is when you fail, the
next step is to stand up and try again. We're not here to make a perfect world. That's impossible. But we are here to make the world better. And I really, really appreciate your efforts to make every student
in our school system a better person. So we need to make sure that all the rules and regulations and operations uh of our schools support the that aim for all children. This board is a key component of that and I really
appreciate the efforts you put in to making that happen. Thank you very much. Oops. Good evening. My name is Harlon Etinger. Um, unlike Steve, I've only lived in this district for about 39 years. Uh,
where I've been a resident and taxpayer in Hybridge since 1987. Uh tonight I just want to thank you and commend you for following the law by taking the first step toward adopting a policy that implements New Jersey's
freedom to read law. The widely publicized struggle that took place in this district over challenges to library materials. Challenges that ultimately failed were an impetus to the legislature passing and the governor signing New Jersey's freedom to read
law. I urge you to complete the process by adopting the policy implementing the freedom to read law on its second reading at your next formal meeting. Thank you very much. Hello, I'm Dan Kleinman from Chadam and
I've been in this district zero seconds. Uh, I'm here today to not talk about the library stuff specifically, but to talk about a problem that I see here, sort of like a slow, silent coup, and that's this.
I think the Open Public Meetings Act is not being adhered to. When you have an agenda like this that says policy first reading, policy second reading, it doesn't actually tell you what's on the agenda.
So, you really don't know based on the agenda what you're talking about here. And then when I go and I click on that link, it takes you to another page that takes you to yet another page that I have to sign in with with my Google
address, which I don't want to give you. I was actually intimidated from signing in with my safe libraries.google address because you would have just said it's him. I'm not going to read it. So, I thought that would be a violation of the
Open Meetings Act if you're not putting this kind of information as to what you're doing on an agenda and the only thing it says is policy. Here you have your public copy. Do not remove the board of education meeting minutes and attachments. I was hoping to
find the attachments maybe in here. They weren't in here either. I don't even know what the heck you're talking about tonight except I think it's about libraries because I heard some of the speakers. So, what's the problem with this besides just the legal problem? The problem is
that the parents in your districts who are interested in these issues aren't coming out because they're looking at the agenda and it doesn't tell them what's on the agenda. But the ones who are coming out are the ones that are politically activated such as Martha Hixon, the former retired
attorney um not attorney, what is she? Librarian uh who has uh published on Twitter that this meeting two days ago was going to happen and again a few hours ago she did because she wants people here who are already activated to come who don't who can't read the agenda
either because it's not on here. She wants them here to come out and pressure you guys. and they're here and they're pressuring you. All you need to do is comply with the Open Meetings Act and put on here what it is you're going to be talking about and don't make it so
people have who are in the no have to bury their way through the the labyrinth and then sign in with their names. I think that's it. Thank you very much. Hello. Uh, my name is Lucy Harris. I'm born and raised in town of Clinton. My
parents went to this school. I go to this school. I'm a junior. Um, I would like to address two policies that the board is considering this evening. The first being the NJSBA gender identity and expression policy 5145.7.
As the vice president of the GSA, I can confirm that this policy truly saves lives. I have witnessed it have a positive impact on the students in our district. This policy simply requires uh New Jersey school districts to respect a
student's chosen name and pronouns corresponding with their gender identity. Sadly, sometimes our schools are the only places where queer students can feel safe enough to be themselves. It's important to maintain this safe space, which is why it's important to
maintain this law. The second policy being discussed today is the freedom to read law. I know that many of the board of ed members here today support our librarians and the right to read because in January this board voted 10 to1 to approve the updated library materials
policy 6163.1. This policy was modeled after the freedom to read law which was enacted in the state of New Jersey in December of 2024 and prohibits the censorship of library materials. As I said before, these laws are
important and protect our basic rights. So I must ask, what is the purpose of calling these laws into question time and time again? It's not really what we gain from this. It's rather what we stand to lose. As a student of this district, I commend our board for
fashioning district policies in alignment with our state laws and for continuing to stand up for what they know is right by prohibiting the censorship of library material. And I rest soundly in the knowledge that they will continue to do so. As a student with a very rigorous schedule, it takes
a weight off of my shoulders to know that I will not have to spend any more of my time protecting rights that should be guaranteed. Thank you. >> Good evening everyone. Uh my name is Jeff Moore. I live in Clinton. Um, and
uh, you know, I'm a longtime educator, but I'm here tonight speaking uh, as a as a parent in the county and and not representing any district or organization or or for that matter having been activated by anyone uh, to
come speak uh, tonight activated other uh, by anything other than the duties that come from really the difference between right and wrong. Uh, two of my children graduated from Borhees and our third is in eighth grade. I'm here with my wife uh as well and we all read the agenda. Um I wanted to just take a
moment to compliment the board and the administration uh on your reasonleness and and really to thank you for returning to some focus uh on the job at hand for our kids that is the education of our children for
their future. And I stress their uh when I say their future rather than uh sentencing them to unenlightened ideas of of someone else's claustrophobic uh past. I've been in your audience before
both here in this room and across the way in the auditorium and uh I've seen um I've seen my children and their friends, your students stand up for their rights
uh against adults who wouldn't give them would would not only not give them the time of day but shouted them down uh to the degree that some of them had to be removed from the auditorium. those adults shouting children down. Hope uh on those long long nights was
something that I really only found on this side of your table with those brave kids. But I'm happy to say tonight that I'm finding hope from your side of the table in the work that you're doing to ensure timely and faithful
implementation of the Freedom to Read Act through sensible uh policy. It's not only good to see among uh other signs of of a healthier board here, but also a reminder that there's no limit to what two readings
and a vote can do uh or as sometimes necessary undo as it were. So, I just wanted to thank you for your service and your volunteerism and and the model that those bring to our children. Thank you.
Hi everyone. I'm Sandra Marzo and I'm from Franklin Township. Um, I'm not here on anyone's behalf but my own. I'm a former teacher. Um, my youngest just graduated last year,
last spring, so I can't say I'm a parent of a student anymore here, but definitely spent plenty of time around North and ascending districts. Um, and I just I want to thank you for, like some others have said, following the law of
the state, not putting us in jeopardy of a lawsuit. And it really wasn't hard to click on the policies on the agenda. I think that should be said. And if anybody's so
worried about the district knowing who they are clicking on a policy on the agenda, they can make another Gmail account. Lord knows plenty of people here, I shouldn't say here, that's not what I meant. in the area make fake accounts
online on Facebook, social media, and don't present as themselves. And it's just it's I'm sorry that you all have to have
that regular presence of somebody who is not even from the area that in my opinion seems obsessed with certain aspects of our district. If I were a teacher in the district, I would be and
I was aware of this, I would be concerned, especially since this individual primarily focuses on women with his comments. It's just
it's just gross to be honest. I It gives off stalker vibes, harassment. >> I was ask you to >> sure >> be cautious about >> Awesome. Sure. Sure. Um,
anyhow, I'm sorry that you all have to go through this and I support what you're doing. I know it's a hard job for everybody. It's a hard job, especially when you don't see eye to eye and you're not paid for your
time, and I appreciate all the effort. Thank you. >> Do we have any additional comment? Okay, thank you. Um, we're going to move to our curriculum instruction and technology report by Mr. Brown.
Well, good evening everybody. Um, today I'm here to talk to you about the PSAT results. Um, remind me at the end to see if you have any questions about the curriculum items, the items under the curriculum agenda as well. Um, but I want to give you an overview of the PSAT results because I think it's a it's a
good measure. It's a good way of measuring how we're doing across the district. So, I want to start by just giving you an overview of PSAT. So, uh, the way that we have it set up is that all students in grades 9, 10, and 11 to take the PSAT in October. Um, so for the
students in grade nine, we've only had them for about a month and a half. Uh, some seniors also take it if they haven't yet demonstrated proficiency in English or math. So we give them that opportunity. There's two different tests. So the students in grade nine take what's called the PSAT 89 and all
the other students take what's called the PSAT NSQT. This rolls right the time. So the PSAT is an adaptive test. It's a computer-based test that became adaptive three years ago. This is the third year
uh for computer adaptive test. And at the end students and us uh we receive three different scores. the total score, what's the English section, which is called the evidence-based reading and writing, and then also a math section. I want to uh let you know because I often
say that scores don't include students from the Hunter County Hunter County Vocational School District. The uh results that I was sharing do include all of those students. So, just to give you the score ranges, um I'm not going to go over the PSAT 9
results um because I I'll explain that why in a second, but those score ranges are a little bit different than the others. Um but basically, for the NMSQT, there's a math score and an English score somewhere between 160 and 760. So,
when you add those two together, the total score is somewhere between 320 and 1520. So as far as the benefits for students, obviously it gives them practice for the SAT if they choose to take that later on. Um so it allows them to become familiar with the test format, the
pacing, the question types, those kinds of things. And they get a really detailed score report after completing it with a skill breakdown. So it gives them that personalized actionable feedback after taking the PSAT. Juniors when they take the test uh are
able to qualify for scholarships and recognition through the national merit scholarship competition. So that is that all juniors when they take the test they are eligible for those scholarships. On the school side it gives us a lot of benefits as well. It allows us to measure students progress. It allows us
to evaluate uh curriculum effectiveness. And one of the great things about uh students taking the PSAT is that it gives us a report at the end um which is called the AP potential and it identifies all the courses that students based on certain metrics would be
successful according to the college board. Now remember that the college board is doing the PSAT and the AP test. So there might be a little bit of a individual bias within that. Um but these are students that they think based on that test that will be successful in these AP courses. So, we're able to use
those reports to help encourage some students that might not be thinking about taking courses to push them to try a new course uh during their high school career. Now, I mentioned that I'm not going to go over the PSA 9 results. First off, we only had it for
a month and a half, so there's not much of me to take credit for at that point. Um, but also in the interest of time, I'm just going to focus on the uh the results from the sophomores and juniors. But I do want you to know that what I think is most important about the PSAT9 is the information that we're able to
give to our studying districts. So since about 2017 when we receive those results, what I do is I break it down into different categories. I I show you know obviously all of North all of all of the district but then I isolate the students from each district as well and
give that to the sending district. So they're able to see okay total score students who went to this school you know and I obviously only give them the results from their school um and how that compares to all of North all of so we do that for the total score we do
that for the the English score and also the math score we used to get before it became an adaptive test there were about 12 different subcores there was like algebra subcore there was a vocabulary subcore there was mechanics subcore and
ever since they switched to the adaptive test. They only get from now. I'm thinking all of those still in the which is not popular. So I'm hoping that soon we'll be able to get all that those scores as well because I used to give them all of those sub scores as well for
them to bring back to their teams and uh you know review that information. So quick question. So, so you give the schools their individual score, not the other school score. Correct. But the average of all the >> correct. >> Yes. And it's the average of their
students as well. It's not the individual students. Correct. The average of the students. >> So they don't get the they get theirs, not the individual schools, but the total average of this all the same where they stack up. Correct. >> Well, so they'll let let's say Clinton Township. So they will get the average
of students who were from Linton Town in grade nine average of all of the Vorhees students and the average of North students. >> So okay >> they can figure
it out. Yes. So in addition to the the average scores because I'll tell you that there's something that's called a nationally representative percentile. So that and there's a separate percentile for 10th grade students and 11th grade. So it
basically shows you um where you are. So let's say you're in the 60th percentile as a sophomore. That means that you performed better than 60% of the nationally. So in addition to the average scores I also give the districts where that average score falls
representative. So I'll share with you first and again percentile in a second. So I have this broken down um north grade 10, north grade 11 and obviously you can see that there's quite a bit of an increase um
you know from sophomore to junior and the same for and junior um but again that doesn't tell you much. Look at the national representative for the same group. You can see that we're typically in the 60 to 70 range and this
is the average individual students are higher than that but for the average we're in that 60 to 70 range. Um this also doesn't tell me a lot is growth that takes place from
sophomore year to junior year. Yes. So this shows students in the class of 2026 both for you know north 40s and then also the class of 2027 but when they were sophomores you can
see that in north the average total score is 183 and then as a junior the average score 152 the jump in that one year and then you know I broke down each of those uh different groups obviously that's the since it changed to a
computerive test those are the only two classes that have taken to sophomores and juniors. Um, next year we'll be able to look at the class of 2028 to see their over those two years. Um, you can and that's the thing that we're always looking at is that growth. Again, this
doesn't this gives you the numbers, but as far as the getting a perspective for it representative will help just to give you a ballpark. if you were a a 1200 on the PSA put you
in the top 25%. So just to give you the ballpark of what we look at those national representative percentiles you can see big chunk that class of 2027 which was so high.
Now just remember that those numbers change the percent for sophomores and for juniors. So staying the same would be good because the percentiles obviously changed sophomore to junior
year. But besides the scores increasing, the percentiles are also increasing. So just to show you the growth that takes place within our students from sophomore to junior year. And again that 74% for example the kids last 2026 as
juniors that means that the average student their score was better than 74% of so it really puts things in perspective there. Um so I think that growth is the
best way of looking questions. So I did break this down with I did the growth for the English and math sections because it's going to mirror what you saw with the total score. Um you can see the total scores for for the evidence-based reading and writing here
as well. We are seeing you know the upward trends over here as well. um and put those in the national record of percentiles. You can see consistently in the 70% percentile um except for that
first year um you know most of the time we've been in that 70th 70 or above percentile which is which is fantastic uh math you know you can see the scores uh you know rate hovering around 500 uh
or above or just under there and then for the national uh representative percentiles 50 into the mid60s upper 60s as well. We try to see that growth uh every year especially the growth within cohorts you
know year to year. So overall when you look at the PST it does give students access to these scholarships. There's over 181 there. It gives it a free practice. In addition to the free practice on the
test uh when the students get to results they can connect up to different u prep um platforms like Khan Academy based on their actual results to get um help in the actual areas they struggle. Um, there are those college readiness skills that they're able to learn about and
also the course placement that I mentioned that we're able to recommend to students, some uh AP courses that they might benefit from taking. So, we do offer some prep courses or uh or resources for students for the PSAT
and also the SAT. Um, the the test is taken on what's called Blue App and the Blue Book app does have fulllength practice exams. We as a district pay for albert.io which has full length pract practice practice exams and there's a
website called schoolhouse.orld that has a lot of practice for students as well. So we do give students besides you know having them take the PSAT um give them a lot of practice to help prepare them too. So for example and all students access to all of these um Albert.io is
one we pay for and we enroll students in the course with their counselor. So all students have access to all SAT, ACT, um all kind of test prep information through that through that program as well. >> Rich, what kind of um activity or usage
metrics do we get on that? >> Uh the Albert io >> a lot. Uh so I I look at the usage for that every month. It is used a lot. Um at this point, so we we see a license for every student. So already in this this school year, our students
established average over 100 questions completed per license that we have and we have a license for every student. So what we're able to look at um now talking about PSAT specifically or SAT, we're able to get a breakdown on how many of those questions they do on their
own because the other ones that we're talking about are ones that teachers assign. Like for example, our AP pre-calc teachers are the ones who use it the most. Most of our AP classes use it today, but but it it was used a lot. Yeah. >> Thank you. >> Yep.
>> You give us because the national the the percentiles national results results. I'm pretty sure >> what's going through my head is that and maybe I'm just biased, but you know, I
think that New Jersey's public education system is one of the better ones in the country. And so it'd be interesting to know how we're how well we're stacking up against other very well educated and resourced students. >> So that the AP results, they get to
break down school, district, state, and global. So for AP results, we're able to see all that. >> Yeah. and and you've given us some feedback on that. I just was just asking, but the at the this is about PSAT specifically and and that data is not available. >> The New Jersey numbers,
>> it might be out there somewhere. I'll have to look for that. >> Okay. But it it's not as easily accessible. If it is, it's not as easily accessible as your national. >> Okay. >> But did you say the SAT numbers are available? >> The uh >> for New Jersey. >> So on the school performance report,
they is that correct, Mike? I'm pretty sure it's right. It's on our school profile. >> It It is on our school profile as well. Um but yeah, on the school performance report, it does list the average SAT score, but the SAT not everybody takes. So that's why we like to look at the
PSAT because we have everybody take it. Back on the uh the Albert IO, I know as we're trying to help kids who need extra practice, do we have the ability to see if the students who might be most in need might be the ones that aren't using
the Albert IO uh independently and I don't know if any of our interventions seek to connect the two. >> Yeah, we can drill down uh into the actual user and everything as well. Um we can also do that with our online tutoring program as well. So um we a lot
of our interventions do you know utilize those platforms um and we're able to get reports on the individual user as well for that. >> I want to also compliment you the board has asked in the past about this kind of cohort analysis and thank you very much
for presenting those. >> Yeah I'm sorry two years but they just changed the test. >> Any other questions? All right. Well, thank you for your time. And the two items that are on the curriculum agenda are pretty routine.
One's home instruction and one's a u a uh I forget how it's phrased, but a um I think it's for provider to provide physical therapy. So, they're pretty routine. Did you have any questions about either of those? >> Thank you.
>> Um I had a question for you >> for Rich. >> For you? Oh, >> regarding this um I don't remember this last year report. >> I guess my question is that if we did
this or something as such last year, would this have been done in the curriculum committee >> or would he have been here presenting to the entire board? >> Uh potentially both. Definitely. I think the curriculum committee, but I know in prior years as we get data from various
tests, we've tended to ask for more expansive test information. So, SATs, PSATs, AP reports, and things of that sort. But I feel like in the past that even though it might be presented like formally in the committee there, I can't remember if
that would be repeated. I I'm pretty sure we did discuss PSAT results previously, but all these presentations that we're now doing as a committee as a whole >> were you were usually part of our committee structure. >> Yes, that was my question because this
was great presentation. It at first pass it screams like something that should be next week. So that like that that's kind of like was my unless I was missing something like at the more formal meeting this kind of that that seemed like a more appropriate setting than
this when we were working through committee the whole this was not kind of my idea of >> you know what I'm saying like I thought this would be kind of like more for next week. >> Does that make sense? >> Yeah. And I guess after being presented in the committee structure, the committee chair would often just give
maybe a summary report out of it could be as simple as went over PSAT scores and you know may not go into great detail beyond that. >> Right. I I like this format better, don't get me wrong. >> Like I think we should all see this presentation was great. >> Yeah.
>> I think it was kind of more in the >> the formal meetings. My suggest >> Okay. >> Question though. >> Yep. something like this what you said would be done in >> committee >> committee >> yes >> and this would this meeting is
technically serving as our meeting >> so it placement wise >> no I think what I'm understanding rich if I'm understanding you correctly um yeah I think Nicole you're correct that we are doing in work session the things that we typically would have done in
committee >> but now that we're doing work sessions actually we have more meetings happening. Um, it's not something that is requiring action per se. So, it it could in theory be presented at either meeting. I guess I think that's your
point. Correct. Yeah. Okay. Information is good. It might just as we acclimate to the committ board of the whole um we could maybe be selective in what goes where depending on how busy an agenda might be or something to that effect. That's what I I took it. >> Okay.
>> Okay. I'm just trying to understand everything. >> Yeah. And I would say as I said initially going back to we have sought to get as comprehensive a picture as possible uh regarding student performance because there are a lot of different tests that are out there and
over the course of the year Rich would hit each one of them PSAT SAT AP seal of bi literacy. Um but in this format they'll get more attention. Thank you. And the point being was like realistically speaking if this was in a
committee format there's a decent amount of board members that wouldn't see it >> right. I understand that. So that's why so that's why I was kind of like this having formal >> right >> meeting because most people can't you're consumed with your committee meetings and then it's hard to go back and watch
now or committee you're not on and then you're saying okay we went over this report but it's not really doesn't hit the same when you see yourself >> that make sense yeah no I totally understand what you're saying I'm just thinking and trying to understand since I'm new trying to understand the the >> the way everything is kind of like
separated into working and regular Me, too. >> All right. Um, we're going to shift to policy and school security. So, two sort of updates. One, our policy ad hoc committee did meet for the first time. So, I want to thank uh Brian and Rich
and Stephen and Tara, myself and Rich. Uh, and if you recall, the ad hoc is sort of put in place to keep us moving on policy so that we um are moving things along that we're required to move along by law. Um tonight in fact we have
one second reading the Freedom to Read Act and we have a set of first readings which was our first sort of blast of policies from school boards that are mostly about required um and complianceoriented kinds of changes. Uh
for the public who might be listening uh we did switch to school boards as our policy vendor back in was it June or July? June. Um, and some of the back work that was done was the committee began to go through each of those policies to make observations or notes
about how our stra policies under Strauss Esme may or may not have been perfectly captured in their school board equivalent and that is work that we are really beginning now. Um, so we're doing a little bit of catchup because the Freedom to Read Act, we were asked to
have that in place for December. Our first policy blast that came from school boards uh was last month's also. So we're in a first reading stage of that. But our work going forward is really going to be the heavier lift of now
going through all of our policies to evaluate that transition from Strauss to school boards and the questions that we might have to consider or confront. So, um I imagine after getting caught up as we are on these policies, we my hope is
we establish a regular rhythm of a batch of policies kind of coming forward first read, second read, first read, second read as we move through them by section or perhaps um as recommendation from the superintendent to get some clarifying
work done. Um I think Brian's also going to share um some some thinking about from the committee about some of the um additional policies that we may see coming up next. So Brian, I just as a preface wanted to hand over to you.
>> Uh well, okay. So you've introduced >> the larger context >> and the first and second reading. Um so again we had some discussion at the at the ad hoc committee level about that
rhythm as um as Brendan called it um that uh we could use this working meeting normally we would not uh probably or at least there was some discussion about would we ever you know try to avoid using this working meeting for second
readings and um that's you know for the board to decide as the norm. I you know I don't think there's a strict um um resolution that we need to have but do we want to have you know second readings which is where the policy
becomes in effect whatever policy change only at the at the >> voting >> this voting meeting or or action meeting or whatever we call that the one next week. um but that it would be prudent for PACE to allow us to have first
readings during this working meeting. Um now there's uh the exception you know so I don't think we want to handcuff ourselves but the and and today's a good example of an exception to that and that is the second reading for um policy um
6163.1 on the media center which gets us into compliance with the freedom to read act which you know said we were supposed to be in compliance in December. So we're kind of doing that and we we you know those are eyes open. the board had his
eyes open last meeting about that. Um so uh the the the first readings uh they they were introduced to us from um from school boards. They're really what I would have characterized as kind of housekeeping. And if you've gone through
it and looked at them, it's like, you know, adding sunscreen to the medication list and some other resources and the and some really not significant policy adjustments that were involved in any of those first readings.
Um so uh one of the things that I I uh proposed that we might do so as has been mentioned before when we first started this process last year about switching from stress estate to school boards. We got the whole list from
school boards and I started to go through and look to see were there basically housekeeping issues that we needed to take care of like you know uh an example that I just remember off top my head is there was like a line item about playgrounds. I I don't think we have any playgrounds
at our high schools and so maybe we shouldn't have those kind kind of language, you know, policy about playgrounds in our policy manual. So there were kind of housekeeping items, but the the the committee struggled a little bit or or has an open question about how do we decide which ones to
tackle next, right? Do we you obviously we would like to do things that seem to have higher precedence. you know, a a New Jersey law that says, you know, that comes on the books that says you school boards need to do this, that would go to the top of the list. That would be an
easy one. But after that, it becomes a little more difficult to decide what to do. that a proposal that I I made was that while we have open this idea of um adjusting the policies related to let
let's just you know be honest about it the challenges to school resource you know library resource materials that we should take a look at all those policies that relate to this and see if we're happy with them as a board and do we
want to make you know so rather than kind of touch on it now and then in six months touch on it again perhaps is to is to get it you know go through it now and um and so I had some recommendations that I think are best discussed at the
at the next meeting because we haven't really discussed them but I went through all those policies that relate to this 6163.1 is one but there were even some some housekeeping items are related to that um that we could have changed changed.
Um there are some other you know concepts that came around the board the meeting actually last last time around this you know around um uh the c perhaps cottifying the right for a parent or guardian to request materials be
withheld from a student. That that is currently how the district operates. But nowhere in those policies or regulations does it say that. So, so do you know is the board happy with that? We would we rather have it in
black and white says that that will be you know what how we want to approach things. Um those are some questions that we'll we'll hopefully discuss in the next ad hoc committee meeting. But besides that um there were some for the other first policy readings there were
some additional kind of housekeeping things that I brought up that didn't quite make it in time. So, we'll we'll we'll talk about those as well, I guess. Or maybe we can work them in. >> Yeah, I'll try to share those with the full board um like tomorrow, Thursday
the latest, so at least we get another extra day for everyone to look at the language. And I think a lot of it was housekeeping stuff, but it was um >> one of them, for example, was there's a list of um of uh aspects of, you know, that the the
district will not discriminate based on in a long kind of a paragraph list. And if you looked at it for, you know, you read it briefly, it was fine. But if you looked at it closer, you're like, wait, that's not grammatically correct. There were some like phrases in there that or or clauses in there that kind of felt
like what probably happened was that's where the sentence ended before and then they just made it into a comma and kept writing at some later date. These are things that bother me. Um but maybe you know again it's not a it's
not a change in in policy. It's kind of clarification in my opinion. And I'll I'll make one last comment on the on the general topic and that is the our policy manual however it's evolved
over many years and then got kind of ported into a new platform um has repetitive concepts in them. So they say, you know, policy
C points to policy A, but there's information in both places that are meant to be exactly the same. So to me, there's a just a a potential that you change the wording. You know, someday we're off and we're changing
policy C and now we have messed it up and and being misaligned. And so someone could look and say, well, which do these things apply actually? Is it the one you said in A or the one you said in C? And to me, what the easy the way you approach that is you you you make sure A is exactly what you want and then you
say C follows the principles of A and you don't try to be repetitive or you you look for instances to avoid doing that. So, however, that's could be a very heavy lift because there's a lot of that >> a lot >> in the policy manual. So, we're not
going to say like, "Okay, today we're going to solve all those issues cuz that would be way too much work." But when we come to them, I recommend that we try to be as clear about our intentions as as we can. Well, I think you're also pointing out a method and sort of a strategy given that we adopted the
policies wholesale in June. Uh, and we've only the only policy we've moved so far was the one pertaining to bylaws. Uh I think we're envisioning work going forward where we're going through each of those segments of the policy more
methodically resolving those housekeeping issues feeling uh finding places if we find the language or recommendations to be inadequate to bring those as a first read for consideration uh discussion and then to evolve into a second read. But but doing
this could require um in my contrived example just now, you you can't just touch C. You have to touch A and C at the same time because you want to move something that you know make sure everything's working together because they're in cahoots. Um I do have
a question uh interpretation. Is a regulation a part of the policy or is it a separate thing? Like is 6163.1R a special piece of 6163.1 or are they two different things?
>> Well, I know what Go ahead. >> I was Yeah, it's my understanding they're two separate things. The policy is the why relations to how >> that's what it's supposed to be. But I will say in my experience that why and how has sometimes morphed >> that that happens. Yeah. And somehow in
many in some cases the why is in the regulation. >> Yeah. >> And and that's again another example where I think we should be all you know the why is really what the intent of the board is about this this issue
>> and I think stress >> how is not we don't need a regulation for every single policy. They're not today. But the how is if if the board feels it's important enough to be a little more explicit about exactly how to implement this, then we we have a
regulation. >> And and I'll say and Phil, I'm just curious. But I feel like I'm more familiar with Strauss SMA's approach that often just seems to have a very consistent policy regulation policy regulation except for the instances
where there's no regulation required where school boards feels like it's a little bit of a mix going on. Your your policies indicate that the policies are board sanctioned policies after first reading and second reading
and the regulations in large measure are the responsibility of the superintendent of schools. that it is analogous to the fact that if you look at all at your board policies, you will find many references to title 18A, which is the
statute, which is the what and the why um of everything happening in public education and private for that matter and higher education in New Jersey. Whereas 6A is the Department of Education's
how. And so by analogy, the policy is the board's what and the regulation is the superintendent's how. >> But as I said, I agree over the years those things have crossed in some areas.
So, I think, you know, >> I obviously, you know, I thank all of you for your time and effort that you put into this board event, but Brian in the last week, >> um, has put a tremendous amount of time and effort, as anybody on the policy committee can attest. Um, and you know,
so, thank you for the time you put into it, even thus far. If we can even match that pace, half of what we've done so far in the last week, I think we'll be in good shape in a short amount of time for a lot of work. Um, >> better you better keep me on a short leave.
I'm a little scared but but I'm also grateful. So um so I think our hope is as we meet the next time we'll sort of pull together the idea of what we think that rhythm and that strategy are going to be of you know bringing things forward first read for a work session
second read for uh an action session if that seems like the workload that's going to be needed in order to keep us marching through uh sort of the backlog that we have to get through. Um Brian was oh yeah >> is the policy committee um the group that's going to be bringing to the full
board what policies we should be looking at taking action. >> So in other words yeah it's like the idea would be the first reads that are appearing each month will be the result of that conversation between the ad hoc committee and the superintendent as to
potentially what to prioritize. um the ones that we're dealing with now um aren't they're the catch-up ones of the the freedom to read and the first batch of updates from school boards uh after tonight or I guess technically after
next week after we have a second read on those first readings from tonight will be technically compliant and caught up and the work of now going through our policy guide to attend to all the questions um that the prior policy
committee surfaced that work begins. Okay. So, sorry for the lengthy preamble. Uh but I would like to call for a motion and a second to approve agenda items 111 and 112. >> Before we do that, so
I don't know if I understood what it said correctly. I think I did. But so is it is it our position that going forward we're going to have first readings at working sessions and
second readings at formal meetings. Am I am I understanding that correctly? >> I I think that's the question that the policy ad hoc committee needs to bring forward as a strategy. In other words, there given that work, yes, the policy committee would be may making a
suggestion that that may want to be our approach. >> Okay. Because with the second reading today, we are taking definitive action. >> Actually, with the second reading and the first reading, we're taking action. >> Correct. >> Correct. >> Correct.
>> So again, I kind of go back to the committee, the whole structure, right? Like my problem with this is that we really should be tableabling this until the formal meeting, right? Because typically if we did not if we were not in this structure, we would be in siloed
committees having a conversation privately >> where no action would be taken. So because we're now in the public, which I I like, right? I just don't like the cadence or agree with the cadence of how we're going to move forward with this because I'm not even sure um a lot of
the constituents or parents even know that we've moved to two meetings a month. I'm I'm not sure. I I mean I defer to superintendent on that, but um I don't think we sent any communication out, right? that we've kind of we we're doing this and then to take formal
action on on policy that and I hate to use this as an example but only because it's on the current agenda that is you know um a hot button issue ah doesn't I'm not sure I I I'm aligned with that.
So I I again I I would preface or I would you know like to make the motions to table this until next week's formal meeting where it can be addressed at in a proper setting. >> So Phil, check me on this. Um we we didn't move it yet, >> right?
>> Um but now a table has come up >> but the table is premature because there hasn't been a motion >> for the uh resolution that you were requesting. By the way, so moved. >> Okay. Yeah, we need we need to we need
to kick the discussion into motion. I was asking for a motion >> from Brian >> and I need a second. >> What? Wait, first, what are we moving on? I just point of order to >> I move that we uh approve agenda items
11.1 and 11.2. >> He's moving. Now just I want to clarify though I was under the understanding that even though it's open to the public because we're a quorum we the working session we're we should be voting on this I thought next Tuesday and this is
the discussion on everything um >> well it's the discussion on the first reads okay but not on the second read it's the action on the it's action on both one is a second read one as a first read we had our first discussion uh last
last cuz I I wanted to also bring something up on that just a statement that but I thought we were voting on that next week. So, I just wanted to bring up what I don't know if this is the time for >> Well, I think once we have it in motion, it would be somebody we have a first. I
need a second. >> Okay. >> Okay. Second. Okay. Um, >> now it's open. >> Now it's open for discussion. And then we'll go Tara and then Rich if that's okay and then I'll come back. >> I was confused on I thought working sessions even though cuz we in the past
we did a committee so they were closed because we weren't quum. We couldn't take action. But that's I guess where we're going to look at the policy, our procedure to see if we're going to be able to do this going forward >> through as we go through our backlog of policies. These ones were, as I said
before, catching us up to getting into compliance from in one instance where we should have been in December, right? And then in the other instance was the the first blast of updates from school boards, which I don't know if that was December also or it was December also.
So we're getting we're getting sort of up to current on these and then going forward is sort of the determination of the the rhythm and yes then it does become an open question of um because we
have our entire catalog of policies to go through um do we want to t take a pace where we're first reading at a work session second reading at the action to enable us to sort of get caught caught up on moving through that policy. To
your point, Rich, it's a fair question to say, okay, given the amount of work, does that hamper our pace or do we want to accelerate our pace on that? And I think that's the sort of thing that as the ad hoc committee is doing that work. Um, you know, certainly if you have
thoughts to express here to send to me or Brian has sort of in unofficially in informally chairing that committee, um, we can have that conversation then come forward next month. >> So, I'm going to just change how my verbiage because I felt we were voting
on the second read next Tuesday. So, um, but being in the ad hoc, I just wanted to put um that tonight we're not voting on individual books. We're voting on a process, one that is aligned with New Jersey statue and designed to ensure fairness, professionalism, and clarity.
Our libraries are curated by certified school board, school library media specialists as required by law. This policy affirms their professional role while also preserving a structured and transparent pathway for concerns to be reviewed. The only change made during
our first reading was extending the reconsideration period from one year to three years. I supported that adjustment because repeated annual challenges to the same material consume significant staff time and public resources. A three-year window allows a determination
to stand long enough to provide stability while still preserving the right to bring forward concerns. As board members, we are stewards of both intellectual freedom and taxpayer dollars. This policy protects the right to question, ensures due process, and
supports responsible governance. For those reasons, I will be voting in support of the updated policy. >> Thank you, Rich. >> Well, lots there. So, um I guess before I go to table because we're at the
working session. So, um I I I don't think there's any secret of where I stand on this. Right. So, um I as a parent, I don't support the Freedom to Read Act. As a parent, um I've seen some of the material. Um I do think it's
inappropriate. Um and I do think some of it is uh educationally not suitable. I I I believe that as a parent, which is my right. Um however um as we kind of discussed it in another setting, I I I do believe in following the law even
though when and that includes when I don't agree with it in this case. So, I am a I am a proponent of following the law. Where I get sidetracked on this is we're taking the NJSBA's
guidance. Give you some rope here, uh, Brandon. We're taking the NJSBA's guidance for us to stay in compliance with the Freedom of Read Act. Right. That's that's what that's we got the guidance, correct? >> So, we could stay in compliance with the Freedom of Read Act, >> right?
you would have had me there. But when we modify that and take it from the one year to the 3 years, that's when you lose me. Now, this would have been me saying I even though I don't agree with it at all, I'm a yes because it's
following the law. But we are now in it in in my mind it screams to me that it's a solution in search of a problem because this is a hypothetical situation that's never happened before. Now I've seen the bookb situation. I wasn't I
have a front row seat like some of you guys, right? But I will say I think in my opinion it was handled so poorly by my predecessor. It's one of the top three reasons why I'm in the seat. Um, but if I'm being fair about it,
we're putting a modification to a situation that's never happened. So there's no there's no saying, okay, this is what the board had to go through and then a rechallenge and this is what it's never happened before. So I I don't again I I don't understand why we would
go down this road. Now, when I look at this, I think everyone understands this is a very contentious issue, right? At best, at best, this is a 50/50 issue at best. And I would argue for those of you in your towns, if you really um talk
to your constituents, it's probably more of a 60/40 against on the Freedom of Read Act. That's my opinion right now. Again, if we follow the law, we follow the law. But by modifying the law, the board is now essentially taking a hand
grenade, pulling the pin, and dropping it on this issue. Once again, that's an unforced error in my opinion. I I there's there's no reason for that. Now, you're also going to trigger there's people folks on both sides. Now you're there's there's going to be parents out
there that are angered by this and the intent is to not bog down the administration with constant challenges on the same boat. Correct. >> Uh the administration and the board. >> Right. Right. So what you're potentially setting up a
situation is okay I can't or a parent can't challenge a book because it's been challenged before. Now you have threeear window. You're going to anger somebody and they're going to they're going to put in a book challenge and we're going to go through that process and it's going to get adjudicated. It's going to you're going to come out with a result
and now they're going to do it on spite and they're going to go say, "Okay, you did that. Now I'm going to go to the next book and now I'm going to go to the next book and now I'm going to go to the next book." So, you're going to be in this constant rotation of dealing with this issue because you
willingly pulled the pin on a hand grenade for no reason. I guarantee there's somebody out there that's going to do this because it's a it's a hot button issue. So, the administration is I I think setting themselves up to have a problem
here where there isn't one. If we would just follow the law without modifying it, I I think it's hard to argue that the that that the district and the board doesn't follow the law. That that's that's an open and shut case in my opinion. modifying it changes the whole
game because it sounds like the board is taking in my opinion partisan policy that was heavily influenced by a skew of activists and and now putting their spin on it. That's that's what it is. Like we got to
call it out for what it is. But following the law is following the law right down the middle. changing it for for for a hypothetical problem that's never happened. That's an unforced error in my in my opinion and I would
encourage everybody not to do that. I would support 100% following this adopting this policy as suggested by the NJSBA and not modified for a reason that I don't even know why and how we it determined a one year to three year. I I
still don't know why or how we came up with that time frame. But it it doesn't make any much sense to me. But um keeping it as is by the NJ SBA, I'm all in because that's the law.
Siding with cuz I'm telling you right now. But regardless of how you vote, it's going to be looked at that you siding with one of the sides. THAT'S JUST A FACT. THAT'S A FACT. If you're willing to put yourself in that position, then that's what it is. But I don't see
the reason to willingly put drop a pit in this room and start that whole thing all over again. That's what this would do for no reason. So that's why I would say listen, I don't support the Freedom to Read Act, but I support and I respect the law. So I
would support that 10 times out of 10. modifying it that can be perceived as siding with one of the sides on a highly contentious issue. Not recommended by me. So with that, I will make a motion to table this at least to the formal
meeting next week uh February 24th. >> So we have a motion to table. Um it does require a second. >> I have a question. >> Well, let's it requires a second. Second we just tableing that one policy.
>> Uh well okay if that's the clarification >> I I I move I make a motion to table 11.1 and 11.2. >> I second. >> Okay. So two to 224. >> I need a clarifying point here. >> Does this mean discussion stops on
everything? >> No we but we do have to address the motion to table. Okay. >> We have to vote on the motion to table. If we vote to table it, that means as the motion was phrased, we address it next week. >> Okay? >> If we
decide not to table it, the discussion continues for a vote tonight. >> Okay? >> And I believe there is no discussion of a table. You just vote on the table. >> Robert's rule says that a mo motion to table. So if you vote yes to the table,
that means we revisit this next week. If you vote no to the motion to table, that means we continue discussion and vote on it tonight. So, let's uh let's go roll call. >> Miss, >> no. >> Mr. Chapman, >> no.
>> Mr. Hanley, >> no. >> Miss Vince, >> no. >> Mr. Lordy? >> Yes. >> Mr. Matthews? >> No. >> Miss Messappa? >> No. >> Mr. Morgan? >> No. >> Miss Reyes?
>> Yes. And what stands out in my um reasoning for tableabling it and second in the motion is this >> wow >> is >> we're just voting >> this is because you know as we mentioned before to have the full community
transparency and I know that you mentioned that the suggestion >> do you want let's finish the vote and then we can discuss >> we're just finished. >> Sure. So then my >> your vote was a yes to table. >> Yes. >> Miss Stein,
>> no. >> Mr. McKisac, >> no. >> Which one does So the floor is open for discussion on these policies. What stands what stands out in my mind is um we had a parent
who has a student in the district who is non-verbal and she spoke at the podium and she was concerned about certain images not because of genre not because
of um anything other than certain images that she was didn't want her non-verbal son to come across and that is why I feel that we should table it. It's not
passing that's fine. Um we'll move forward. However, I think it should be known that is why >> other points of discussion on any of the policies that are up right now? Um,
I think there is good reason for the three years. Um, and it's because book challenges has taken up a lot of time and energy and dedication from this board prior to my serving on the board,
of course. Um, and and quite honestly, it's a waste of taxpayer money and time. And um I don't believe and to to speak to Rich's point, you know, that he made last week or last
meeting that that we're basically cutting off any parent who doesn't have a kid in the district and can't challenge for 3 years after. We have a system in place to prevent students from taking out books that
their parents don't want them to take out. We're not cutting off anybody's right to choose what their par what their child sees and doesn't see has access to.
Um what I think we're doing is being cognizant of the work that needs to be done by the board and trying not to waste the resources, the time, the energy.
um how it went years a ago you know when when all the challenges came through um I think 3 years is a is a suitable amount of time um and and doesn't put any undue stress
or burden on the on the board. I think it also takes into account parents rights to decide what their you know what they want their kids to access. Um, with that being said,
um, you know, for the for the second reading, I'll address the first readings now. Um, I'm looking for clarification as to the purpose of the changes
for for the first readings. You said this is to bring us up to compliance with what is required by the state for the first readings cuz there are some edits to some of these policies that I believe should be made and I have made
notes on them. Um so do we address that now? Do we bring that up, you know, after we bring ourselves in compliance and then go back and touch on those the verbiage that needs to be adjusted in those policies
afterwards? I I don't know how you want to address. So that that would open the door to precisely that the the vote tonight would get us into compliance and then our work ahead of going through our catalog of policies would be the opportunity to have more of the
substantive conversation about specific language um phrasings whether or not we think they're adequate or suitable or appropriate. as those policies come forward um on the substance that would be the opportunity to surface any
specific uh questions, concerns or language that you would want to um change or alter. The policies as written right now are are policies that became effective in June when we went to
school boards. And so the compliance updates we're getting sometimes refer to, as Brian mentioned, the inclusion of sunscreen in a student's right to access uh medicine and things of that sort. In other cases, it's uh updating the language about the student data
reporting system that the policy that that's the only thing that's changing in a policy. Um I'm trying to remember other examples from the folks on the ad hoc committee. Um I those two sort of leapt immediately to mind.
>> Yeah. I think the other one was the new board member um training uh updates. >> The requirements. >> The requirements. Yeah. >> Those were some old co rules. They had extended things to a year. It used to always >> they extended it. Now we're going back to >> Okay. So the first read vote brings it
into compliance. uh the first read vote and a second read vote would bring it into compliance. >> Okay. And then if there was um as the policy work goes forward and we're reviewing our catalog of policies that
really becomes the opportunity to get into the substance of the policy addressing the questions that the prior board had uh highlighted or made notes on or just questions as a board that we have as to is this the version of the policy that we want and it is currently
the policy we have on the books but because we haven't done that thorough or review process that work would now begin. >> If I I'm going to assume that this is this is what you understand as well, but just in case it's not that every time a
first read is just bringing housekeeping. Sometimes well every policy change has to go through first read and second read. In the future, we should expect substantive changes to the pol like, you know, the board's going to do something different,
not just, you know, adding sunscreen, >> right? uh which you know maybe it's really more than housekeeping to somebody but um I I'm just this this instance is a the first read set is housekeeping items
>> but two months from now the first read set could be >> changes >> big league changes to our policy or or another set of housekeeping you know or something like that or but just in case
it was it's not that every time it's going to be just housekeeping items. This time it is. >> Right. Um okay. So in in light of that that these are housekeeping items to be brought up to get us in compliance.
I do want to at some point in the very near future revisit policy 5145.7 and add some and adjust some important wording in that policy. >> Well, that's what we'd have to do tonight before we could
>> we could adopt what's >> Yeah, we can adopt to get into compliance between today and next week and then have the substantive conversation. Sounds like it would be inefficient, but there's no reason the board couldn't change the same policy every single time it met. >> Mhm.
>> I mean, >> I'm hoping we don't >> but I I in in >> the the conversations, right, the conversations that the policy ad hoc had were about getting us in compliance, a charge of substance.
>> Yeah. To to make sure that we are in compliance. You know, I I can understand foregoing deeper changes in in the policies listed, but I do want I just want to make note that we need to revisit 5145.7. >> Okay. Thank you.
>> I thought that the first readings since this is the working session that the first reading is here. So, everyone's >> done their due diligence and you know, look over prior to the meeting. questions or thoughts
>> and then could ask any questions beforehand and too but could bring those questions or changes that they want to this meeting now like as Andrea said we don't make any changes now we'll make this in the next policy meeting like and then bring it to
the second and say okay here's the next draft here's so this is the first reading is just here's the blue book policy right out of the book that we're adopting do we want to change anything or modifying anything and that's what we talk about in this first reading working
session but we don't like you I don't know >> well I guess there's there's two ways that we can go about it we can get into compliance and then shift to substance or you're talking about um and I think
um Nicole you're sort of surfacing the same question I think in the same spirit of um of compliance and substance Yeah, I don't I didn't know if that was part of the of that what we were doing in the since this is a committee of a
whole now and not that would be done >> since there's an ad hoc policy it's done in the in the committee in that ad hoc committee but then doesn't this committee of a whole give the opportunity of everyone to have that policy time theoretically as well
>> yeah it does I I was just trying to I think preserve the fact that the ad hoc committee came into this with the compliance mandate. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. >> And and and not closing the door. >> Similarly to more substantive
>> I think that's just why I want to make sure that everyone understands is that it's not >> necessarily end all be all. >> Correct. >> But we just need to bring these policies up to date. They're the standard policies that were there.
Are we agreeing to readopt them in the language that they have been presented to us? And then to get into compliance, that's the whole point of this is to get into compliance. >> Correct. >> We can then if we have issues as Nicole said, she'd like to revisit, right? >> Like to revisit this, like to revisit that. It could be done >> not, you know, it could be done in in a
working session meeting, but not at the it doesn't have to be uh so to say the the the first read of it or second read of it. Even this is just the first and second read is just to get into compliance. That's the main point. But the second read is enforcing. It's
creating the policy. >> Well, the policy already exists. >> Well, the modification in this case, >> uh, the modifications, the housekeeping, as Brian said, is what's changing. The substance of the policies are unchanging because they've been our policies since
June. >> Um, Rich, I don't know if you were clarifying, but then I knew Rich had a point as well. Stephen, were you finished? >> Yes, thank you. >> Okay. This is this is just something I didn't know before the ad hoc policy committee, which you could probably explain better than me, but this is a
batch of policies that came from NJSBA that they noted that we are that they updated. So, our policy is now out of compliance with the new update and they do this several times a year. >> Correct. So, that's why these specific
ones came up tonight. moving forward once we get these in compliance with the changes that they said we should make moving forward when we have first reads that's those will be policies that we're particularly bringing forward to update
on our own accord just clarifying because I didn't get that before that was >> I think that's >> yes I agree with what >> right I think the point that I was making before which I still don't like it seems like just an appetite from a lot of a couple of the board members
that We were all under the same impression that this was a working meeting, right? So, um, and that formal action is not going to be taken. Yet, this is now going to be the second working meeting that this board has taken formal action in a row. That's a fact, right? So, against the spirit of what we said we were going to do here,
we're now doing it for the second month in a row. >> But I think it's only because the uh legislation we were supposed to be compliant in December. So, that's the only reason I think we did the working. Okay. Correct me if I'm wrong. The reason why it's late on compliance is
because the NJSBA was late getting it out to the districts. Correct. >> That is true. >> There you go. So, I mean, there's some wiggle room there. And what I'm saying is, listen, we're setting it. It's not even about these two specific policies. It's precedent setting. It doesn't matter what the topic is. >> It could be policy. It could be swearing
her in. This is now the second time that we're going against what we said we were going to do about taking that formal action uh in a committee in the poll setting where normally if we didn't go this route, this is we're all on Zoom and the public's not here. That's what I that's where you are under the
impression that some others were under the impression but yet we're moving this policy forward when I'm saying we don't even know if the parents even know that that we're doing this. >> I recall slightly differently. >> As do I. >> As do I. >> Well, there's obviously confusion here. So I mean >> Andrew
>> we always were under the impression that formal action was not going to be taken at working meetings because they were going to be handled the same way that we did uh on the prior structure. >> You have formal action. >> I wanted to say that I recall I think bringing this issue up at our last meeting to just clarify that because we
were under a time crunch that we were doing the first reading uh we made that change the modification that once we that we would vote on it on the next meeting. And I think I was clear saying okay we are voting on it at the next meeting even though that is sort of out of our you know our process which
sometimes happens but that everybody knew we'd vote on the second reading and we would be ex if we voted pass it we would be accepting it and that I was trying to explain that in my previous experience in a board once you accept the first reading and you vote on it you're really not supposed to come to the second reading and say oh wait I
want to change this because then you kick it back into that first reading process. So, I believe that, you know, we did really verbally talk about how we would be doing a second reading at this meeting at our last meeting and that I hope that people understood that you really like if you try to make a change
at a second reading, you're kicking the policy back into that first and second, you're you know, resetting the the clock. That's my understanding of my prior experience working with >> Brendan. If we would have had passed, if that would have had passed to table to the next meeting, it doesn't revert back to the first meeting. If we could have
taken formal action at the next meeting, correct? >> That's correct. That's my point. So that that's inaccurate. Um >> Bri, hold on. Rich Brian and Andrew had the floor. >> So So my recollection of the general idea, yes, there's a specific example
about this this second reading policy and and getting a compliance with the law and all that stuff. But our general this is the this is the benefit of having a public meeting. We can take action. we posted that we may take act
take action that that our consensus although I don't think you know it's it's confirmed completely was in general we will try to make this just a working meeting but we not going to handcuff ourselves and say we will never take action at a working meeting
>> we will do it selectively not often whatever you want to call it and I'm a a proponent of that there's a heck of a lot that needs to be done in policy that I would think it's fine to
have a regular, you know, first readings at the working meeting, not the second readings. That should be >> the exception. >> Rare the exception. >> We're too late tonight. >> No, no, but exception does not mean never >> or for two already a two million.
>> I'm fine with that. I'm fine with that. >> It was that was our act. It was our act. >> Uh if we could Phil >> just a quick process issue, >> process issue only. The board discussed a lot about decorum
over the past several months. And one of the things that was mentioned was the idea that board members only speak when the board president recognizes them to be able to speak. >> Secondly, with regard to decorum, we
also talked about um addressing the issue and not the individual. that there are merits and much to be uh debated here on everything that's being discussed. But
it's a very different uh conversation if number one a board member asks to be recognized by the president and number two the board member speaks to the issue that they want to speak to and not
directly to or at the person. Uh, Brian, were you finished? >> Okay. Other comments or questions at this point? >> I guess I had some more. Sorry. Um,
if we had delayed it to another 7 days, what would that do? Because we're still out of compliance, right? So, what what's another like what would that theoretically do to us? Nothing, right? Like there's no penalty if we were to get into compliance
tonight versus the 24th. Correct? If you're asking me correct but yes I think the the >> incentive has been let's get ourselves in compliance. >> Okay. Um in the last 5year period how many
challenges have there been? >> Two official challenges >> there was >> in the last five years. There was one challenge that challenged one individual title and then one challenge that challenged four >> four titles. Oh, two separate challenges. >> Two separate challenges.
>> Five separate books. >> Okay. Never on the same book. Correct. >> I believe when the four were challenged, there was a repeat book there from the uh maybe two years prior. >> Okay.
um in the new policy when they say the parent can opt out of the book, right? How does that work? Meaning like parent X wants to opt their child out of the book, then what happens?
>> So that is not in the policy. Um but that is a school procedure. Okay? >> That is broadcast. That is the parents are notified. They have that option typically at the beginning of the school year. Um, and if they want to, they simply email the librarian and say, "My child XYZ, I do not want them to take
out these five titles or I don't want them to take out books in this genre or books, you know, looking." >> So, are the books um that could be potentially deemed inappropriate or unsuitable, are they kept in a separate
section or are they with all the other books? >> I don't know. I think the books are probably going to be mixed in as they're current. >> My point is rating system on some of these books. >> No. So, so they're so they're in the library with all the other books in the collection. Am I correct?
>> They are. Yes, they are in that collection. >> So, so if a parent says, "I don't want my child to take out this book." Is there a mechanism in place that doesn't give the child access to the book while in the library, but doesn't
allow them to check it out? I'm sure they could access the book. Sure. Yeah. >> So, so if you're saying that the parent can opt their child out, that is, is it from checking it out, but they can still have access to the material in the library? Am I understanding that correctly?
>> I think so. >> So, that So, so, so what exactly is opting out when the child could still have access to the book without the parents knowledge? They just can't check it out. They can still have access to it, right? Am I wrong? >> In other words, could they find it on a
shelf and look at it >> and read it or take pictures of it or whatever they want to do? Right? They can still have access to the book even though a parent has sent in and says, "I do not want my child to have access or check out of this book." Am I correct in
saying that? >> Yeah. Okay. So then that doesn't make any sense to me whatsoever because a parent can opt their child out of the book and the kid still has access to it. So, um, has there been any other school districts that have modified their
policy from the recommendation of the NGSBA that we're aware of? >> I don't know. Uh, I know the law requires a minimum of the one year. >> Yep. >> But schools can vary that. >> So, is anyone or are you aware No one's
aware of another school district doing anything like this today? I am not aware of specific examples of that but obviously that was the point of our conversation at the last meeting as to why we would consider three years. >> And then I my last question is on
moving forward what is the criteria to challenge a book meaning on the stakeholder side what vested interest what defines the vested interest in being able to challenge a book? Well, I think the policy outlines as the parent, a student, a staff member.
>> A parent, a student or staff member. >> Parent of a current student, >> current student. >> The interesting thing about this is that I think by that policy, a vast majority of the challenges don't come in because there's no vested interest by that definition that I've seen.
So, um, at least from what I've sitting at this chair, a lot of folks don't meet that criteria. Um yeah that that that's the points I wanted to bring out is that it it when we sit back and say okay
the parent it doesn't take away rights of parents because the child can't check the book out we all have to be reminded that they still have access to the material. So that's that's the thing that that I don't really um understand as any basis of a fair argument to say that this is an infringement of on
parental rights at all. Um, and the final point is that putting a three-year uh extending it to a three-year period, boards flip every year. Like look at this board. There's four seats open every year. You got affordable housing situations popping up
all over our communities. Our demographics are going to change. You're going to have people coming into the community that are brand new that are going to have their hands tied because they moved in and they didn't know this existed. they want to challenge a book and they can't because hypothetically it was already been done within the past year. So now I have to wait a year or
two or three to do that which doesn't make any sense when it's clear that our our community is changing rapidly. So it's just you guys know where I stand on it but that's all I have to say about it. >> Other comments?
>> Well, yeah. I just want to can just on parental rights and the library access. If a parent said to the school district, went to their counselor, went to the administrators and said, "I don't want my child to have anywhere access to that, could you limit that child in the library?" Like, is there any way if that
was important to the parent, could the school do that? Could you could they police that child because of the parents wanting it? I mean, if that's going to be an issue that they can have access to it, but if parents >> was aware of that student and that and and knew that that student wasn't supposed to be anywhere near his
material, they would do the best of that they could while the library was functioning. Again, I can't say that >> but we would accommodate >> we would accommodate everything we can to prevent that student from accessing the material, >> but there is no foolproof system there. It's >> of course
>> if you have kids roaming in a library, >> right? >> Um >> uh other questions, Cynthia. >> Um to your point, the parent can opt out. How would the parent know what books are available in the library
to know what books they can opt out of? If there was a parent, for example, like that parent that came up and spoke, she had no idea that a book like that with those images existed. So, how would she know other than if she
was at a board meeting and she discovered that and she didn't know? >> Pretty sure if any parent emailed our librarians just wanted to talk about what the materials were that are available to students and if there was anything controversial, could we talk about that? They'd be open to that conversation. They have a they have a
list of what's controversial. >> There's there's there's a lot of lists out there about what's controversial. Yeah. >> So, the librarian has a list of controversial books. If apparent >> Well, the librarian has access to the internet. That's what I'm talking about. It's the lists that are out there. I can't remember the names of the um websites from back in the book
challenge, but I looked at many of them um that that rated books and talked about what the content of the books were and the concerns that there were with them and things like that. So they would just base it on whatever previous book challenges, not necessarily because if it even if it's
not about graphics, if it's about a specific topic. >> Yeah. I think a lot of times and I know from classroom teacher perspectives, particularly teachers who might be offering students um you know independent choice in terms of a book that might select. There's always that
opportunity for a parent to uh have a conversation whether it's among a selection of books that they might be choosing from uh to ask that their child not you know have access to several of those or I think the other point is
whether it's a librarian or a teacher if you have a parent as a parent have concerns generally about certain types of reading material um the conversation with the librarian would be able to um steer I that conversation productively or the teacher who might be apprised of,
oh, if kids are picking a book, I know I spoke to your parent, they have concerns about this title or these titles. uh that would be something that they would be able to >> Yeah, I believe I believe uh one point parents had access to um what was
available in the library online and that you know I'm not sure why that was that I think that would probably be very helpful for parents who >> may want to opt their child out of you know seeing a particular book or you know taking a particular book out
of access. >> Yeah, that would be a very good I thought it was I thought we had the catalog access to. >> Yes, there was catalog access but no longer available. I'm not sure why. And that maybe that's something we could revisit to have available. >> Yeah.
>> So, that would be a nice option to have for parents who want to opt their children out >> or for parents that want to see what's in the collection that they can suggest to their children. >> Yes, >> absolutely. Andrew, >> I just uh Googled, you know, Northund
and uh Worhees catalog, library catalog. Looks like you can log in with a ID. So I assume that parent >> or could request an ID if they >> Well, I think that's the student. >> Parents were able to get in. >> I guess not.
>> Right. I guess my point is the catalog is available online, but it's ID protected. Yes. >> So, I don't want to speak cuz I don't know 100% but we will look into the catalog issue. Um, if it was restricted from the public but is not restricted from our parents, you know, that those
are two different things and that's what I have to find out. I think >> and it sounds like you actually might have already answered my question, but um I mean I'll check the library to say if there was if there is a way to allow you know there is a question about parents but >> and I'm assuming that ID is probably
student ID right now perhaps. So, >> so any parent with their child would be able to >> Absolutely. Yes. >> Okay. If it's asking for an ID and I know the students have access to the catalog, right? Um if the parents don't because they don't have a specific ID, they could use their child's ID to
access the catalog. It sounds like um but again, I would look at why it was public, why it went to this and then report back. >> That would be great. >> Yeah. Andrea, >> uh, I'm going to do Robert's rules of order and, uh, I move through the previous question or move to close the
debate to see if we can move ahead to a vote and keep on with the agenda. And I mean, >> second, >> okay, I think we need a 2/3 majority on that to call the president. >> Okay. >> I think
I don't I I don't I don't know if that's true. As a matter of fact, according to the debate debate 2/3 2/3 >> What? What are you looking at? >> I'm looking at the the Roberts cheat
sheet that we got for our training the other week. >> Thank you. >> Yeah. >> Oh, thanks. School boards learned something. >> Um, >> so uh so we have a motion to close a 2/3 majority needed to close. Um, why don't
we roll call that to make sure that we're at two/3. >> Miss, >> yes. >> Mr. Ch, >> yes. >> Mr. Hanley, >> yes. >> Miss, >> yes. >> Mr. Lord, >> no. >> Mr. Matthews, >> yes.
>> Mappa, >> yes. >> Mr. Morgan, >> yes. >> Mr. Reyes, >> no. M. Miss Stein, >> yes. >> And Mr. >> Yes. So I think we have 2/3 we needed.
>> All right. So now then we are voting. Uh why don't we roll call that as well? So we're voting to accept the second read and the first read. Well the motion in motion. Okay. Miss
>> yes. >> Mr. Chapman. >> Yes. >> Mr. Hamley. >> Yes. >> Miss Hibs. >> Yes. Mr. Lord. >> I would have been a yes on a non-modified version. It's been modified on the no. >> Mr. Matthews, >> yes. >> Missappa, >> yes. >> Mr. Morgan, >> yes.
>> Miss Reyes, >> no. >> Miss Stein, >> yes. >> And Mr. McKisac, >> yes. >> Thank you, Mr. >> All right. Um, we have our finance, facilities, and transportation report from Miss. >> Okay. I'm going to start with the
presentation up on the screen. So, last month we talked about our expenditures and our cost containment. This time we're going to look at the revenue sources in the budget and to as much of our knowledge as we have right now which it is February so we don't have all the numbers just yet um our best estimates
as to where we are. So I'll try and move through this quickly in the essence of time but also give it the attention that it deserves. Um so tax levy represents 85% of our budget that is the biggest um revenue source for us. We also receive state aid in the approximate 7% range out of district tuition for students
attending our programs. other miscellaneous revenue which um encompasses interest income that we receive. Um student parking fees that we used to have and other items such as facility rentals. Also budgeted fund balance is something that carries from two budget years prior. We're able to
carry into this future budget year. I'll get a little bit more into that on a future slide just so that I can clarify that and what that means. So tax levy, we do have a 2% tax levy cap that was enacted in 2010. There are exclusions to that tax loading cap and those are for health benefit cost
increases that exceed 2% mostly relying on the state health benefit plan and if that goes up exceedingly high the state does allow us to use um an adjustment for that. Uh pers pension contributions increases that are over 2%. Any significant enrollment increases if we
have unused taxing capacity or bank cap that's something that you can go over the 2% to use. and also a separate proposal such as a second question on um a voter ballot. Also, there's debt service tax revenue. That's something in addition to normal general fund revenue.
That's typically just for a referendum vote. So, if the voters vote through a referendum specifically for capital projects, there will be a debt service assessment on their tax bill. So, this is the historical tax levby chart for the past several years. Um the blue bar is the general fund balance. So
that's our operating budget for the district. And the small piece at the top that's orange reddish color that is for a prior year referendum that was back in 2016. There was debt service issued for several capital projects. There is a link on this slide that'll be posted online that if you want to see what we
did with that money. The taxpayer share was 6.8 million and then the state aid was 2.9. And that 15-year debt service payment will continue until 2032. You see there are three years there that there is a debt service adjustment. I'll get a little bit into that on the next
slide, but we were able to use the debt service success of the referendum, which was we were able to complete projects less than the cost of what we had originally anticipated. So, we had um the cost of those projects come in less than what we originally thought. We were
able to take that money and return it back to the taxpayers for those three budget years to offset their tax bill. So on this slide you'll see kind of our historical um general fund increases as well as kind of the net impact on the tax bills. If you were with the board back during
that time you'll remember we actually increase the general fund budget those three subsequent years after 2020 2021 2.8 2.83 3.33. However, their actual tax bill only felt a net effect of the 1.6
1.68 and 2.2. And that's the refund of that capital project u money that was remaining in our debt service fund to be able to offset that additional debt service assessment that they had on their tax bill. So again in 2020 2021 we used the bank cap since it was a 0%
increase and we use that in the subsequent three budget years. Hopefully that makes sense. I can always clarify that a little bit more if you're needing clarification. So, state aid funding over the past several years, the S2 bill
was enacted in 2018 and we've felt the significant impact of S2 in this district. So, what it did was took adjustment aid for districts and it either adjusted you down or it adjusted you up. So, there were districts that were underfunded got the adjustment aid
increase. Our district was adjusted down um and we felt a severe impact of student. So you could see in 2018 2019 we originally were receiving about $5.5 million per year for state aid and now currently in the year that we have right
now 2526 it's $1.7 million less than we were receiving um those eight years ago. So again that's that's a year-over-year impact. Um so still feeling that today budgeted fund balance. So what does that mean and why
do we have fund balance carrying into this current budget year? School districts are permitted to maintain unassigned fund balances um which is surplus up to 2% of the total budget. That's a healthy district. You should have a 2% um un assigned surplus. Anything exceeding that 2% threshold
during your annual audit, you can take in as revenue in a succeeding budget year. Um so the audit that closed at the 2025 630 of 2025 we're able to take into this 2627 budget. Um so that was established and set at the end of that
audit. So what does it mean to balance a school budget? Um the revenues have to equal appropriations. Districts cannot run deficit. And right now what we're looking at as far as moving forward in the next budget process is waiting for
state aid. Um, so the reference on the first bullet point is referring to the governor. Now, there's legislation on the desk of the governor to extend the state aid timeline to two additional weeks. So, she's allowed to have two additional weeks to determine what state aid will be for districts. So,
unfortunately, I will not have firm numbers for the board most likely until the week before our preliminary budget in March. And all of that kind of moves through this timeline. So, as soon as we get stated the week before the 20th, we will be presenting the board with the preliminary budget with all of those
final numbers. And then all of that leads up to the annual budget hearing at the April meeting. >> Was the state aid last year, I can't remember if it was less, more I felt like it was a little bit more than we thought it was going to be. >> We always expect three scenarios less
the same or more. Usually, it's about the same. Last year, we received a very incremental increase. not significant. So this is just a summary of where we are today building the budget. Again, these are estimated numbers. All of these are subject to change. Um but
right now approximately on the left hand side, the left bar, the revenues are expected to decrease about $500,000. Um this is due to this green bar is state and is currently expected to be flat. However, this component is unknown and
will be released the second week of March. Um, we do expect a $100,000 decrease in extraordinary aid revenue. That's for the special education students that rise above a certain threshold of cost. The small blue bar is miscellaneous revenues. Um, projected to decrease approximately $120,000 due to
decreased revenue streams such as parking fees and facility rental fees. The small yellow bar is tuition. Again, we're still looking at that lefth hand column um of students attending our programs. Gray bar is the budgeted surplus. And then the blue bar is a tax levy base.
So again, we have a health benefit adjustment that I'm going to get into a little bit more on the next slide available to the district currently due to the severe increase in health benefits this year. So let's start looking at the right side. The appropriations, the black bar is assuming that all of
our budgetary expenditures are assumed to be equal for next year. Um all of the increases for the main three budget drivers, salaries, benefits, and transportation are the yellow bar is salaries. Assuming that that increases 3.4%, which is moving with the current
salary guide and um collected bargaining unit um agreement, that's $1.4 million increase for us. The green bar is benefits. That's increasing by 20% or $1.6 million. That is staggering for our budget. and the brown bar is
transportation assuming a $674,000 increase. So again, assuming everything is everything else is the same in the budget, just those three budget drivers is $3.7 million increase. So I want to point out one thing since Katie has us up. The um health benefit
increase is $1.6 million. If we use the health benefit adjustment for the tax levy, that comes out to 1.4. So it doesn't quite pay for the health benefit increase, but it comes close to it. >> Say that part. Can you say that again, Rick?
>> So the appropriate health benefit increase is going to be $1.6 million. >> How do we know that? >> Because we've already our B already told us. So you have already for 20. It's a 20% increase next year on health. >> You confirmed? >> Yes. >> Cuz he when he first came in, his numbers were wild. Like his his variance was
>> That was a few months ago. >> Yeah. That's why this is the first time. >> Absolutely. And I think he had gone as high as >> so there are districts I know of that are are getting 40% increase. >> So 20% is insane to me but it is a lot
so much better than what I'm hearing from my colleagues. Um so we're actually I hate to even say the word fortunate to have a 20% increase but that's and again healthcare you're going to hear a lot about healthcare in the next month and two months really. Um it is the driving
factor as to you know what's going to motivate what's going to drive this budget and whether or not we're going to um maintain what we have in our district is whether or not we want to spend money on healthcare >> and and actually I shouldn't say we don't have a choice but to spend money on healthcare. It's going to be determined whether or not we want to cut
something to pay for that or we want to raise tax levy to pay for it. Those are the two options and there'll be more about that coming. I just wanted to point that out because I thought this slide just it was it was so easy for me to see those two numbers, right, and to see them side by side and
see how they match up. >> So, the purpose of this slide is to give everyone kind of a holistic view of all the anticipated revenues, the anticipated appropriations, but also taking into account the revenue side has the health benefit adjustment embedded in it. And even still, there's a $1.6
million gap. So, even taking the maximum taxing authority that we have right now, we have a 1.6 6 million gap. >> Go ahead. >> Um the that extra.59% that's what that line item is that
>> the 2.59% is a health benefit adjustment that's available for us to use. >> But it is it is the tax levy going from 2 to 2.59 or 2 to 4.59? >> It would be 4.59. >> So again, let me just go one more slide.
So, here's the different scenarios that I wanted to play out on the screen for everyone's understanding. If we go up the 4.59%, that's a $1.6 million budget gap. That's on the far right. If we go up 2%, which you can do, we have a $3 million budget
gap. If you decide to go 0%, it would be 4 almost 2 million. >> So, we have to cut no matter what is what it comes out to. It's just about how deep we have to cut. I think we've had several conversations in past finance and facility and transportation committees of the fiscal cliff and what
other county districts are seeing versus us and we always knew it would it would come but we were trying to hedge as long as possible with this health benefit increase >> it's happening now if we don't take if we if we don't take what's available
>> the cliff has been accelerated dramatically because of the healthare cost that that is really the again if you take that 1.6 six off of here and then we went up if you took that off the 2% gap, right? We would then still have to cut 1 and a.5 million. Um, but we
have to cut that anyway even at a 4.5 4.59% increase. So again, the the healthcare is the piece that is causing this issue right now. >> Can you go to the previous slide briefly
and let me just understand the numbers. So 2.59% of something >> is 1.4 million, but 2% of something else is 57 million. >> So the tax levy base with the 2% increase. So that's our total aggregate
tax levy base with a 2% in it already. >> And then 2.5% above. So it's 102% of today's. And this is this is 102% of today's. I hate to make assumptions for the board, but our recommendation as an administration is
in in order to bridge the healthc care um wild increase that we're seeing this year is to take the health benefit adjustment and then still find $1.6 million of either savings or adjustments or you know that's what we're working on
right now. Could you sorry >> y >> my hand um could you just explain this healthc care um benefit that we can take a little bit more so the state's offering uh where does that come from because I don't I don't know if I see >> the only time you can raise taxes above
the 2% is if there's those certain um items that qualify so the state is offering health benefit adjustment to districts every district >> so they're not giving us money they're saying they're allowing us to raise money I need that clarification That makes a lot more sense than I
thought they were giving us money. >> Yes. >> They're not adjusting state for that, >> right? They're saying they're they're red they're making an exception to their rule. >> The 201 um caps us at raising our local tax level by 2% but then based on different
um there's enrollment waiverss, there's healthcare enrollment waivers, there's um >> y what was on the slide? >> The other wavers that we usually don't qualify for anything except for healthcare. Um and last year if you remember we qualified for healthcare it was a um 66% increase. So instead of
going 2% we went up 2.66. The 66 was the healthcare waiver and that's because of how much the healthcare was raised last year. So put that in comparison to the cost of healthcare being raised this year. Last year I think was 8 or 9%. That's why we're that's why the
healthcare waiver is 2.59% above the 2% tax levy. And and that the next page, I'm sorry. It gets you that that one gets you to a $1.6 million tenative numbers, >> right? >> Yep. >> But
>> absolutely depending on where falls >> because the healthare you're not going to find that in the coins under the sofa. >> No. No. And and we're we're digging deep already for that and those will be things that we bring to you um at the future meeting. You know, by the March meeting, we'll have a lot of this
figured out. Um but yes, the the 1.6 million is what we have to cut even if we raise the tax 4.59%. So >> and and so think about it in in buckets, right? This way I look at it. Um healthcare is 1.6% increase and the
waiver gives us 1.4 of that back. So we're already in that bucket down 2%. Or 200,000. Um the salary, which is our biggest line item, goes up 3.4%. But we're only able to offset that with 2% of our tax levy, right? So that 1.4%
of our budget line is a number that is we already have to make up that number, that 200,000, the increase in transportation, all those things that are above 2%. Anything above anything in our district that is rising in cost above 2% adds up to $1.57
million. >> Right. Fact. So uh so you mentioned brief you always look at three scenarios with three budgets. Is this based off which of the three is this based off of? >> This is based off of assuming flat stating >> the middle one. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Cuz I think that's the most likely scenario.
>> Okay. I think sorry I would I would love to see what that would look like with the other scenarios if that's a possibility. >> Okay. >> Thank you. Just for reference, the you chart about how our state aid has been going down was that we are down 1.7ish
million dollars over the last five years. >> So the only way >> year over year >> Yeah. Yeah. So the only way state aid will help this is if it goes way back to where it used to be >> 5 years ago. >> If we get an increase in state aid and it's $40,000, that's going to help, but it's going to it's going to close that
gap. Instead of being 1.57, it's going to be 1.53. Rich, couple things. One, hate to say I told you so, but I said this last year that this is where we were going to be, right? Fiscal cliff. I I we saw this isn't a surprise. I said that we were
going to be here and and here we are. Um the 3.4 Rich, where where does that number come from? You you said on the you said it was 2 plus the 1.4. >> Sure. Salaries are going to go up next year. 3.4% um according to the collective bargaining agreement.
>> That's already been negotiated. >> That was negotiated. It's we have a collective bargain agreement. >> What is the final projected budget expenditures? I I would anticipate it to be I I was >> nothing is final. These are all estimates.
>> What is ballpark? I can't read it. >> So if you want to look at the appropriations >> and if I could make a suggestion that if on these presentations which are which are great if we could name them and link them in the agenda, I just can't see it. So,
>> so I think this process up till today. >> Yeah, this being the working session obviously gives us the opportunity to get this presentation to digest it and continue to bring questions. So, this will be available for review as of tomorrow. >> I'm having a hard time seeing it on the
screen. >> What we've been doing, again, this is a fairly new process for us as a whole. Um, we put the presentation from last month in the board folder for you all to to be able to um digest more and analyze. Um, and then we also the minutes that you approved tonight for
last month when those are posted tomorrow, the link for this presentation will be in there for the public as well as part of the minutes. So, because this was presented at a public meeting, it's part of the minutes and that's when the link goes live for the public. >> Okay. So, so the final budget was going to be estimated at what >> it looks like about 70.
>> The estimated >> estimated >> revenue is listed there. Again, I don't think I don't know if I have a total. likely the totals of the lines, but um >> the right hand bar which is the appropriation is >> just over 70
>> and it was about 68 last year, correct? >> Thereabouts. >> 67. >> Okay. So about a $3 million increase for the prior year, give or take estimated. >> Yeah. Okay. Um >> I think it's
more 3.7 actually. Yeah. And again, that's just those three largest budget drivers increasing >> 3.7 3.7. >> So it sounds like the tax levy recommendation is going to come in at almost 5% estimated. Correct. >> If we utilize all taxing authority, it
would be the 4.5 >> 4.5. So 4% >> that would be the most allowable. >> Correct. >> I can tell you that if the board goes that direction, there's going to be a revolt from the taxpayer because just keep in mind there's also the local side that they're going to get hit from. So
this is not um unfortated issue. >> Every Hunter County district is experiencing the same impact. >> Yes. >> No, I I my my thing is that I've been saying for a year now is that >> this pattern was unsustainable. Hence
why evidenced by this, right? And when you have enrollment at an all-time low and expenditures at an all-time high, capped at 2%, those lines are never going to go down. And unless you do something differently, you're going to find it to be in that fiscal cliff that
we're at right now. Like I said last year, right? So I'm not sure how this gets resolved, but I mean, everyone keeps talking about affordability in New Jersey, affordability, and this is going to go right at the heart of affordability right here. You can't have enrollment at
an all-time low with a budget at an alltime high. What's the cost per pupil? What is our cost per pupil estimated to be at? >> That's available on the taxpayers. >> I don't know it. >> So we we can talk about that in a future meeting if you'd like. Like no cost per pupil.
>> Andra had a question. >> Isn't that a gauge of how this isn't that how the gauges like how districts run like on a cost per pupil? >> It is one way to to to measure a district. I but I I do want to caution that you know looking at those numbers. For instance, if you looked at a um 9 to 12 regional high school district that
has one high school and you look at their cost per pupil compared to our district that has two high schools, um we have a lot of duplication of services in those two high schools. You know, we have two completely separate sports teams. We have two completely separate administrations. We have two completely separate custodial crews. We have two
completely separate pieces of equipment. I mean, there are just I could roll on and on that maintaining two high schools should be a lot more expensive than maintaining one high school, right? That that's not the case. Might we might our per pupil cost be a little higher
than a district that has one high school? It might be, but again, that doesn't tell the full story, but it is part of the picture and we can give you some more information. >> One last question because we talked about the raises. Is the 3.4% 4% going to go to um staff that is not collectively collectively bargained
collectively bargained as well. >> That's up to the board, but that's what I would recommend. Yes. >> Okay. Well, >> Andrew, >> I had a question about you mentioned transportation costs are going up as well. Uh could you give a little more background on what drives those transportation costs?
>> Yes. Um please. >> We we are seeing anywhere from like 5 to 7% increases on normal runs and I would say a little bit higher on the athletic runs. we've been having those conversations of why why they're more expensive. Um unfortunately with athletics it's during the time period that most um major bus companies are
already doing their K to8 runs, you know, anywhere from that like 2:30 to 3:30 4:00. So we typically unfortunately get the vendors that have the capability but also have the highest prices. >> So >> so we're seeing it more on the athletic supply. >> They're just So I assume we have a con
and and forgive me if I I don't know this. We have a contract. I know we contract our buses out. We look at that contract every year or we have a multi-year contract or >> um it is an annual contract with Cadiat services. >> Okay. So you're saying that every year they're kind of raising the prices and we can assume it's everything from I
don't know gas going up they have to pay their drivers more their healthare >> the driver increase is usually what's driving. >> So we try to increase the um we try to renew the runs at CPI which is usually affordable 1.7 1.8%. But again, if those
vendors do not want to renew in CPI, we have to go out to bid and a lot of times they do come in much higher. >> Yeah. >> And even CPI, you know, that 1.8 1.9 that adds, >> you know, that's at the 2%, right? So even if they go up to the minimum, that just means that we're keeping pace with
that at 2%. >> Right? I forgive me if we've discussed this here in other places, but I know sometimes there are ways to incentivize uh parents to wave their right to a bus seat and that does save us that can save a district money. I
>> have been looking for we actually I I hope we'll have a plan by next month, but next month is going to come very quickly when I start looking at the calendar, but that will be part of >> I don't know if that moves the needle or not, but >> Well, there there's two factors with that. One is um you know um we
eliminated a parking fees you know at one of our meetings um earlier in the year. We're gonna try to incentivize students to um not take the bus and maybe if we give a waiver for that, >> right, >> that would incentivize them to not take. But if we can incentivize them and we
can calculate that, we can um monetize that. If we can cut one run, one bus run for let's say, you know, a hundred seniors that decide not to um that wave their right, um that bus run is worth $50,000 or $55,000
>> a minimum run, right? >> Um and if we can save that and the revenue that we don't get from the parking fees that we're not going to get right now anyway, you know, that would offset that and now we have more savings. So again, those are things that cut away at that 1.5 million. And so,
but we're looking at that from 9 to 12. There might be people that will say, "Yeah, I will wave my right all year because I drive my kid every day. I drive to work at that time and I drop them off every day." And if you've ever sat outside North Hunter in the morning, you know, there's a lot of people that do that. Um, >> right. And I would say that anybody who
has a child who participates in after school activities generally winds up having to drive their ch pick their child up 90% of the school year you know and maybe if there was money in it they would shift to some other model of >> you know >> for
just you know there might be some >> transportation waiverss are something that we are going to present to you as one of the options to close that 1.57 million gap. Um it will probably include senior parking and um under the classroom as well. >> When would we know whether or not these
waiverss are taken? It would be well after the budgets approved. I mean >> yes. So this year it will be after the budget is approved. Um and and I guess every year it would actually be because if we we can't ask someone now to decide what they want to do next year. I mean
we could but we're probably not going to get a good response. Um so typically you know but what we would do is in subsequent budget years we would say what was our participation last year and once we have multiple years under our belt we can sort of anticipate this is what we're going to save and that's where we can start you know taking that
money out of the budget for bus runs that we would have typically budgeted for. >> But this this year we could gauge transport or participation this coming summer >> and then you know the implementation then we can kind of gauge for next year's budget cycle. But this this year's budget >> this year I think this would be
>> and we're trying to figure out how we can do this so that somebody doesn't wave get the money and then take it back. Right. So it has to be something that we you know sort of like an aid and loo kind of thing which is for somebody that you know lives within 2 miles of the district and um decides they don't want to take their busing um or outside
two miles um they actually get paid money back. They they wave their bus fees and um it's usually for private school students, things of that nature. It would be similar to that. At the end of the year, we'd say you didn't take a bus seat this entire year, you didn't utilize it, and you kept your waiver,
and then the person would get the incentive at that point. So, >> so um my question is the $ 1.57 million gap exists with use of maximum taxing authority, correct? >> Correct. So, when um I I'm guessing it's
coming in March. Um I imagine you're going to give us a budget that includes what your recommended cuts are. >> Yes. >> And are those recommended cuts >> for the 1.57 million or are you also
giving us a recommendation for cuts that would be deeper if we were not to use our maximum taxing capacity? >> So, we can give you every scenario you'd like. Um, so yeah, we we we we will be giving you
information in March on what we have already cut to get to the $ 1.57 million reduction and then we'll also be giving you um scenarios if we want to cut deeper where we would have to hit. >> I mean, I do think we have a responsibility to the public if we're
going to be raising taxes. >> Absolutely. Um, so at least I think we should be conversant with um what we've either decided to forgo cutting in order to raise taxes or in order to keep taxes lower what we
decided. I think I think we need that if it's if it's not too burdensome for you to do to run more than one scenario. >> No, that's actually part of the presentation that you'll see in March. >> We used to do it in April. We actually have accelerated that to March. um you know just the budget timeline correct me
if I'm wrong some Katy but um you know preliminary budget has to be to the county office by a certain date so I believe our March board meeting was adjusted that's why it's so early so we can be 3 days it's it's due to the county office by the 20th um action meeting will be on the 17th of March and
so we will take action on on a preliminary budget to send down there that should be um you know what our final budget will be at that point we can change it between it going to the county and in April when the board will adopt the final budget. Um but we try not to do that because then we have to
get county approval again and that is something we try to avoid. So um and last year what we well what we've always done typically is we would present a preliminary budget say here's what we're planning on sending to the county office. The board would agree. We'd send it down and then we would have the presentation to the public in the April
meeting which would be talking about exactly what you're asking for is the the public information. Um, last year, you know, the board decided that we wanted to accelerate that. That's why it's one of our district goals. Um, and so we're doing that budget presentation basically in March. Now, we're still obligated by law to do a budget hearing
in April. So, we will continue to have we'll have the major budget presentation in March, a smaller budget presentation in April that will satisfy the um the legalities and then the board will adopt that final budget. But hopefully it does it shouldn't change between March and
April because of Go ahead. >> No, no, you may. >> I'm sorry. It's actually Brenda's. >> Yeah. Well, I didn't see the police. >> Oh, no. No. I I just wanted to uh to his point um uh the most recent data I found
was per pupil cost is 19,356 for North Boris, but I happen to look at my two districts that I represent and hybrid per cost for their K8s are 20,892 and Lebanon Township is 18,922.
So looking at I mean just we're >> yeah again there's there's no numbers I've seen that we are off the charts spending more money than anybody. I mean again if you you have to look be careful what you're comparing to right. Um >> when I look at administrative costs um I
look at high school districts that have two high schools and I compare our costs against them. There's seven of them in the state. Um I know that because I looked it up once. um you know comparing our administrative cost to somebody that has one high school with 400 students it's not the it's not apples you know
it's not the same comparison so >> by by doing a per pupil that brings it down >> like it averages it out >> well it does but sometimes again when you only have 400 students in a school um your per pupil cost is going to be a lot higher so in in that case we would probably look favorable in that but I
wouldn't want to use that to make us look favorable because it's not a fair comparison Brian, >> couldn't the board agree that uh in terms of this how deep, you know, of scenarios that we asked the VA to or office
um we're the lower end of that is the 2% levy, not the 0% >> levy. I mean, we don't put some boundaries on all the different things we're asking the the VA's office to end up doing, but I I would hope that we'd
at least agree that a 2% >> we don't want a 0% >> increase >> scenario, right? >> Yeah. That that I mean, we could ask ask them to do it, but why why to run all those cases that are unlikely? >> I agree with that. >> Yeah. So, yeah, we can present those we
can prepare those two scenarios. >> Um Okay. I didn't want Katie, I don't know what you had in terms of additional slides. Obviously, there's a lot of information here to be shared for us to digest to come back to continue the conversation next week. Um, uh, Katie, I
just wanted to so that we can move on to the other items under finance facilities. >> Just two more slides I was going to and I'm not going to I'm not going to, um, read these and I'm not going to explain them, but um, you know, my portion of this is to really look at the the um, budget goals. Okay, so Katie and I talk about the numbers all the time, but
budget goals are driven by the strategic plan. So I'll let you read these once we share this presentation with you tomorrow. You can ask me any questions you have on it between then and next week or whenever. Um and then this was a nice little infographic that we used our um notebook LM to do which basically
took the information from the budget goals and sort of frame that around what our um strategic plan is and um you know some of the things you'll see that I want to just that I do want to mention you know personnel and retention you know the you know we want we want our
staff to stay here we want our staff to be happy in our district um part of that is their compensation um that starts with this board. So the tone that this board sets is the the message I have to deliver to the staff and that the staff hear and see. And sometimes that is the
determination on whether or not somebody stays here, goes somewhere else to make an extra thousand, go somewhere else to make a little less money because they feel like they're valued. Um, but that really does start with this board and I want everyone to make sure they remember that as we're talking about budget cuts.
These are not easy decisions. Um, I live in Hunter County. I know what um taxes are. I actually got my new tax bill today and I am not happy. Um but I also understand that, you know, my local school district is doing their best to maintain those costs and maintain the
programming for students that are going through there. You know, my kids are gone. Um I want this board to keep that at top of your mind as we are looking at these budget scenarios. Nobody wants to pay more taxes, me included. Um but schools cost money and we are we only
have so many revenue sources to our um at our disposal as Katie showed you and 85% of that is our tax levy. So >> yes, >> um since we're a regional school
district, do the taxes affect all the sending districts or just like Clayton Township, Lebanon bro? >> Great question. And so our this tax levy and all the information we're talking about are the students in grades 9 through 12 from our 11 sending districts. So each individual school
district that sends to us, they have their own budget they're preparing and presenting to their boards to raise the taxes for the K to pre preK to 8 um school budget. So >> yeah, this is just the high school students, >> right? But who what constituents are
impacted? Is it all every >> and when we get to the next budget presentation that's when I'll have actually have like the regional share chart which shows like what's the regional share for each municipality and how are they bearing the burden of that whatever 2% 4.46 whatever it is
>> and we don't decide that. That is a state formula that gets plugged in and then it shows what portion Clinton Township has, what portion Hybridge has, what portion Lebanon Township has. >> So it'll take that full amount of >> in any given year based on population and valuation within that township.
There are years we could say we we want we're going to increase the budget 4.59% and there might be some townships that see a tax decrease >> and other ones will see >> correct >> an increase. So it it does fluctuate based on population and valuation of the township, >> right?
>> Yeah. >> Stephen, just to your point, I spent three years in municipal government. If you look at your tax bill, it's they're itemized separately. >> Okay. >> So the county the regional school tax and the municipal tax, they're separate. It'll show you the percent and the dollar amount. >> All right. And that's >> that's like a little at least that's how
we do it. Union Township and there's like a pie chart >> that comes with it so you can see exactly how it's broken down. >> Okay. >> Okay. Uh, all right. Um, other items to address on finance facility transportation.
>> Um, I'll go into agenda next. I know everybody was looking for a capital projects update. I know we're impressed for time, so I'm going to go through it quickly. Um, the ramp replacement is now complete, so we'll be final final payment at shortly. The district office roof was done over the summer. We're wrapping that up. That is done. um the
North Hunter erosion issue if everyone's aware if not there was an erosion issue up at a salt shed at the North Hunan campus on the very north end um over by the baseball fields that is complete and you'll see the final change order on this agenda that
I'm going to get to. Um, interior doors. We replaced lots of classroom doors at both North Hunter and Vorhees at a recommendation through the last CQAC audit. That's nearing completion. Just waiting for a few more cores and district office HBAC is to be done this summer. Very much thankfully to be
getting that done. Um, now looking at agenda items, the resolution to amend the official designated newspapers. We did that at the reorg meeting. I'm adding Ganet Media to that as um all of the other Hunton County districts are looking to
comply with the new OPMA newspaper publications. We have to advertise in our online um official newspaper two times every month through the rest of the year and that's going to get expensive. So Ganet Media is the most affordable option and we're actually for all of us to advertise together. So all
the K8s, everyone in Hunden County is going to pull together and do the advertisements together through Ganet. the contract with Clinton in Lebanon Township for the school resource officer. These are the exact um agreements that were presented to the board back in October. Um the same
amounts, nothing has changed. Um if there's any questions on those, I would probably defer any questions to you. >> So yeah, we were going to have a discussion about this in executive session um in regards to, you know, student safety and security um and also legal matters because Phil has been
working with um negotiating these contracts as well. So, yep. >> 12.4 may be pulled before next week. Um, I was hoping to give you a little bit more information, but I know again pressed for time. Um, there is a grant opportunity that I've been discussing
with Honeywell, who is our current ESCO, our energy savings consultant. I know we talked at length last meeting about them and how they were our consultant during our last EIP. We could potentially continue our EIP and go for a grant opportunity with significant savings and payback. Um, I'm still looking into the
viability of this project, but it would require the board's approval for Honeywell to be authorized to apply for this grant. Uh, we do meet the criteria for the grant. You have to have three or three out of the five components that they ask for. Um, and meet the minimum grant award for the projects. We would
have two applications, one for North and one for Borhees, primarily for solar canopies on parking lots. So, that's something that we looked into the viability back in 2019, 2020. Um, it didn't make sense at the time, but now there's additional incentives to do
that. This grant potentially stacking it with IR um IRS credits and then potentially stacking that with SREX. So, I'm looking into that now. I'm hoping to get something to the board as soon as possible because again, it's first come, first serve. It's a $75 million grant award and it can go very quickly because
I think our application would probably be 15. Um, so more to come on that. Hopefully you see it soon. If not, if you see it pulled, that's the reason why we're still trying to pull information together and determine if it makes sense. >> Does applying Sorry.
>> Does applying for the grant mean if we're gi if we get accepted, we go so or is it another step in the process? >> There would be a lot more steps. So if we if the board authorizes Honeywell and you know obviously through legal counsel approves that contract if we move
forward with them applying for the grant and we receive the grant they say you've got the money we can always say we don't make sense if it doesn't make sense because I'm looking also at financing options. I'm not sure if we need to finance using capital reserve because right now we have a certain amount of capital reserve. I'm not sure if it's
not. Again I know it's late. I know we have a lot to do tonight and there's there's still a lot of bridges to be crossed before we get there. This would just be to authorize Honeywell to submit us to apply for the grant because they have all of our energy audit for the last EIP process.
>> It does not lock us into anything. >> Does not lock us, >> but it gives us an opportunity to take the opportunity to move forward. >> My point is I I don't know why we would not. Yes, we just don't know if we're going to have the information to present to you by next. >> I'm hoping I'll get it together >> by Friday actually when the agenda.
>> But again, I don't want to push Bill to have to review it like over the weekend. >> Well, we have to release the agenda on Friday anyway. >> So, I haven't received it from Honeywell otherwise I would be pushing it forward. Um, but it's it's also in their legal counsel at the time.
The only other attachment I have available, all the other things are typical monthly motions, um, are the change orders or use of allowance. Um, again, this is referencing the erosion that we had up on the north side of the campus. This project did not exceed the grant, the the award, the purchase
order. It's really just using the allowance that's built in. We were anticipating once they started digging up some of the asphalt that was eroded that they would have to do some subgrade reconstruction and they did. they had to put in some additional um loose gravel underneath the new asphalt. Um so it was
a little bit more intense than we thought, but we had an allowance for that built into the uh bid award. So there will be a return of allowance actually. So it was under budget in totality of that $4,000. Hopefully that makes sense. >> Okay,
>> that's all I have. >> So um that puts us at community relations, student affairs. We have our overnight field trips. Rich, >> real quick before we move on, update on the bills list. There's been some back and forth. I've asked if I can get
copies of bills in advance of voting. Where are we with that? >> No. >> Um, is is that some What exactly is the request? >> Uh, request to see specific bills. by going over the bills list. If I find
something that I would like to review prior to approval, I'd like to see the bill because we're being asked to approve bills that I can't see. >> And are there specific bills? >> Um, probably will be. Yeah. But I don't have
anything specifically like top of mind this minute. But yes, >> I guess the the question is if I want access to a bill to review it prior to asking me to approve it, can I get it?
>> Okay. I think I think the the answer to this falls a little bit too much into an area where I'd be much more comfortable uh having this um discussion in executive session than in public. >> Okay. as the attorney client privilege.
>> Okay. >> And then on the bills, I know I had asked, can we get what is already done for the working meeting on the bills list? You like I I know it's a work in progress. I get it. Not everything's done now, but can we put what's done now
on on the uh agenda for the work? >> I see what you're saying. Unfortunately, when we cut our bills list, you see check numbers. So, I have to actually cut all of the checks and have them prepared in order for you to see that list. So, I can't I can't issue half of the checks and then run them again. >> Yeah,
>> if that makes sense. >> It it it just doesn't work. >> Yeah. Unfortunately, like procedurally, you can't really just >> So, we can either present the bills list to you now and then not pay any vendors that give us their information over next week, but that delays payments to our vendors. >> So, if I'm hearing you correctly, that
it's there's still bills coming in to be that you're trying to approve. >> Correct. >> And the system doesn't allow you to send or upload partials that have already been approved, >> right? >> System sounds outdated to me if you're ask my opinion, but but okay, take it at face value. Um, the reason I'm I I
mentioned that cuz Friday afternoon 3:30 for a Tuesday turnaround, that's a tight window. It's just it's a tight window, right? especially if I if there's bills that I would like to review, uh then I have to make the request in and then hopefully get them back before I could
actually approve it on Tuesday. >> I guess just just to remind the full board, um the bill's list that you're approving um that I think we're referring to um are um board obligations that the goods and services have already been provided to the board. >> Yes. Um, and all the board is doing is
approving the check to go out to the vendor for services and goods they've already been provided. So, um, it's not like the the bills list isn't saying, "Hey, can we >> spend this money? We've already spent the money." You're just approving the payment of the service or product that
was already received. I just want to make sure we're clear on that. You know, now there are other methods that we the board will approve us to, you know, through different contracts and um things like that to allow us to expend this money already, but the bills list itself that we're actually focusing on right now is we have a contractual
obligation to pay those bills. Um the goods and services have already been provided. The business office has done their due diligence to make sure that the vendor has given a declaration um that they provided services. the person that ordered the um services or products has signed off saying they received
them. All the paperwork and all the procedures in place that the business office does on a daily basis have been received, documented, cataloged, and then we bring it to you so that as a final approval, you say, "Yes, we believe you've done all these things." And we send the checks out the next day.
So, just want to make sure we understand what we're talking about because we call it a bills list, but it's really a payment list. And >> can I um I just want to clarify the we we go through the process. You guys manage the district. We we bring you bring us vendors. You let us know
what this is for and that's when we do our you know whether we're going to say yes or no at that point. So >> yeah I mean there there are certain thresholds you know we that we use vendors that um under certain thresholds. We use them because they have state contracts or they are part of a cooperative um program and we get good
pricing from them. um those things you all authorize us being a part of. So you authorize being a part of the co-ops and utilizing state contracts. Um and then we utilize those vendors for those products and then again after you've
authorized us to use them. We use them for services and products. They provide us the services and products and then we want to pay them and part of that payment process is for you to approve that bills list. And that's what we're talking about. >> All right. Um
>> regarding the bills list, yes, but there would be bills on there that the that the board hasn't approved because the bid threshold is what? 57,000 >> 58 >> 53 >> 53 >> 53. So essentially there could be unlimited amount of bills under 53,000
that are being cut, checks cut that the board never approved, but the board approved it uh at at reorga. Correct. >> The board approves um different co-ops all throughout the year. Correct. Some of them at reorg and some of them at
other times of year when we find um programs that are advantageous for us to use. And so >> I guess my thing is with this is like we just sat through this fiscal cliff, taxes going up and I can't see bills that I'm being asked to approve.
Personally, I think that's crazy. I'm just being honest. I mean, just me being honest. Like I think if you look at the public and they see that at face value that there's a board member requesting just to review to review bills prior to being asked to approve it and not having
access to that. At the same time, we're on a fiscal cliff. Nine out of 10 people that see that are going to think it's crazy. >> I'm just >> Well, that's Yeah, and that's what Phil will speak to. Um, all right. Uh, community relations and student affairs. We have the overnight field trip
requests that are typical on the agenda. Any questions or clarifications there? We obviously um as the update, you know, we're supporting the wrestling inquiry. Um, >> is it um
correct that the two teams are staying a different amount of time? >> Um, yes. It depends on what they qualify for and what actually it's not even what they qualify for yet. It's what they anticipate they'll qualify for. >> Okay. >> So, that's
>> and yeah, >> Rich, you resolved that with the rest of the team. Correct. >> I did. >> So, they're going to >> for this year. >> For this year. For this year. Correct. So the the district is going to cover the cost this year but not going forward. >> Correct. >> Okay. And
is it I I guess when I saw your update on the drive, the thing that stuck out to me, give me some hope here, is that it was classified as a trip. I don't know if that would right mean like on a wrestling team state championships. Would that be kind of
part of the program like part of the season? like no different if like the football team made the playoffs and it was somewhere else. Like isn't the state championship part of like the season or part of the the the overall cost of that sport and not really looked at as like a
trip? Like it's not I I wouldn't classify that as a trip. Am I Am I saying does that make sense? >> I'm not quite sure, but I can tell you this. Um it is the only athletic event that does have overnight accommodations based on how they run the um state
finals in Atlantic City. Um and so it is unique, >> right? >> Um and we have um been we we we have accommodated it for many years um you know in a matter of fairness and equity um through other areas, band trips,
cheerleading trips, things of that nature. You might say they're not required, but I think those parents would probably argue with you that they are as part of the experience. Um, we're we're now making everything under the same umbrella of um what we um pay for. You know, I I I will say there
there were when I talked to the wrestling um booster, the parent actually that spoke here, he was under the impression, and I think a lot of his um people that he was speaking with were under the impression that all the trips that the board approved here, like the cheerleading trips and the band trips
and things like that were being approved by the board and then paid for by the board. But so there was once I explained that to um to them, I think they did realize that oh wow, you know, these the board is authorizing a trip as part of a school trip, but that doesn't mean they fund it. And so now we're putting
everything under that same umbrella. >> And I think there was a miscommunication because the the feedback that at least that was communicated to me is that uh that that it was a board decision not to fund the overnights for the rest of the week and that that's not accurate. >> Correct. >> Right. So that's why I think you might
need to clarify with some of the parents that they thought that was a board decision when when when it wasn't. Um and I guess >> do we even what was the approximate cost? What was the hotel room like? Is this >> $3,400? >> $3,400 bucks.
I >> mean I just struggle with it being public. That's to me if that's a unique sport >> discussing. No, we're not um Okay. >> To be continued. Um No. >> Okay. Yeah. But we're not we're not
discussing the budgetary options for the items. Um we do not have any delegates reports at this time. I'm calling for a motion and a second to adopt resolution uh 0217262
for an executive session to discuss matters reflected in the attached resolution. The board expects to be in executive session for approximately 45 minutes, hopefully less, and upon return to public session, action will be taken. Can I get a motion?
>> Uh, call second. Brian, all in favor? >> I opposed or abstain. a uh call for a >> Oh, yeah. That's right. Thank you. >> Uh call for a motion and second to reconvene public session. Can I get the
motion, Tara? Thank you. Can I get a second to reconvene? Sure. Where Rich? Thank you, Rich Morgan. won't do that. Uh all in favor? >> I >> I opposed abstensions. >> All right. Uh obviously we'll be uh affirming the personal and executive
session minutes and agenda items next week. Uh old and new business. I had something I was going to touch upon. I will bring that next week. Um is there any other older new business or suggestions for next week under old and
new business? I'll phrase it that way. Okay. Can I get a call in motion motion and a second to adjurnn? So I'm looking for a motion. Andrea, thank you. Second, Brian, thank you. All in favor? I
opposed abstensions? None. Thank you. And actually,