--------- Good evening everyone. I'd like to call this meeting to order. I would like to invite everyone to rise and say the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation
under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Okay, all members are present and accounted for. First item on the agenda is Laker Pride. Dr. Thomas. Thank you, Chair White. Tonight, uh, we will be honoring our spring athletic,
uh, and activities participants and a variety of their coaches. So, I will ask Jeff Marshall to come forward as we do, um, each session or each season. And, uh, all of our students and coaches will be given a certificate of recognition, thanking them for their uh, their time
and participation. And, Mr. Marshall, I'll give these with you, and you can distribute them at a later time. Perfect. Thank you, sir. [Music] How do I find him? Martha escape. Oh, escape twice.
Escape. Got it. Twice. All right, good evening. Sorry, I wasn't quite prepared when I came in here. So, uh, we're getting started right away. Uh, but good evening, Superintendent Dr. Thomas, Board Chair White, and school board directors. It is my honor and privilege to present to you the 2024 to 25 spring activities and athletics
report, as well as to recognize and honor those students who have qualified for state or achieved tremendous success in their given activities from this past se past spring season. Before we begin bringing our students in, I wanted to share a few reminders about our athletics and activities department. As you can see here on the
first slide, we continue to live by our vision of students experiencing an enjoyable environment of a wide array of co-curricular activities that promote pride, character, sportsmanship, and development of personal and team excellence. With over 75% of our student
population participating in some sort of co-curricular activity, this is a testament to the wide array that we offer and the enjoyable experiences our students are having within these sports and activities. As we switch to our next slide, you will see what we use for a definition of success within our programs. While it is
always our goal to win in our competitions, when we reflect back on our season, our coaches, advisers, and students should be looking at creating lifelong memories, developing lifelong friendships, and teaching or learning lifelong lessons along the way.
In addition, we use the acronym Laker to define our purpose statement within our department, starting with having our students help develop moral character skills. These are skills that we want our students to learn and display in all aspects of their lives, not just within their sports and activities. Thus, when
you look at the acronym, love, appreciation, kindness, empathy, and respect are all skills that our students and adults should reflect on and display in all interactions within and outside of their activities. The performance character skills of legacy, advocacy,
knowledge, enthusiasm, and resiliency are skills that we want our students to display specifically within their sport or activity. but certainly would also want these to carry over into other aspects of their lives as well. This next slide shows our participation numbers from the last two spring seasons. So, you can see a comparison of
where things are at for student involvement. Um, I think it's pretty important to note a few things. Um, again, very comparable numbers that we have year in and year out. I think the one that's rather interesting is our boys volleyball. We actually see a little bit of a decrease in boys volleyball, but one of the reasons for that was because we had to limit um the
number of teams that we could offer because we did start to offer it as a Minnesota State High School League sponsored sport this year. Because of that, our expenses grew. Uh the length of the season was a little bit longer. So, we weren't able to necessarily bring on as many coaches as we may have had in the past um because of some of those
additional expenses. Um thankfully um we were not we didn't we did not have to cut this year, which was really nice though, too. So, anybody who came out for the boys volleyball team, we fielded three levels and all three of those levels were able to compete this year as well, too. So, now we will specifically start to highlight some of our specific
activities and our sports from this spring. This is always the best part, I know, of this meeting. Rather than me talking, we get to see them. Uh, we'll start with our activities and our non MSHSL sports. So, first we're going to have our
trap and our ski team members come in. [Music] So, our trap team and our ski team shootings are what it's called independent providers within ours within our district. So, the district doesn't necessarily um sponsor them directly. Um, but we uh we have been able to be
able to honor them and recognize them, especially since at the trap level there is an MSHSL state competition that the Minnesota State High School League does sponsor. So this year, our trap MSHSL team finished seventh in the state tournament and the all state trap
shooters with Will Johnson, Payton Happy, Weston Thompson, and Sebastian Bullion. So is that all five of you guys? Not quite right. Who's missing? Just two of us here. Just two is here. All right. Well, congratulations. Why don't the two of you step forward?
Okay. Here. No. Now, the ski team this year actually repeated as state champs. They were state champs last year and they came back this year. And that was, correct me if I'm wrong, gentlemen, just a little over two weeks ago or so where that that
occurred. Yep. um finished as ski state champions. And this year the all-state ski shooters were Will Johnson, Payton Happing, Payton Happy, Jason Rush, and Henry Sandow. And the five that won the state title were Samantha McDonald, Sebastian Bullion, Will Johnson, Henry
Sandow, and Carter Hack. Congratulations. You good with the picture? I'll do one more together with that. Christiey's taking the picture. I do think it's also important to note Scott Conrad has been the coach of this program for quite some time. He has built up this program tremendously with
both the trap and the ski shooting teams. This past spring, he was actually awarded um the coach of the year within our programs, which is pretty incredible giving the fact that it's an independent provider program. Scott is stepping down this year. He will no longer be coaching after this year after 16 17 16 years.
Nine consecutive conference championships I believe. Or was this the year the 10th one? This is the the 15th. Oh, all right. Sorry. 15th year of being consecutive uh conference champions, which is extremely impressive. So certainly we want to give
a big public thank you to Scott as well for coaching the team and thank you to all of the parents for everything that they have to do in terms of running the organization the program as an independent provider and again congratulations gentlemen. Congratulations [Applause]
Next, we'll bring in our speech team. And we have two different groups of our speech team that we're going to be recognizing. The first group from our speech team is going to be those who qualified for the state tournament this year. The speech team ended up placing fifth as a team at the Class AA state
tournament. Um, coach, correct me if I'm wrong, highest finish ever. Highest finish ever for the program. Highest finish ever for the program. And individually, Talia Bushman finished in second place in discussion. Go ahead, Talia, step forward. [Applause]
With us tonight, she finished in second place in pros. Khloe Ericson and Jaden Nelson finished in third place in duo interpretation. We've got Jaden here. [Applause] finished in sixth place in poetry. And then also qualifying for the state tournament were Lindsay Madson, Ingred
Olsen, and Wyatt Gillis. And Lindsay is here as well tonight. In addition, we had eight individuals who qualified for the national tournament, which took place in De Moine, Iowa. Wonderful place to be able to go to for the national tournament this year. And uh that happened right
after school got out um so early in June. And at that tournament, McKenzie Bounds finished sixth in the nation in poetry. Mason Bass, who's with us here tonight, finished 11th in the nation in humorous interpretation.
Katie Weaver finished 18th in the nation in dramatic interpretation. Khloe Ericen and Jaden Nelson finished 23rd in duo interpretation. and Jaden is here. Qualifying for nationals were Ingred Olsson, Leo Choy, and Lindseay Madson. And Leo and Lindsay are both here as
well. And Leo is holding the NSDA School of Excellence Trophy. This is a trophy that goes to those teams that finish in the top 20 in the nation. first time ever that the Prior Lake speech team has earned this this honor, which is a
tremendous honor. And certainly, it's also a big reflection of Mr. Nick Engles, our coach, and the rest of the coaches for the speech team to be able to get them to this level and to be able to have this team compete year in and year out, both at the state and the national level. So, congratulations to all of you.
Congratulations. [Applause] So good. No, no voice. So, we did recognize our DECA students at the winter meeting. Um, at that time we did have um six qualifiers who had qualified for the DECA International
Championships which took place down in Orlando. We did not have the results at the time. I do just want to point out that Josh Piscanic was actually a finals qualifier. So he finished in the top 10 in the nation in the in the c excuse me in the world at the international competition for DECA while he was down
there. So again public recognition for Josh and for the other five students who also qualified for the DECA international competition. Um we did have um switching over to our Minnesota State High School League sponsored sports. Uh we did have one boys golfer qualify for the state tournament this year. Sean Lutner. Sean,
this is Sean's second year of qualifying for the state tournament. He finished in 34th. Um, our coaches were John Haftdoll and Jim Strando. I actually believe that Shawn is in a tournament right now and so he's currently on the golf course and was not able to make it here tonight. All right.
[Applause] Uh, the next team that we're going to recognize is our adapted softball team. So, if our adapted softball players want to come on in, our adapted programs run as a cooperative program.
Go on and stand up there, you guys. Right in the front. There you go. And with softball, we actually are the host school and we are in a cooperative sponsorship with Chanhassen, Chaza, and Shakape. And as the host school, then this group of uh
softball players play all of their games over at Twin Oaks um in Jerbeck Gym. That's where they have their practices as well, too. And coach Julia has heard me say this many times, but I just need to put a plug in. You are never going to go to a sporting event and see a greater
extent of sportsmanship, camaraderie, and pure love for the sport than you're going to find in an adapted sporting event. These athletes are tremendous athletes who care about the sport. They are extremely competitive, but they care
about each other and they care about those that they're playing against as well to a level that you have never seen. So for those of you in this room who have never been able to make it to an adapted sporting event, I encourage you to do so. We play adapted soccer in the fall and that's down at Chanhassen and in the winter we are adapted floor
hockey. It's just us and Shakape at Shakape High School. So, um, and again, this team actually ended up advancing to the state tournament. And correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think the expectations during the season were necessarily that high. And they came on right at the end, qualified for the
state tournament, lost their first game, but ended up winning the next two games, and finished as constellation champions at the state tournament, which was absolutely incredible. all here tonight. But team members from Prior Lake were CC Brutal, John Connley,
Aub Hussein, George Johnson, Ben Madson, Ryland Man, Ella Miller, Dylan Nomman, Caleb Schultz, Colin Schultz, and Jackson White. And then our coach is also here, Julia Reese. Congratulations to all of you.
Congratul Congratulations. [Applause] Next, we'll have our boys track and field members come in. This year at the beginning of the season, our boys track and field numbers have been very very high every year, but um you know, we we hired a new coach
right here. He's doing a fantastic job. Um coach Nick Syler. And uh the team was young as they came in. And I don't necessarily think that expectations are very high come the end of the season, but when this team went to sections, they finished in sixth place at sections, seventh place at the SSC, but
the number of state qualifiers that they ended up having far exceeded anybody's expectations. So, two of those state qualifiers are here tonight. We have Josh Baras, who finished 23rd in the 110 hurdles. Josh was just a freshman this year. [Applause]
And we also have John Mains. John finished 16th in the pole vault at the conference meet. John also tied the school record for the pole vault as well too. So congratulations tournament. Garrett Wood also finished 14th in the pole vault. Ethan Beckman finished fifth in the shot put. Broen
Anker finished 16th in the discus. Jason Hadar finished 26th in the disc discus. and the 4x400 relay of Austin Creger, Griffin Nordrum, Aiden Binda, and Jackson Zeb finished in 18th overall. So again, a fantastic season for this young group uh that of uh of track and field
stars who came out and we know we expect very big things coming for next year. So nice job, guys. [Applause] Next up, we'll have our girls track and field members come in. No girls track. Oh, no girls track, unfortunately.
Shoot. Um but girls track this year they ended up winning the conference championship by one point over Lakeville South. It was 121 to 120 which was just an amazing feat for them to be conference champs. You can see on the slide um those who qualified for state
um they finished second at the section section meet and similar to swimming um you only qualify for state and track and field and swimming as individuals. You don't qualify as a team at all. But for them to have the number of qualifiers that they had and for them to to uh be able to get three different relays in which we be more relays you get in the
more individuals who get to participate was very exciting. So again another really exciting year for our girls track and field program uh for them to finish as conference champs and second at the section tournament. Next we'll have our synchronized swimmers come on in.
This year, our synchronized swimming team finished in eighth place at the state tournament with nine routines qualifying for state and six of them placing at the state tournament. Hannah Evold was third in short figures and fourth in the short solo. Jasmine Du
Hadway was sixth in the extended solo. Payton Hannah and Rachel Vegdal was seventh in the short duet. And the short team of Shrea Bajaria, Harper Collie, Annabella Deng, Payton Hannah, and Rachel Vegdal finished seventh. And the long team of Cayla Barnett, Hannah
Evold, Elizabeth McNair, Jenna Pettis, Cara Petri, Sophia Suarez, and Tessa Wesland finished in sixth place. Jasmine Du Hadway also earned the academic all-state award this year. And also qualifying was a short trio team of Shria, Harper, Collie, and Annabella
Deng. and a long trio team of Sophia Suarez, Klay Hillsengar, and Hannah Evald. And a long trio team of Cayla Barnett, Cara Petri, and Tessa Weslin. So, congratulations to all of our team, by the way, is coached by our head
coach, Carrie Kabushek, and her sister, Kelly Thomas, who is our assistant coach. And they've done an absolutely amazing job with the program over the last couple years. So, congratulations to all of you. [Applause] your mom in the background. All right, come on in, girls.
This is it. This is it. Well, that's all right because there's no time. We know there is no time off in the sport of girls lacrosse. And one of the things that I know that many of the girls players are doing right now are actually coaching in our
youth program. Um my own daughter has a game over at Eina tonight. She plays on the 12UB team. Two of the players that were on this team or at least one is coaching over there. So I just cannot say enough absolutely amazing things about our girls lacrosse program. The
success that they have on the field is unchartered. But when you look at the things that they do besides the success that they have the field in terms of giving back to the program, that is why year in and year out, this team continues to have the success that they
do. The culture from 6U all the way up to the high school program. There's no other program out there that is similar to the culture that this program has been created. And that truly is a testament to our head coach, Heather Pearson. Um, Heather is involved
at every level of the girls lacrosse program. Heather is the one that brings these girls on, to be able to participate at the young level to be able to volunteer and to help out those lower levels. Um, and I've seen it as a parent, you know, and to know that that my daughter is in such good hands from a
coaching perspective and from the older girls that she looks up to is absolutely incredible. Um, so this year the team went 19 and0, never happened in Prior Lake history. They finished the regular season a perfect 13-0.
And the closest game was four goals, five goals during that time. Four goals. And that was still Lakeville Edina. That's right. Uh went into sections. Uh ran through sections beating Edina again in the section championship game. Went
into the state tournament as the number one seed. And you know, obviously you've got a target on your back when you go in there as the number one seed. And the way that these girls handled themselves and the coaching staff handled themselves throughout that state tournament was so impressive because not
only again did they compete unbelievably well on the field and dominate all of their opponents, but they did it with pride and dignity and respect for all of those around them. The comments that we get from other coaches and other programs and maybe most importantly officials is truly one of of how
positive and how much they appreciate um everything that our girls do in terms of their graciousness, their gratitude that they show. Um so again, this starts at the top and it is truly something that is absolutely unbelievable. Uh from Heather all the way down through all the way to our again our our U8 girls who
are out there are experiencing the same type of thing. So again, knowing that there's only two here, I do want to go through and I am going to introduce all the roster as well so that they know that. So again, Heather's here as our head coach. Uh also coaches were Jessica Jervich, Katie Poston, McCannan, Megan
McGawan, Haley Hartage, and Grace Maddox. On the team this year, we had senior Sophia Bile, junior Ava Clawson, junior Brittany Pinowski, junior Lexi Brandon, junior Lucy Jones, junior Mallayia Green, freshman Holly Baressa,
senior Tally Balziki, freshman Quinnland Lairman, senior Maline Sasma, junior Brianna Roberts, senior Emerson M Emerson Maddox, sophomore Maline Belaloo, sophomore Taylor, senior Lauren Kenudson, senior Chrissy Sabi, senior
Lauren Jonah, Senior Abby Grove, junior Anukica Meyer, junior Kila Keely Mulling, senior goalie Addie Christensen, junior Ava Cleven, and junior Whitney Fers. So again, congratulations to all of you here. Congratulations to those of you watching
um on truly again an absolutely perfect season. Fabulous. Congratulations, [Applause] Director Marshall, if I could just I'm just going to take two seconds here on a personal note. Um, I've known Heather since she was a
little kid. She grew up playing basketball with my daughter, and I don't want to get so emotional, but I am. um to see her life get poured into and then as an adult turn around and uh do that for for kids is really about all you can ask for. So
congratulations Heather. I'm super proud of you. [Applause] [Applause] So I encourage you to to take a look at the slides that are in this presentation. We always add pictures of um some of the different accomplishments. You can hear see here
we've got our state champions uh girls lacrosse. We've got our golfer Abby Grove who was not here was the player of the year. She didn't earn the miss lacrosse award but she was the star tribune player of the year and the coaches association player of the year as well too. Um again number of school records section runner up for our track
program. Um we've got our synchronized swimmers here. Uh a group of our boys lacrosse seniors who are there, our softball players who are huddled up in a circle, our girls golfers who are there. There's Ethan throwing the shot put at the state tournament. Uh we got our our ski shooters down in the bottom lefthand
corner. You can see our adapted softball team getting their their constellation championship trophy as well. Um but I do want to point out just one final piece in terms of our activities. Okay, as you all know, activities don't end when summer starts. You know, if you were to
go up to the high school right now, well probably not right now, but certainly any morning or almost any evening during the week, the place is extremely busy. There's a lot that's happening, but two specific things that I want to point out. One is our marching band. Our marching band has probably been in and I
believe two parades so far this year with three more to go with with kind of that highlight being every year they do a parade that's at the state fair, which is absolutely amazing. And often they have to go right from the state fair parade to the first home football game to be able to play that night. Now,
that's not the case this year, but that was the case last year. So, they are practicing and they are in those parades throughout the course of the summer. The other one, and I'm proudly wearing my shirt here tonight, was for those of you who went to Lakefront Music Festival last weekend, you saw that 25 of our students who are
involved in choir actually got to get up on stage and sing backup to legendary rock and roll hall of fame foreigner. And for them to have that experience to be able to do that was just incredible.
So, I just really wanted to make sure I gave a shout out to both our band and our choir for the work that they're also putting in this summer and the accomplishments that they've had. So, again, lastly, we just continue to be so grateful. One of the things that we preach through our Laker leaders program, which is all of our captains
and our leaders, is servant leadership. How can we give back to our teams? How can we give back to our school? How can we give back to our community? And one of the reasons you do that is by showing that gratitude and by being grateful. We could not do this alone. Our coaches, our adviserss, our athletes, our
students could not do this on their own. The support that they receive from their parents, from teachers and administrators, from the office staff, school board members who are here, many of you have students currently or in the past who have participated in our programs, our custodial staff, sometimes
they're some of our biggest supporters coming to those events and they're cheering them on. Um, all of our community members. And then I just really at the end of the year need to highlight the activities office in particular. So the other three women who I work with day in and day out are
absolutely incredible women who keep the programs and all of our all everything that we have going on in the office going on a daily basis. So a big public thank you to all of you for the support that you have given our co-curricular programs and thank you again to allow us to be able to to share and to be able to
present these students here. Thank you. Um, I just thank you, Chair White, for giving me a chance to speak. I need I feel like I needed to say, um, I appreciated what you said about the lacrosse coach, Heather, and I didn't
share. Um, my son was part of the trap team since 8th grade and and um I just couldn't um express more the gratitude and I love how you uh wrap that up, Jeff. It truly is um the programs that
are run through Prior Lake High School are incredible and um the the teams and the coaches and no one can do it on their own. So, um I I when uh the trap and ski team were here, out of um um you
know, respecting my son and not embarrassing him, I didn't get up and hug him. I wanted to so bad. So, I hugged him out in the in the hallway instead. Um but I just really wanted to say thank you. Yeah. Thank you.
Can I just add um I think a big thank you to you, Mr. Marshall. I mean, I've seen you as my son has participated in many different events throughout the year and I've I see you there. You're you know, you and your team are some of the hardest working individuals and and this program wouldn't be what it is without you. So, thank you.
Yeah. Thanks, guys. Next on the agenda is the superintendent report. Dr. Thomas, thank you. And and I was going to also just echo what uh um Director Atinson said, Coach Marshall, Jeff Marshall,
you're you're you're one of the best. And so thank you for your leadership and all your support. Uh you're at everything. I don't know how you keep it together and at your own kids sports too. So uh thank you for your leadership in that space and uh our our students and our staff love you to death. So
appreciate you. Um yeah, just a couple of quick things tonight. I I do want to share that uh the um a advanced placement scores were newly released. Um and again bringing some outstanding news for our students at the high school. Um, some of you who
were on the board, um, a couple years ago know that we did a report and we saw the continued increase of students who are taking AP courses at the high school and I'll say that rivals anything with PSO. I I I will invite our families and our students to consider looking at AP before leaving campus because I think
that's where it's at and and a lot of opportunity for our kids to do outstanding work as well as get college credit. um for the 24-25 school year um PR Lake High School not only continued to increase in student participation um in AP courses but also improve the percentage of students earning a um
scores of three, four or five. Those are scores that often translate into earned college credit. Um all 23 AP courses that we offer at the high school averaged a score of a three or higher, demonstrating a very consistent and high quality experience for our students across every AP subject area. And just
from a point of reference um giving you um the past four years in 2021 we had 60 students participate about 481 students and they achieved the scores of 34 or five. In 2022 we increased to 73% which
was about 548 students again commensurate scores. 2023 74% of our students uh equating to about 587 students. 2024 80% which is 710 students
and then just recently in 2025 82% of of uh or 771 students um again all achieving scores of 3, four or five. So again thank you to all of our staff, our administration and also a big shout out to our kids who are busting their tails to do extremely well in those AP
courses. So congrats to all those students um for their hard work and dedication our staff there. So um shout out to you all there. Um, it's been a busy summer as always with a variety of events, whether it's some of the parades that uh Jeff mentioned and some of the other opportunities that our kids are uh
involved in, but also our staff. So, I want to say a big thank you to all of our staff. Um, uh, some of you on the board as well that volunteered with Dan Patch Days. Uh, thankfully we had much better weather. We have not had luck these past couple of years, so weather
gods were with us this year. Um, also just want to put out a reminder to our staff that and and the board that we have a um sign up genius is sent out for prior lake days. That's taking place August 9th. And we're looking for folks just u fill one hour slot. That's it. Just a one-hour slot this time. You
don't have to stay for a half day and give up your entire Saturday. So you can still um have plenty of time to do whatever it is you need to do. But love to see some new faces and volunteers uh coming out to Prior Lake Days on August 9th. Um which is going to be right downtown where they have the farmers
market. And then also um gearing up for our back to school celebration, our second annual beginning August 18th. Um we are already uh seeing the anticipated uh larger scale of event. Um and I also want to make sure that I share this
publicly. we will ensure that we have ample parking and appropriate parking for those who need assisted parking. Um, so I want to share that we had some trucks that were blocking off some of the uh handicap spots. So, we'll be more mindful of that. So, I just want to own that upfront. We've uh taken that into consideration, but it's going to be a
bigger event and I'm sure a lot more participation and our own Justin and it will be our uh in-house DJ as as as always. So, thank you Justin in advance. So, if you have any music requests, get those in. Um, but looking forward to that August 18th. And then also be
looking for a sign up to come out for our annual night to unite August 5th. It's always a great opportunity for us to connect the community. Um, I know we usually get a bus and we'll take the bus around to various um, neighborhood parties and it's always just a great way to connect with um, our community and
uh, kids always love getting on a bus and we have a lot of trinkets to hand out to the neighborhood parties as well. So um, stay tuned for that. And then lastly, Jeff put it out there with Lakefront Musicfest. What a great opportunity. I don't think our kids really understood and can appreciate
standing on stage with Foreigner, the 1980s band, the era of high top fades, aquinet, and blue eyeshadow, right? I mean, anybody else understand that? So, it was uh those were the days, right? And um and to have our our students on
stage um to sing I Want to Know What Love Is is is just something magical. So, um, huge shout out to our kids and thank you for whoever helps set that up. And from what I understand, um, and I'll kind of give a shout out to Foreigner, they do this wherever they go on tour. So, they always tap into a local high
school group to make sure that they invite them on stage. So, I'm glad that our students were, uh, that lucky to be able to do that. So, those are my uh, updates. All right, thank you, Dr. Thomas. We have no proclamations this evening. So, next on the agenda is the open forum. This is a 15minute period of time
set aside to receive citizen input. We have five speakers tonight and we'll start with Katie Gabriel. Good evening. My name is Katie Gabrio. I use she her pronouns and I have two students in the district. The board views the work of the district through
the lens of the strategic plan, including the strategic priority of positive learning environments, fostering a welcoming, inclusive, and safe environment. You recently sunseted the board's equity resolution, stating that work on equity and inclusion does
not only lie in a resolution. It is work that is done day in and day out with teachers and staff. Yes, ideally this work takes place in the classroom, at home, in extracurriculars, and at the board table. The Minnesota State High School League membership is on the
consent agenda for this evening. Two years ago, this item was pulled for further discussion by a current board member using their seat at the table as a platform for political anti-trans rhetoric based in bigotry. Participation and eligibility of
transgender student athletes is determined by the Minnesota Human Rights Act and the Minnesota Constitution. As you all are dedicated to creating a welcoming, inclusive, and safe environment for our students, I know you care that LGBTQ plus students are at a
higher risk of self harm and suicide than their peers. 46% of transgender and non-binary non-binary youth have seriously considered attempting suicide this past year. They are placed at higher risk because of how they are mistreated and
stigmatized in society. This statistic is greatly reduced when they are shown acceptance and support by adults in their community. Participation in organized sports has the same positive benefits for transgender and non-binary youth as it does for all youth, including physical
and mental health benefits. A U of M study showed that about 2.7% of Minnesota high school students identified as transgender or non-binary, and only about 12% of that 2.7% play organized sports. That's approximately
3/10en of 1% of all Minnesota high school students. It looks like our transgender and non-binary students are at greater risk from harmful comments at the board table and lack of acceptance and support from our community than the perceived risk they face from a small
number of transgender students participating on sports teams. So, you don't need the equity resolution in order to carry out the strategic plan. prove it this evening through your actions. If this item is pulled for further discussion, I expect to see the
board immediately shut down any remarks rooted in bigotry targeting some of our most marginalized students. I know you will agree that this type of rhetoric is not to be tolerated and trust that you will take immediate action to shut it down. Thank you.
Our [Applause] next speaker is Ryan Parr. Good evening everyone. I hope everyone can hear me. This is my first time at a school board meeting. I am representing
uh another person that has the same views that I do about what I'm about to say. Um hello, my name is Ryan Parr. I'll start the easy way. I am a resident of Prior Lake, a parent, taxpayer, and
stakeholder in this district and neighbor of Charles Johnson. Um, back in May, a member of the school board made false claims and derogatory comments on their official school board director Facebook page.
I don't think that was wise. A post that was publicly critical of a district administration started off with the closure of a school. In this thread, this board member went on saying progressive education ideologies were to
blame for lower enrollment, wrongly defining progressive education by tying it to be a political ideology of progressive politics. To clarify, progressive education is a learning through doing model of teaching and has
nothing to do with partisan politics of any kind. In this discussion, this board member said the following to a district parent, and this is a direct quote. This includes equity I'm quote and quote uh
based programs the dummying down of our society including removing advance advanced math courses equity grading nonexclusionary discipline radical and divisive ethnic studies transformative seal transformative sex
education hiding information from parents and last but not least an alphabet soup of genders. I love alphabet soup. I didn't know it came in genders. Now I need to find where I can buy them.
Again, I'd like to remind that this was from their official Facebook school board director page, presumably therefore speaking as a district representative. I have three points to add to that. One,
equity grading, transformative seal and transformative sex education do not currently exist in this district. Um, two, non-exclusionary uh discipline is limited legally by the
state. Three, calling the LGBTQ plus community an alphabet soup of genders is at disrespectful at best and bigoted at most and at worst, where can I get this
alphabet soup? If a teacher or administrator has made these remarks as a district representative, they no doubt would have been disciplined. Many emails have been written to the board about this incident and no one has
heard back um except for a response of we are a self-governing board. I understand you are a self-governing board. These are the things you need to take into heart as this is what's real and this is
what's happening right now. And I trust you as someone who has children in your district to do this correctly and with empathy and seriously. This following month, the member uh in
question voted to sunset equity and inclusion resolution, citing it was divisive. And this board member is voting on a new set of board ethics guidelines that will furthermore shield this board member and make comments like these allowable. I
didn't like in my whole career. I wish I knew I could make my own governing rules. That's amazing. You have an amazing opportunity to make great things happen.
you can make great things happen. I'm sorry, your three minutes are up about a minute ago. Can you conclude? Oh, um, the changes to the ethics guidelines do not increase transparency. They shield members from having to take
accountability for their words and actions. However, I leave it to you with the council and my neighbor. Your children are wonderful. They're at the bus stop with my children. I would We're on the different sides of the aisle, but I do anything to protect your
children and because they're lovely and all of our children are wonderful and they deserve the best district. We can offer them as collectively. You as a board, you as
the superintendent, we as parents, that's all I have to add. Thank you. Thank you. Our [Applause] next speaker is Kelly Malpin. Good evening, Dr. Thomas, Chair White,
school board directors, and members of the community. My name is Kelly Mopin. I'm a parent of two students at Prior Lake High School, a district resident, and a member of the policy advisory committee. I'm here tonight to share my concern about how policy 904 was
handled, particularly how the input from the policy advisory committee was represented during the June 16th study session. To be clear, the PAC does not approve policies. Our role is to review proposed policy changes and provide
feedback to the board. At our May meeting, policy 904 was the primary focus of discussion. While one of the seven committee members present expressed support for the proposed changes, the other six, including myself, shared serious concerns. We
questioned how the changes would affect staff morale, the safety and inclusion of marginalized students, and whether this policy was the best use of district time and resources given other pressing needs. We also discussed the scope of the policy. The version we reviewed
applied to materials posted by non-school individuals. At no point did we agree that the policy should expand to govern what teachers and staff can post in their classrooms. In fact, we were clear any updates
involving staff posted materials should be part of a new or separate policy and return to the PAC for further review. Despite that, the version presented during the study session still included those expanded restrictions, language the committee never saw or discussed.
And more concerning was the implication that the committee had fully supported the revised version. That simply is not true and misre misrepresents both the tone and outcome of our meeting. It's also important to note that policy 904 had already been reviewed and approved
just last year. It was not scheduled for review at this time. The process by which it was brought forward was unclear and that lack of transparency is troubling, especially when it results in major changes being introduced without full community awareness. Additionally, the board's own process
calls for a first reading and discussion before moving to a second reading and vote. That step is important not just as procedure, but as a way to invite reflection, questions, and public input. When that process is skipped or rushed,
it undermines trust in the board's work. This issue is bigger than one policy. It's about the value placed on community in committee input, the importance of following established procedures, and the commitment to honest, transparent decision-m. When those expectations
aren't met, it damages public trust. I respectfully urge the board to revisit policy 904 with integrity by accurately reflecting the PAC's input, following proper procedures, and ensuring the community's voice is truly heard. Thank you.
[Music] [Applause] [Music] [Applause] Next speaker is Emily Gillespie. Good evening. My name is Emily Gillespie. I am a Savage resident,
parent of two Lakers, and also a member of the district's policy advisory committee. And I will be also speaking tonight sharing my perspective as another member of that committee. I am here to speak about policy 904 and the importance of transparency and trust in how we develop policies in this
district. Policy 904 covers distribution of information on school district property by non-school persons and employees. At our May pack meeting, we spent 90 minutes discussing this policy. Multiple pack members raised serious
concerns about staff morale, potential chilling effects on expression, the impact on marginalized students, the amount of time being spent on signage when we are facing more pressing challenges as a district, and the fact that the corresponding MSBA model
policy, which this board has been vocal about following, covers only non-school persons and not employees. By the end of the meeting, the pack was aligned. The only change we supported moving forward was to add the process steps for how concerns can be raised.
All other proposed changes, especially those limiting what teachers and staff can post, were to be set aside with the understanding that any future updates related to employee speech, would be considered for a different policy or a new policy, which would come back to the
pack for review. So, I was surprised to see the version presented at the June 16th study session. It included restrictions we had agreed to leave out and added new language giving the school board, not the superintendent, final decision-making authority in cases of
disagreement. This change was not even in the policy that the PAC reviewed. And I would ask whether it is truly the work of the board to police signage in the schools. Even more concerning was that the PAC's board representatives didn't share any of the PAC's discussion or
input with the full board. Instead, it was suggested that the pack supported the updated policy, which is simply not accurate. In the June 16th study session, a board member stated that while there were oppos opposing voices in the pack regarding the policy
904 update, there were also supportive voices. I want to clarify that out of the seven pack members, not including the board representatives who attended the May 15th meeting, there was only one committee member who supported the updates. I understand that the pack is an
advisory committee and the board isn't required to follow our recommendations. But the purpose of the pack is to offer guidance to the district and we can't do that when the pack's input is misrepresented at the board table. PAC input should be conveyed fully and accurately at board meetings, especially
when it differs from what's being presented for a vote. In your discussion tonight, I ask that you proceed with full transparency about the pack's concerns and going forward, I ask you to act with integrity in making sure that the community's input is meaningfully
included in decisions that shape the environment in our schools. Thank you. [Applause] And our finer final speaker this evening is Richard Wolf. Uh, thank you. My name is Richard Wolf
and I'm from Savage, Minnesota. And as you may know, I'm a former school board member and had the honor to serve as chair for two of those years. So I speak with experience. I'm not pleased to be here, but I'm strongly here to voice my
opinion and opposition to your sunsetting the equity and inclusion resolution. One reason given was the resolutions was that since the resolution's inception, this resolution has not improved test scores. you demonstrated no serious analysis of the
test score situation and that reason is weak as affecting test scores. The second reason stated was that new strategic plan would cover the concepts detailed in the resolution but year's strategic plan as documented is just a
bunch of educational word salad statements and is not a plan. And lastly, it was stated it was divisive. You obviously didn't consult with teachers, principles, or any parent groups. It was not discussed at any study session and it just sprung on the
public after the school year was ended when you thought no one would notice. What I saw in the boardroom that night was a packed room full of folks asking you to reconsider your action. I did not see anybody present that was in favor of sunsetting the resolution. So, your
reasoning for the sun setting was sloppy and divides this district even more. It was known in advance that this board wanted to get rid of the resolution. And I have I would have more respect for the board if you would have just come out and stated the reason you got rid of the
resolution was for your own personal political beliefs in place of the weak reasoning that was offered that night. What you don't seem to understand is that learning and development takes place when it for it in order for it to
take place one has to meet students where they are at in their educational journey. Diversity is this country's superpower. diverse teams or groups of people function better, come to breakthroughs better and are more
innovative and discre and increases discovery and breakthroughs in learning. But I believe there's a much larger issue for this board under the school concept of school governance. This board has claimed transparency, but your actions have demonstrated otherwise. But
tonight, you are continuing a troubling trend. Tonight, it appears you are changing ethics policy 209 to remove the idea that a board member should recognize the integrity of their fellow board members and the members do not have to appreciate or respect each
other's work. It also appears you're removing policy 203.7, the school board member violation of policy. So, there's no way for the board to hold any fellow member in check to ensure proper governance. Ethics policy
without accountability is just wishful thinking. I'll be quick here and makes any accountability toothless. And we all know that without accountability, corruption soon follows. You spent considerable time discussing policy changes requested from one board member on policy 904 to remove the
administrative duty so you can micromanage what teachers hang in their classrooms. What concerns me the most is that directors with three executive directors leaving, you're cutting teachers, you're cutting millions of dollars from budgets, and you're closing
schools, but you want to micromanage what teachers display in their classrooms. You members on the current board have displayed a certain level of dysfunction that does not portend for good things in the future. Good governance relies on honesty, integrity, truthfulness, and
character. These traits are not gained by wearing a uniform on a political ad or telling yourself good things while you sit in a pew on a Sunday morning. These qualities are earned by your behavior. Integrity is doing the right thing even when no one is looking. Being
a member on the school board is an honorable and worthy service to the public and should not allow individuals to install personal beliefs. The board has difficult decisions ahead of you about the future of children who walk through our schoolhouse doors.
The parents put their trust in public schools to educate their children to succeed in this great nation. As a board, you may have to ask for the public help in future referendums to achieve that goal. I believe this board's behavior in the past, and with your expected actions tonight, you have
demonstrated that you are not up to the task of good governance for this district. You have decided personal agendas outweigh proper oversight of this district. And while you have lost my confidence that you can lead with proper school governance, you have a
much larger problem. You have lost the most valuable asset you have. That is the faith and the trust of the public, including the teachers, the parents, and the children who rely on you. Thank you very much. All [Applause]
right. Thank you to all the speakers. Um, next item on the agenda is the approval of the agenda. Um, I would like to entertain a motion to amend the agenda and make item 15 A1, policy 9004, and move that from a uh
second reading to a first reading. We never actually discussed 904 at the last meeting. discussed its whether or not it should have been at the table, but we never actually discussed the uh the content of the proposed policy. So, I would entertain a motion to um amend
that to to a first reading uh for tonight's meeting purposes. I second that. I second. Any discussion? Thank you. Hearing none. All in favor signify by saying I.
I. opposed. Motion carries 70. Moving on to the approval of the agenda. Is there a motion to approve the agenda? Made by director William. Second. Second by director Mason.
All in favor signify by saying I. Can we get discussion, please? Yes, you may. I'd like to make a motion to a amend or I'd like to amend the motion to move policy 209, 212, and 215 up to 15A
as we spent a significant amount of time discussing them at our last board meeting. And I was under the assumption, if you go back and watch the video, it was clear that there was board direction that these would be voted on this evening.
Is there a motion to I have point of information. Point of information. I don't understand the motion. Um I'm asking to amend the motion to approve the agenda and move policy 209, 212, and 215
up to Sorry, my screen's jiggling. um up to the second reading. Correct. Yep. Up to 15A, which is the second and final reading. As like I said, if you go back back and watch the school board meeting, um it was requested that these policies,
we spent a significant amount of time, unlike 904, we did spend a significant amount of time reviewing these policies at our last study session. And I was under the assumption if you watch the video that we were going to be voting on these this evening.
So there is there a motion to suspend or I'm sorry to move policies 209 12 and 15. Is that correct? Yeah, I made the motion to amend the motion. So we need a second. Second. Any further discussion?
All in favor signify by saying I. I. I. I. I. Nay. Nay. Opposed. Nay. 52. Motion carries. 52. So we have a motion and a second on the
table um to approve the agenda as amended. If there's no further discussion, all in favor signify by saying I. I. I. Opposed. Nay. Nay. Motion carries 52. Next on the agenda is the consent agenda. These are items that are
considered to be routine in nature and will be enacted in one motion. Is there a motion to enter to uh accept the consent agenda as submitted? So made by director France. Second. Second by director Johnson.
Discussion. Um can we pull off H approval of memberships? MSH MHSL please for further discussion. All right, we will approve the extend agenda then minus the uh vote on membership of the Minnesota State High School League.
And where will that be placed? I will place that um right before number 11. So um I'm sorry, right before the milk and bread contract extensions. Right after we do we vote on the
memberships minus the MSHSL. Okay, we have a motion and a second on the table. All in favor signify by saying I. I. I. Opposed. Motion carries 70. And I will now entertain a motion to u approve the membership in the Minnesota
State High School League. Is there a motion to accept membership in the high school league by director Johnson? Second. Second by Director France. Discussion. Um, yes. I have a question for Mr. Marshall if you wouldn't mind. Thank you.
U, Mr. commercial. I have read the MSHSSL contract and MSHSL policies and my concern is that nowhere in our agreement or in their policies does it state that member districts are to follow Title 9. Currently, MSHSL is
under investigation by the US Department of Education and the US Department of Health and Human Services and currently has a lawsuit against them by female athletes, Athletes United, for allowing bi biological males to compete in female sports in the state of Minnesota,
which violates Title 9, which is federal law. No signs in the boardroom, please. That is a standard rule. No signs. card size. Thank you. Um, let me just uh let me go back since
I was interrupted. Um, Department of Human Health Services currently has a lawsuit against them by Female Athletes United for allowing biological males to compete in female sports in the state of Minnesota, which violates Title 9, which is federal law.
So my question is, if we sign this MSHSO contract, can we include an addendum stating that we agree to the contract renewal, but to protect our female athletes and our districts from future litigation risk
that we will follow Title 9? So can we write an addendum into the contract? Uh my understanding is no. The contract comes with a with an expectation that you are following all Minnesota State High School League bylaws that are in
there. And the reason I say that um is there's an example that I can give with a member school when it comes to the transfer rule who's trying to do something different than what the Minnesota State High School League bylaws state. And in conversations I have had with the leadership of the
Minnesota State High School League, uh they specifically have said when you sign when you register to become a part of the Minnesota State High School League, you are following and all of the bylaws that are a part of that piece. Is there anything we can write into our athletic contracts?
So the high school league doesn't govern athletic contracts when it comes to the regular season. The high school league specifically governs postseason, which is sections and and state. Okay. Um, so when it comes to again any sort of section competition, it's all
based on geographical location with where you're placed within that section. And then there's a seating process that happens. And so you're playing those teams or competing against those teams from a seating process that then also happens at the state level for those teams who qualify at the state level. uh
the regular season, all of the scheduling. Again, the league besides football, um bec the league has has a little bit of a say with district football because there's a period of time where schools could not find enough school enough other schools to be able to play. So, the league stepped in to be able to assist with football and so the
league has to give a stamp of approval when it comes to football. Every other sport, we're a part of what's called the South Suburban Conference. As a part of the South Suburban Conference, as AEDs, we are um each one of us oversees a certain number of sports and as conference coordinator for that sport.
We create the schedule um for our conference opponents within that sport. So again, we've got 10 schools. Every year we join the South Suburban Conference. We have 10 schools within that conference and happen within that. Um there's a for
each sport there's a certain number of competitions that you can have. Most of our sports will fill to the max of what you can have. And so anything outside of the conference competitions then it becomes a non-conference piece that we schedule. Um usually it's coaches with
with you know my assistants that what we look at in terms of who we schedule with our our non-conference opponents. There aren't a lot of non-conference opponents. Typically, when we are scheduling any sort of non-conference competitions, the main things we're looking at is who else is in our section. Who's in our section that we
would like to be able to compete against for seating purposes that we're not necessarily seeing during our conference schedule. Okay. Thank you. Um, I know there was a situation this year, I'm not going to name the for confidentiality reasons, I'm not going to name the sport, but
there was another school that canled not against like decided not to play against our district. I don't know the reasons, but I heard it was something in the contract. So, that's why I'm wondering if there's anything we can write in the contract that would protect our district from future litigation. So, conference schools don't have
contracts at all. Um, the only time you ever see a contract is with non-conference pieces that are in there. Um, and like I said, our non-conference competitions are typically schools within our section that our coaches usually want to be able to compete against for seating purposes for that
piece. um a contract in and of itself um really, you know, again, when you're setting a non-conference contract, which again is very few competitions that we have to begin with. Um there's not a a place or an ability to be able to have any sort of stipulations
that you would put in there. Do you have any suggestions on how we can protect our district? Um well, I I believe that our district is is very well protected to begin with. I I don't you know I think all of our student athletes who participate in our
sports are doing so in a fair level um with all of the schools with whom we compete. Um and I and I don't I don't see an issue that we have within our programs at all with our with the the teams that we compete against. Um again usually it's based on geography.
um when you're talking about Title 9 and some of the I think the the issues that that you're bringing up as a concern short of somebody from my office or me contacting each one of those schools to find out what's there which again we don't have the time or the resources to be able to do that. Um I I I don't know
what a solution would be. Yeah. No, I know it's um Yeah. No, we're we're clearly in a um an interesting predicament, interesting times right now. And um I appreciate your um explanation. You know, I I clearly understand the importance of being a
part of the MSHSL. Um the smiles of all the athletes of the students. Obviously, you know, we wouldn't see that tonight. It wouldn't be possible if we're not part of the league. But unfortunately, our hands are tied and we have to, like you said, we have to agree to abide by their illegal and harmful policies. And
these have been in place for years. Live in reality. This is a meeting being held in public. It is not a public meeting. I would appreciate everyone just calming down because this is just all business. This is insane.
Um, ironically, I have been criticized by people in their community and by fellow board members for voting no. Yes, I voted no twice on this membership renewal. But without was someone standing up at this board and raising awareness to the illegal policies of MSHSL, our community would not be aware of what
signing this membership really means. And as a board director, we have an obligation to ensure that parents know their rights and that they ensure that as a district, we are creating a safe and fair experience for all students, including our female athletes. I also believe it's important for parents to
understand that while we're an independent school district, we cannot control, like you said, what other district's decisions and who a student may be participating at at a state competition. I raised this concern back in 2023. And this year we watched as a
Champlain Park girls softball team's transgender pitcher dominated their conference which led to a state title and also brought a lawsuit and national attentions to MSHSL's illegal and harmful policies. As I heard more about the Champlain Park softball team, I felt
incredibly sad for both the team and for the transgender student. I continue to ask myself, where are the adults in the room? Where are the coaches to guide this student to help them understand that biological males should not be competing on a female softball team?
Why are the adults not protecting these trans students? So, while we wait out the litigation and investigations, my hope is that as a district, we will continue to stand up for our female athletes when they are feeling marginalized based on sex and make the proper accommodations for girls
who are uncomfortable sharing private spaces with biological boys and advocating for them when they are forced to compete against a biological boy at a state or scholarship opportunities. Title 9 was created and signed into law to prohibit sex discrimination and
provide opportunities and protect equality and fairness for female athlete sports. It's the law. It's common sense and it's what's right. Thank you. And as two years ago I was here talking about the transgender policy that is in the high school league. Has been in
there since 2016 I believe. Correct. Um, and the policy that's in place, you know, certainly is a policy that every school district must follow when looking at transgender athletes. There are many, um, I shouldn't say many. There certainly are some bylaws that are in the high school league uh,
handbook that I don't necessarily agree with. I will I will say adamantly that just because I don't agree with those does not mean that I don't feel like we should belong to the Minnesota State High School League. And so for my ability to be able to say, "Yep, I don't
necessarily agree with these, I still strongly support obviously us joining the Minnesota State High School League on an annual basis." And as I pointed out two years ago, for us not to be a part of the Minnesota State High School League, the implications of something like that would be devastating for this school district.
Yes. Many families, including my own, would be exiting this district immediately. Yes, I understand. Yes. Thank you. Any further discussion? We have a motion and a second table. Director Johnson. Director Marshall, I just want to say thanks for uh
everything that you do. Um you and I have had ample discussions. Um I know everything. Well, I Excuse me. I don't know anywhere near the amount of things that you do, but just the discussions that we have had and the small little
bit that I have had look into and the extensive amount of work that you do for every single student, every athlete um that you do uh for in our district is is phenomenal. Um I know it's not you you
can't control MSHSL, the the bylaws, all that stuff. I understand that they also right seek they sought knowledge from state level right um and that's what they're following so they're doing what
they can and you're doing what you can so I just want to say thanks for what you're doing and um thanks for the knowledge that you're passing on to us I really appreciate it any further discussion or comments
yeah Um, I find it insulting um that our students are called predicaments on the same night that we're honoring them.
Um, I too uh wonder where the adults are in the room sometimes as well. Um I will be voting to renew this uh membership. Um
our students are not predicaments. Any other discussion or questions? Hearing none. All in favor of uh rejoining the state high school league signify by saying I. I. I. Opposed. Name. Motion carries 61.
Moving on to the school year 2526 milk and bread contract extensions and meal prices. Dr. Thomas. Thank you, Chair White. Board of directors. Um I am covering for Emily as she's out at a training um this week. U but just letting you know that we plan
to extend um our uh contract with Bevo Beverage Company and Panel Gold Bread Company that we adopted a year ago. We'll be doing this for one more year. Also, just to inform the board um that we had discussions, I believe in June about some of our lunch prices. And so,
just at the end of this memo, you'll see that um all because of the universal meals program um that we participate in in K8, our lunches and breakfastes will be free um at that level along with Bridg's ALC. And then, if you recall, we increased our um high school lunch
prices by 50 cents. um still keeping the grab and go free breakfast at the high school, but our lunch prices will be raised for the first time in many years to $3.75, which is still uh below the industry average. So, okay. Thank you. Does that require
action? I don't see it on here. Um I think it does vote. You have to a vote for that. Correct. Uh I'll hear a motion to accept the uh milk and bread extensions and the meal prices for the next school year. So by director Atinson, second by director
Bullion. Any discussion hearing? None. All in favor signifi signify by saying I. Opposed. That carries 70. Moving on to the resolution for acceptance of gifts. Dr. Thomas. Thank you, Chair. White board of
directors. Uh this year we have uh taken the liberty to put together a resolution on the front side of the school year. As you can imagine, um, throughout the school year, our PTC's and booster clubs and LEF are getting gifts and donations throughout the year, and we just can't capture every nuance gift that comes in.
And so, we're doing a blanket resolution at the beginning of the year, and then we'll follow up at the end of the year with a report of um each PTC um like we did uh at the end of this past school year. So, um, whereas to not, um, do all the thank yous and miss something throughout the year, we'll just do a
blanket thank you on the front side and then give you all the report at the end of the school year. And that's what this resolution is for. All right. Is there a motion to accept the resolution as presented? So made by director France. Second. Second by director Bullan. This does any
questions or discussion? This does require a roll call. We'll start on the right side. Director Olstead. I. Director Johnson. I. Director Atinson. Hi. Director Bullan. Hi. Director France. Hi. And Director Mason. I. And I that carries 70.
Moving down to personnel items. Dr. Thomas. Thank you, Chair White, board of directors. Um this evening, I am pleased to announce a couple of uh folks uh sever a few folks this evening. First, I want to um congratulate Mr. Tim
Anderson. Dr. Tim Anderson. Um he is our new executive director of academic services. We are thrilled to uh bring his skills and talents of many years in various roles in academic leadership in a variety of districts here in the metro. And he uh uh officially started
uh July one or shortly thereafter and uh day five I believe in day five. All right. Day five in the seat and uh and just really thrilled to have him on the team. I also want to uh introduce uh Miss Lisa
Ryder who um comes from a very similar pedigree if you will of uh many years in the educational uh business leadership space. Uh most recently spent uh many years in Burnsville um uh stint in St. Paul as well as most recently I think at
Redwing and um and then also a CPA and school auditing experiences. So, she's coming in with a a variety of hats and lenses that I think are going to be very beneficial for us here and uh welcome you. And this is day one. So, um nothing
like baptism by fire board meeting. Um but uh we are we are definitely thrilled to have her join our team. Um just so thank you. Uh and and then also uh you you may know Mr. Michael Kudson. Um he has been our our assistant or director
for uh uh human or executive or I'm sorry assistant director of administrative services. Um he has graciously said yes to be the interim dire uh executive director as we go through the search process for a full-time and permanent position um to
fill um executive director Herman's former role. Um and just for your information, those uh interviews will take place this Thursday and Friday. um fall goes well, we'll hopefully have an offer out on the table um by end of this week um with an anticipated start date
of perhaps the first part of of of August. But in the meantime, we are thrilled to have Michael 5 maybe. I can't remember how many Michaels are here in the district, but uh you know, M5, nice car, too. Uh yeah, he he is a
great asset to the team and just thank you, Michael, for stepping in during this time of transitional leadership. really appreciate you and so just wanted to introduce them to the board and to our community and I am thrilled to be working with the uh this dynamic team.
All right. Thank you. And I'm sorry and then tonight um their their approval that I seek um with that approval we would also or with the action that you all take tonight we would be formalizing any changes. So any um signitories uh any um policy committees or things of
that nature all of those name changes would go into effect as well. So, okay. Thank you. All right. I'll now entertain a motion uh to accept the the candidacy of Dr. Tim Anderson as executive director of academic services, Lisa Ryder as
executive director of business services, and Michael Kudson as interim executive director of administrative services. Is there a motion? So made by Director Bullion. Second. Second by Director France. Questions or discussion? Hearing none. All in favor signify by saying I.
I. opposed. That carries 70. Welcome. Welcome. Yes. Welcome. Welcome. And thank you. Okay. Next item on the agenda um is unfinished business. Uh the board has
been requested to take action on the neighborhood closure and facility consolidation recommendations that we have uh been discussing since uh the middle of May. And I will entertain a motion uh to accept the recommendations
as presented. So made by director France, second by director Bullion. Discussion. Um yes, I have some. Um I feel like this is a very large proposal with many moving parts. So just um I guess my ask
would be to amend the motion um and break it down into separate parts or decisions. Um, I think you know the first kind of most time-sensitive item would be to vote on the closure of Westwood and moving Lola into that school as well as um potentially the
sale of DSC. But um I feel like um just again there's a lot of moving parts here. So I guess that would be my motion to break it down into um separate votes like we did with the budget. So there's a motion to amend uh the motion to break How do you want to break it up? I want
to amend it properly if it's the what the will. Yeah. So, I guess the first most pressing thing would be to vote on the closure of Westwood and moving Lola into that school. Um I think it allows more time for discussion on the relocation of DSSE staff and um you know
where Sage goes, the transition program, all these other things that have been introduced um as part of this package. And I think it um is able we're able to give clear direction to administration that way. and and um on the pieces that you know we are moving or that we
aren't. There's a few things you know not on the deck that we've discussed over time. Um and then I think it allows us to you know meet with our new leadership team and work with them on the direction also and and making sure they're comfortable with the decision. It's, you know, it feels like um the
pieces beyond that first vote are um very long-term decisions that I feel like we could do uh for their analysis on the enrollment projections and and other financials impact. So, so just so I'm clear, the uh ask is to
amend the motion to break off the um closure of Westwood and the moving of Lola Deago into Westwood. Yes. because that vote or that notification needs to happen by October. Yeah. Point point of information, Chair White.
Um we're not closing West. Sorry, bad choice of words. Yes. As a neighborhood school. We're closing it as a elementary school. Uh we're we're actually transitioning it from an elementary to the um uh immersion school. Uh so we can't vote to
close it. Duly noted. All right. So, is there a second then on that amendment? A second. Any further discussion hearing? None. All in favor sign. Sorry. Well, I I think this was brought up to,
you know, over email and I think um I'm sorry I don't have it pulled up, but the my worry with this is that all things are related and tied together in this proposal. Um and and I understand you
know there's pieces that you know maybe we don't you know particularly care for or anything but everything is tied to each other. So my fear is that everything belong sorry I don't want to say belongs the everything is tied
together. Um and so by parceling off parts of this um would a take longer. I I completely respect the fact that we have a new leadership team that we would want to talk and again welcome. Um and
uh and all of that, but I think we've had a lot of this time to digest this and I I worry about parceling it off. Completely understand um and respect that, but that's my worry with it.
I would second that. I agree that um it it there's a there it was it was presented as a holistic plan and there's co financial codependencies in there that cannot be separated out and and if one if one passes and the other one
doesn't um we end up almost in a worse situation financially um as well as planning wise um and also reporting wise uh to the state. So um it was presented as a plan. it's it's codependent within each other and um it would not be a good
idea to start cherrypicking it off. Um I would say just like the the budget vote that we did back in February where we did piece it off from February or from December and then we got more information and reviewed it and um we
took our time to analyze that. I think my concern about voting on everything that's in this package tonight is that there's a lot of me moving pieces and puzzles to this um proposal and what if a levy passes next spring? What if we put a levy on the ballot? That
definitely would have an impact on our plan, right? Um the other thing is enrollment. Um you know, back in 2017, 18, whenever it was, the district um forecasted that we were going to be at 10,500 students. students were not
anywhere near that. Um we know that enrollment is not going to change that significantly, but enrollment does change. And so um to be making a decision on what is really like a two to threeyear plan um it just seems it just
doesn't seem wise in my opinion. I feel like decisions could be made um as we go and engaging our new leadership team I think would be um a great way to collaborate with them and so that's that's my input on it as well.
Sure. Can I uh just a couple of comments that were coming in. Um excuse me. Uh first I just want to clarify um when we did the different phases of the um budget um the rationale for the December vote was because of staffing calendar
timelines um not the complexity of the budget but we needed to get that decision ahead of any any other decision so that we can move forward and be aggressive with our staffing. So um little different situation here although I understand the the perspectives that a couple of you are putting forward um I
will also say there there is a lot of codependency in this plan um it is a it is a comprehensive approach um and and we looked at a variety of iterations of this and shared some of those different um rationale as to why we landed where
we were at versus some of the chunked out versions that you all are um suggesting this evening. Um to your point, Director Atinson, um should the board entertain a levy and the community supports that, that's certainly a dynamic that the board could
um entertain at that time with that revenue source coming in to make a different decision. Um so again, I think you've got that built in in terms of time. We also have the urgency of notification for MDE. So, we've got kind of the inverse timetable coming that
we've got to give notification as soon as possible as well as notification notification to our families in the event that we continue to move forward down this path of the repurposing uh redistributing of Westwood families to other neighborhood schools to give due notice so that families can begin to
make some adjustments as well. So again, I think the complexity and the interdependency of this plan is such that I understand the comprehensive and complexity of it, but it is um a package
that we felt was um uh our ability to drive the the budget challenges that we have still giving us some latitude to watch enrollment. And I concur. I don't think we're going to have a swing that we might have seen from, you know, 10 years ago or whatever it was, uh, where
we had some different projections, but certainly we would watch that and make any kind of modifications or adjustments and come back with different um, conversations for the board. But at this time, I think the administration um, stands comfortable uh, moving forward with our initial recommendation and turn it back to you, chair, for the board's
discussion. Any further discussion on the amendment? Um, yeah, I would just like to add another one of my concerns is like as a board we are going to be going through a budget process and we need to set board priorities. And so I I mean a lot of this right here is
going to dictate the board priorities. So I mean I'm my my concern is that we haven't gone through that process. We haven't gone through the process of setting by pri board priorities. We haven't gone through the process of setting budget priorities. Um, and yes, I I understand
the MDE, which is I think why Director Mason, you're just suggesting the the one piece of it. Is that correct? Yeah. That allows us to notify the Department of Education. I personally I don't feel like that where we're putting DSSE staff or, you know, bringing the other programs that we we've talked
about. Um, I don't personally think that impacts um that decision. Um, for me it's just, you know, trying to take a deeper dive and I know we've had different enrollment numbers, so we're trying to sort through those and, um, you know, what are we going to do with
Greenwood as a building and does it make sense to, um, move administration in there or can we, you know, explore some revenue revenue generating opportunities? Um, my fear is, you know, even with a levy, we we are still making
cuts. Um and and we're not we're not solving the problem right now with just this package. So um you know I think it's again just longer term I would feel more comfortable with more research into that on those last pieces. I I uh thank you uh Director Mason. I
think there's some latitude to still encompass some of that conversation and kind of watch the the numbers as they continue to evolve. I would absolutely agree um that this does not solve our long-term issue. It's way bigger than our our district. This is a statewide
structural issue that's going to have to be addressed. Um, but to the point of board priorities, we looked at the numbers, we looked at the forecasts, and this board gave us a directive to look at ways to reduce the budget. So, that was the board directive. That was the board priority. So, that's actually in
this plan. I think s the the annual budget uh moving forward for next fiscal year um uh not this fall but the the following year that's something that has yet to be determined in terms of some other board priorities. Um but the board
gave us a directive to find ways to meet the down uh the uh 4.5 thereabouts um in successive years and so that's what this plan represents. Any further discussion on the amendment?
I guess I would just say that um I would probably agree with you guys if we would have as the administration originally suggested voted on this on June 9th. Specifically why I wanted to postpone this vote for an extra end up being I
guess 5 weeks so that the things you're talking about um uh could get parsed through and we didn't we didn't rush to a decision. So, I think that the I can't imagine what could change between now and a later date. Um, so I just want to make sure that that's out there. That's
that is specifically the reason that we didn't vote on this in June 9th. Those exact concerns White, I respect that. But in the last two weeks, most of our staff has been out on vacation. So, it's been very difficult to get together. I I I actually wanted to tour the building with Director Powers and was not able to
because he was out for two weeks on vacation. So, I um and I think my biggest concern is the move the DSC move in fall of 26 from DSSE to Greenwood. To me, when I'm looking at the enrollment projections, um I mean, I'm not an
expert at projecting enrollment, but we've seen some inconsistencies. And if we're going to be down 500 students in the next, say, 5 years, there's certainly going to be room in our buildings for our staff versus creating a separate space at DSSE and investing in recreating Greenwood. So that to me
is probably the one that's the farthest out that I feel like until we get our handle on enrollment projections this fall, which is October 1st. It's not that far away. Then we could evaluate those enrollment, where are we at and then look at that decision.
Yeah, I hear that. And I would just say that the um the the complexity in looking at how you would kind of fit the DSSE, if you will, into vacant spaces, they don't vacate in an equal manner. So, we're not going to have, you know,
we we shared the what 22,000 something square feet that we would need to occupy. Um and we could even bring it down to 20,000 to make it an easy number to to shave off some. 20,000 square feet is not going to be something that we're going to find um space to occupy in one
singular building. Um that's still um current even with the um shifting of some of our enrollment over the course of 5 years. Um and and to several of your points, that's what we see now. We also don't know what might happen with other revenue streams, what happens with the state, etc. So, we know there's a
lot of whatifs out there that none of us are were all speculating, but um finding the ability a couple of questions about secondary. We showed that um the space utilization of rooms that aren't occupied by three periods or less
throughout the entirety of the day is very slim. So, we have about six, I think, or so at the high school. And again, um, we're not going to fit the DSC in six classrooms or other buildings that we might have that would have, um, certain grade levels that might be higher or lower, but it's not going to
be a kind of a unilateral way of that we can clear a building. Um, that's going to be some of the challenges of how we retrofit um, the DSC, which is why the recommendation that we see that you see before you tonight um, does look at that in terms of an entirety of a facility.
um and not necessarily losing a facility should something happen. You know, again, hugely positive that we get a surge. Um it's very easy to find commercial space as we've talked about. We couldn't afford to build a school for some of the schools that we currently
own. And so again, offloading school real estate would be a higher risk in terms of uh our long-term sustainability and viability of future expansion es and flows of those. I think we have a cushion to hold and if at some point,
let's say a year from now, two years from now, um we we continue to see birth rates declining and all that and so our enrollment continues to go down and the board's like, "You know what, Michael? I think your team needs to look at yet the another sale of a building. What would that entail?" Well, at that point, you
know, we would have to look at, you know, what what real estate do we have? What would we potentially be offloading? um where would we then you know with central services um reallocate and then would the priority be to kind of be chunking up because right now one of the
things that got asked about is you know move departments you know kind of all throughout the district and we just talked about the complexity and the challenges of customer services um you know one-stop shop if you will for families who need to come in and get multiple supports from the central
services um staff as well. Um but again that's ideal. If we find ourselves two years from now in a less than ideal situation that might be the compromise that we have to make at that time. But until then um I think chair you said it as well that to move you know so fast
down that road of closing multiple buildings while we can watch and kind of evaluate with this plan. I think that's more of the prudent approach to take. And so, um, with that, chair, you know, again, we'll, as an admin team, we still stand with this and we'll turn it back for discussion.
Mary, um, I just want to point out to the viewing public that we've had, I think, up to three months where this plan is first created um, and defended and fully elaborated on um, um, and built out. And
we also discussed as we talk about moving and changing on a regular basis, the cost of configuration is overwhelming and not acceptable. We can't just continue moving stuff. Um, we were going to vote on this on June 9th and one of the reasons why I wanted to
vote earlier is so that we could put this particular building on the market. Um, it was decided to wait another month. Uh, and basically that was a full 4 and 1/2 weeks of another month. It wasn't just two weeks. Um, there have
been questions. Every single one of them have been answered. I am fully comfortable with voting on this plan. And any movement or any variation in this plan is going to have a trickle down effect that's going to cause even long uh larger costs, more delay, and we
need to get this going because we're wasting money when we don't have this plan in place. So, um, in the interest of the budget and the interest of the solveny of the school district, we need to actually make a decision tonight. Um, yeah, I mean, I guess I I would just sort of counter what you said about, you
know, moving and that that's exactly my concern is that this move is permanent. So, we are investing in reconfiguring a building that may not potentially be there long term. So, are there other options? I've, you know, taken the time and walked through the building with Director Powers and I appreciate his
time and we've had a lot of conversation. all of us. I know um that's for me just the piece that I'm uncomfortable with. So yeah, and I would agree. And this building, nobody can move from this building until the students move in fall of 26. So that's a year and a half out. And I understand things take time, but
um you know, I I would also um like h how many actual employees from DSC could fit in our current buildings, high school, middle school, but also um like do you recall what the actual number was? I think there's 50 or 51 building
or so because I know one of we've received a lot of emails on this and a lot of concerns from our community and you know one of the one of the recommendations was can your IT staff work from home a lot of people are working from home nowadays and support our our students in our district. So when you speak about do
Dr. Thomas, when you mention this community, you know, um, how do you say it? Customer service, how many actual people in this building are servicing families that walk into this building on a daily basin, but I can tell you there's constantly
people out here for enrollment purposes, for um, you know, iPad IT swap purposes, for meeting with HR, um, meeting with enrollment staff. Like I said, um there will be families that come in talking about school concerns that Dr. Anderson
and his team will have to be meeting with. So there's constantly community in this building. Um I I couldn't quantify that. Um and I'm sure Amy at the front desk who primarily sits there will tell you that she is constantly logging people in and out. So it's not just a
matter of um you know, I also want to be clear about this because there's been emails about this. you know, we're not looking for a convenient nice spot for adults to offload on on the backs of kids. I think the perception that's out in our community about that is something
that has um been skewed a little bit. Um we are we are not trying to move kids to make adults comfortable. That is not driving these decisions. Um we do know that we have real estate in our schools that we can adjust. That's a known fact.
we can look at our enrollment numbers and we've shared that in one of the the slide decks. We've got the bandwidth there. We also have an opportunity to uh address some of our short-term budget shortfalls with the sale of this commercial property. Both Dan Powers and
I have been in conversation with people and it's not even on the market yet who are already interested in inquiring about this space. So, we know there's going to be interest um as other city officials have had I've had conversations with as well. Um, will it be a long-term solve all? No, because
there's a lot of issues way bigger than Prior Lake as I've shared. But we can't cut ourselves out of this situation. This is this is not an expenditure issue, you know, and and so I want to be very clear that as we make some tough decisions, and I will be the first to
say I know these are tough decisions. I know these are impactful decisions. Um, I would like to not make any of these decisions, but we're in this reality and I can't put my head in the sand and pretend that things will just magically get better if we just wait. So, we are
making a recommendation for some really um challenging decisions that are going to be impactful both to our students, our families, and u many of our staff. um you know for us to be able to move the DSC with the sale, use some of those proceeds to address some of the short-term budget stuff where
appropriate, but then also be able to expand and colllocate in um a a school space with minimal retrofitting, if you will, not these permanent cement structured walls, etc. that should something happen in the future, we have our own internal folks who have been
able to make something that's um a little bit more flexible for for usage should we ever need to bring that back to a commercial space um or to a a school space. Um so I think we have done our due diligence to find ways to make some of the tougher recommendations to
the board for your consideration to take action on being a steward of the real limited resources that we have. We several of you have mentioned the possibility of an an a levy conversation. I think that's something that's also going to be a conversation that's going to be a part of our future
at some point. Um but but again until those days happen, we are here and I think what you have before you um is is a recommendation that I think is a good transition to still giving us some time to look and watch and monitor as
educators do. always progress monitoring and making adjustments as necessary. Um, and you know, our team coming in, um, they're well-versed. They've lived through this. Um, I I can tell you all three of them have been in districts, um, prior to Michael joining us, but
they've all been in districts, um, where they've had to make these very decisions. They've lived through good times and real challenging times. Um, so I'm confident that the team that we have will also be able to look at this data moving forward to make the best recommendations as we continue, you
know, our our journey here in Prior Lake. I'd like to make one more statement and one of the things that um um was stated repeatedly was that once the DSSE moves into Greenwood, it's planning on making that permanent
regardless of the reconfigurations and enrollment increases or decreases. this is not something that um that they planned out to be short-term at all. Um if if we continue to experience a decrease in enrollment, we have other
consolidations and uh boundary changes that we can make, but the move considering the infrastructure, data center, you name it, it's going into one building. Uh and it's not planning on moving for what 10 years or
greater I think was the plan. So, I am very comfortable with the plan that's in place. I'm not happy we have to make it, but I'm very comfortable with the plan that's in place. Yeah. My concern is more for the students though, too. If you're saying, you know, we're going to close another
building in two years. I mean, we've moved students from Westwood to say five and all of a sudden we move them back. Like, that that's No, I didn't say we're going to close another building in two years. I'm saying that the way that they planned this out and discussed it ad nauseium with the board was that here's where
we're we're at. We don't plan on making significant changes to what we're currently doing with Lao and Westwood and the sales the DSC building and the DSC moving into Greenwood. That is something they want to stay. They fe they they felt and they went through
various configurations where they said there's really no reason to change that. uh and gave uh an analysis of each of the other buildings in the process. Um so I feel fairly confident that what we're voting on isn't going to change.
Other things may change long term as as the uh population's enrollment, you know, funding levels expand and contract. But the the moves that we're making right now were made very strategic such that they are not
planning on and having to make any more changes to what we're voting on right now. Yeah. And that that exact I want to make sure everybody has a chance here. So, uh Amy and then Charles. Sure. Go ahead. Go ahead. No, you're fine. Well, I was just going to I agree with Director France and I would prefer not
to have to make this vote. I think we probably all could agree on um on that. I am very comfortable in in voting. I I am grateful for all of the discussion.
The um I'm just grateful for the district staff listening and all the discussion that we've had. I do feel comfortable on voting it. I'm not comfortable with um the second guessing
of the district staff in all that they've done to um forecast and come forth with um their best case scenario. There's not going to be any perfect case scenario,
but I I do um feel confident that this is our this is the best case. uh or this is the plan, the best case scenario plan. Um yeah, so Charles, um has the decision been made to move
the it into U. Right now we are looking at moving that into a permanent structure. So that would make one move and not continually move that around. So we are looking at a venue for um a one-time move that can just stay there. So, and uh is Marcus in
here yet? Marcus, I know you were still getting additional information from some of our vendors. Did that get landed as of right now? Sorry, Director Johnson. Just one moment. Nope, you're fine. Chair White, board directors, Dr. Thomas
Marcus Mazo, director of technology. Yes, we are working with our um our fiber vendor who is new vera to see how many strands of fiber they have in the local that would be that permanent solution so that we do move that main only once. So we're working with new
vera to see how many strands of fiber they have at various sites to determine that final location. So I I thought we talked about this and it was going to be at the high school because that is our permanent most permanent building is the high school. Yeah, that's where I asked him to say I
asked Noa, how many strands of fiber do you currently have? That's one of them that we're looking at. Yeah, that is like the ideal solution, but we're again we have to look but that hasn't been finalized is what you're saying, right? We're we're waiting to see exactly what Mr. Moralous just said. Yeah.
So, I think that even like gives more reason like here we are making this big decision and three to five like there's a lot of factors, there's a lot of moving parts here. So, not even knowing where that data hub is going to be located um is concerning to me. And I'm not trying to delay this vote, but you
know, you say trust the administration. We do trust the administration. We're here to make the best vote, the best decision that we can given the information that we're given. I think the concern is there's a lot of external pieces and parts and there's a lot of external factors. You know, like I said, if we put a levy on the ballot, that
changes the whole game. We don't get enrollment, we might be looking at closing another elementary school. I mean there's just there to make a three to fiveyear decision um I just think is not not very wise. So we're not making a three to five year decision and as an IT senior level
professional I totally agree Marcus with what's going on and agree that the final demark point um will be the final demark point. So, and I don't believe that has any impact upon the decision we have today other than the fact it'll be the
final demark point. Okay, we have a Oh, we have a motion and a second on the table on the amendment to Oh, I'm sorry, Jess. Did you That was my question. What can you
please restate the motion? Uh the motion to uh accept the presented plan for the neighborhood closure and facility cons con consolidation. Um uh there's a motion to amend that to vote on only the moving of Leola to
Westwood and the DSC and the DSC sale the sale of the DSC. So that's they want that pulled off of the of the plan to be voted on at a later time. Is that clear as mud or so we need a vote?
So we need a vote on the motion to amend amend. Correct. And that's there's a motion and a second at the table to amend the uh recommendation uh for the whole plan. So uh all in favor signify by saying I I I
opposed. Nay. Motion fails 4 to three. And then we also have a motion and a second on the table to uh accept the administration's neighborhood closure and facility consolidation recommendation. So made I think there there's a motion and a
second on the table currently. Right. Yeah. Okay. All in favor? Um or do you have more discussion? Can we have a discussion? You may quickly. Um I just uh a couple of things. Um,
when we came into this district, we started as a Red Tale family through open enrollment and then we, um, moved to Westwood when we moved. Um, and I can tell you, I love the way that building smells,
especially cinnamon roll day, I think, as a lot of people can attest. Um, I love the way it's con and I know we're not we're not shuttering a building. I understand that. Um, but closing a neighborhood school is not something that any of us
take lightly. Um, that is a family, that is a community, that is these are kids you grow up with, their parents you grow up with. Um, teachers you grow up with, administration you grow up with. And you
know, the last time we had do a boundary change, we moved, our family moved to Hamilton Ridge, completely different situation. Um, but a boundary change. And I love the way that school smells, too. and how it's constructed and it's a family and it's it's all the things. And so this is this is not something where I
just want to put it out there that this is a decision you lose sleep over. Um I I'm I can safely say that for me um this is not something where I think I've said it once before. Nobody wakes up in the morning and says I wish I can close
a school today. Um, and I just it's heartbreaking that we're in this situation. Um, but we are and nobody wants to make these decisions, but we have to. And I really applaud the staff because the staff
doesn't want to do this either. Um, and I appreciate all of the thought that has gone into this um, proposal. And this is a proposal or I should say the items in it mostly have been talked about for a
year now. Um this vote last November it failed. We were very clear. We were very transparent. These are options that could happen. And now we weren't bluffing. Um and I don't want to be dismissive or
or anything in my language there. I just this stinks and nobody wants to make this decision, but we have to. And I applaud the the um the staff and to that to the Westwood family that is going to
be split up. Um that's heartbreaking as well. Um and it's not lost, I think, on any of us. Um that kind of situation. So, I just wanted to put that out in the ether that this is um this is really hard and this
is the decision one of the most important decisions we're going to make this year. Um so, um I appreciate the discussion. Thank you. Um one clarifying question is around Sage just to because it's I don't think it's in the deck. Correct me if I'm
wrong. We are keeping those kiddos at the in the Westwood building. We're keeping them to that last cohort. Okay. Thank you. Um yes, I agree. Both my kids have been at Lola and Westwood and that is you know our circle of friends and family and and all the
things. So um you know I I've had many conversations with with parents and staff members and and whatnot about this move and it is a very difficult decision. Um my daughter will not be happy either. So um I appreciate that
that comment um director and I certainly agree with that. Uh for me um as I've stated um you know I'm supportive of the closure of Westwood moving Lola to that building. I think it does provide opportunity for Lola um to grow a
bit and um I think for me I just struggle with um you know the long-term um the long-term direction of of Greenwood. So that's where my vote will go. Yeah. And I will say um I appreciate
what you said, Director Olstead. um this this is a tough vote and my student also attended Westwood and Westwood Sage in particular and you know I've I've been pretty vocal up here on the board on the board table that I fully support um the Sage program and I'm going to be very
sad to see that program grow go away because I understand what we're doing and we're going to add extra supports in our schools but that's not Sage Academy. It's not Sage Academy as it sits today and it's not going to be Sage Academy in the future and I'm I'm very very heartbroken by that. Um, well, I I I
think it needs to be said that when our district was built, when we built two new schools back in 2020, basically five years ago, our district was projected to have 10,544 students as we sit here today. And the reality of is it folks,
we have 8,500. So regardless of a levy vote, and that is a fact. Regardless of a levy vote, we would have been tasked with being fiscally responsible and making consolidation. So this is not just
because the levy vote failed and we are here to make a decision to consolidate a district that was overbuilt and that board made the best decision at given the information they did that time. But because of COVID and a lot of different other factors, we don't have the enrollment that was
projected. And so, while I support the consolidating of the elementary schools, um I have a lot of concerns with moving this building, the staff in this building to Greenwood and I, um and my vote will reflect that. Thank you.
Um Chair White, um I want to correct we are not in the situation we're in enrollment because of COVID. we're in or situation we're in because of the birth rate that has sunk for the entire state is sunk for the entire nation. Um so
this is something that is we we can't make people have more babies. Um that's it's it's the 30-year birth cycle that we're currently experiencing and that can change. Um it can change and it does change and we've seen it change throughout the United States over the
years. So um it's also dependent upon migration into the state based upon businesses coming and going and and all that. Um that is out of our control. So I would just want to make it clear that um that while things are the way they are right now, they are the way they are
for every school district. It is not us and it wasn't co this was we can't make people have more babies. So you know things can change. Uh they may change. Um um school districts do not operate on a dime. It takes years to adjust in one
direction or another. And I have every faith in the administration and the truly adnauseium level of analysis that went into this decision and all the different uh nooks and crannies that were discussed and emails that came in
and the answers that were made. And I have 100% confidence that we're making the best decision we know right now. and planning for variations in the future so that we are not preempting bad
decisions. We are leaving those options flexible. Um and and therefore I truly support this plan. It is not a plan I hope we'd be in. Uh but um it is where we is we are today and we're making um the first major adjustment that
hopefully will keep us solvent in the next couple of years also as well as adapt to and be able to support our students and our families as best we can. Okay, we have a motion and a second on the table for the plan as presented. All
in favor signify by saying I. I opposed. Nay. Motion carries 4 to three. Next on the agenda is the long-term facility maintenance 10-year plan. Uh
Director Powers. Good evening, Chair White, uh Superintendent Thomas, members of the board. Um this is the second look at that we've got for the LTFM budget that we're having for this coming year. Um were there any questions that anyone had seen from that one that was presented?
Um I would just ask are there any big changes that you can point out too? There will be a change coming that we'll be um we'll be modifying it to resubmit to department of education. One of the only big change was is the the loading docks that I was intending to rebuild
for this year. um the we ended up needing civil engineering. So that's going to change the price significantly. So I will be taking that off of this year when we go for the to resubmit it to the department of education and then um we'll look at that for in future
years. Total on that is a little over 320,000. So it will we will end up being under the original projected budget that we had for MDE recommendations. Thank you. Where were those at? Should be three different locations.
Glendale, um, Hidden Oaks, and Five Hawks. Five. Dr. Powers, was can you elaborate? Was there some, um, change in legislation about I thought I read about um, us being able to use LTFM funds to replace
roofs, like new legislation passed that we could you is that is that correct? It was mostly on how the funding could be done. We've always been able to use LTFM funds for roofing. Okay. It's just we can if we have a roofing project that's designated, we can actually go separately for that funding than previously.
Okay. So, there was a change. I just Yeah, there's a change. We'll have to see. I'll talk with Lisa and we'll work through to make sure we've got the director Ryder and I are familiar with each other. So, we will make sure and work through all those changes to make sure we can fit it as best we can. Yeah. Okay. Thank you.
Any other questions? All right. I'll now entertain a motion to accept the 10-year LTFM plan as presented by Director Johnson, second by uh Director Bullion. Sure. All in favor signify by saying I I I post.
I'm sorry. Roll call. This requires a roll call. Director Olstead I. Director Johnson. I. Director Atinson. I. Director Bullion. I. Director France. I. And director Mason. And I. Motion carries 70.
Uh before we go down to new business, uh why don't we take five and come back at 8:06 for recess? Yeah. I'll entertain a motion for recess. So made by Director Johnson. Second.
Second by Director Atinson. All in favor signify by saying I. I opposed. No one. Part: 2
I'd like to uh call the meeting back to order. You can try if you want. You need to. Next item on the agenda under new business is the lease purchase of MacBook Air M4s, laptops, and Apple TVs.
Director Malazo. Chair White, board directors, Dr. Thomas Marcus Mazo, director of technology. In your board packet, you have uh items from the proposal. The first is a memo that we submitted regarding um the proposal of 800 MacBook Airs and 600
Apple TVs. The second is the resolution and then there's also the lease agreement is in there as well. What we're proposing is a 4-year Apple lease at 0% finance for four years.
So, I'll open it up to questions any questions that you may have and here to be a resource. All right. I'll first entertain a motion to accept the resolution approving the u lease purchase of the MacBook Airs and the Apple TVs. Is there a motion on the table? So, made by Director Bullan, second by
Director France. Discussion or questions? Um, I just have a question. You answered a lot of questions, so thank you. Really helped to understand um why we're going down this path. Do you ever compare like um uh like Apple products versus HP
products like and how does that compare from a cost standpoint? I mean I understand that our kids are all on iPads or they have iPads but how does that did you look do you look at that or is it we did and thank you for the question. Um and I'm sorry I didn't get that in time. I just someone actually asked me in the
last couple days. So no I appreciate the question. Um so when when we looked at the lease for the um consolidation of staff devices, we did look at MacBook Airs and HP desktops. So
part of the comparison was when we when we compare I don't want to use apples to apples, but when we compare apples to Windows devices, you try to spec them with similar specs to the best of your ability. So, we we have the quote from Apple for an M4 MacBook Air. And then we
have a quote for an HP um Z2 which has similar specs. Um we got that quote from a preferred vendor and that that pricing was on a state contract. So, it's extremely aggressive pricing. And the
MacBook Airs are $271 less per unit than the desktop that we spec. pretty comparable. Any other questions? Um I had one followup too. Thank you for answering everything else, but um the 600 Apple TVs, how um I don't know how
many classrooms we have it. Does that include like all of the conference rooms and the classrooms or how like is that why there it'll be instructional spaces? So, and I'm a visual learner so I brought a little bit of Thank you. Talk about Apple TVs. We're not talking about monitors. We are talking about
device and I'll let you pass it down. Um, so that allows the MacBook Airs to connect uh through AirPlay. The idea would be that we connect that Apple TV directly to a projection system in the classroom and allows for a new and different way of u mirroring than what
we currently have, which is we're using a um legacy product to connect um that's running on the desktop PC and then the MacBook Air is connect to that which is connected to the classroom AV equipment. The other question was, and when we discussed it a couple
meetings ago, it was about legacy uh peripherals like 10 key um keyboard, the extra the larger monitor, the legacy mouse. So, we found this unit, which is a USBC hub that we plan on using as the docking station.
And that hub allows all the connectivity to the legacy equipment. So, uh you can use that as a docking station if you will connect your uh external monitor, your existing keyboard, your existing mouse, and then it also has
Ethernet as well. So, if you prefer that higher wired connection, it has it. So, um that is what we're proposing to be the docking station. And we can get that at bulk pricing. And with the MacBook Airs, the Apple TVs, and that unit, it's still less than what the desktops were
pricing out at. Is this already considered in the pricing? It's not included in the lease. That would be an additional cost to the technology department that we would cover under hardware account. Yeah. Sorry. And I just to clarify, the question was like around the number. It
felt high but I don't know how many classrooms we have and especially if we're considering a a building closure is that for backups and for all the conference rooms or is that why Okay. Yes. Any learning spaces? Every space covered. Got it. Yep. And additional backups as well. Y
and then what happens to the old devices? Do we get credit for them or when we turn them back in or Yep. Thank you for the question. Mhm. The uh legacy MacBooks uh we we had a lease agreement through Providence Capital and there's a remarketing agreement within that lease. So when we
go to replace legacy MacBook Airs, they have to go back to Providence Capital for remarketing. But yes, we do get a portion of that value back to the district. All right, if there's no further questions or discussion, all in favor signify by saying I. I
opposed. Motion carries 70. Resolution. Oh gosh, I did it again. It's right in front of me. Director Olstead I. Director Johnson I. Director Atinson I. Director Bullan. I. Director France. Hi. And Director Mason
I. And I. Now the motion carries 70. Thank you. Thank you. Next on the agenda is a joint powers agreement for SRO's. Dr. Thank you, Chair White board of directors. Um, this is our updated uh
SRO contract with the city of Prior Lake. Um, we have a three-year uh contract with Prior Lake and a 5-year with Savage. So, we're just out of different sequence. So, we will be doing the same with Savage, very similar contracts that we have and obviously definitely a partnership we want to maintain. And um you see the contract
before you and it just includes the updated uh contract costs um for that and it's built into our budget for um the anticipated growth of those contracts over year-over-year. All right. Is there a motion to accept the joint powers agreement as presented
by director France, second by director Johnson. There's no further discussion. Um I just have a a question. Sure. Yeah. So, in the agreement, it says that it's effective 2025 and expires on 2030. So, is it a five-year agreement? I'm sorry. This is a fiveyear agree.
This one's a five-year agreement. The other one is I had them flipped. That's okay. I just point of clarification, I guess. So, thank you. Mhm. All right. If there's no other questions or discussion, all in favor signify by saying I opposed. That carries 70.
Next on the agenda is a resolution to establish dates for filing affidavit of candidacy uh for the school board which would be July 29th through August 12th. Dr. Thomas. Um actually that's all I was going to share. Okay. So
all right. Um I'll entertain a motion uh to accept th those dates and that resolution. So made by Director Atinson, second by Director Johnson. This does require a roll call vote. Uh, director Olstead, I, Director Johnson, I, Director Atinson,
hi. Director Bullan, I and Director France, hi. And Director Mason, I and I, that carries 70. Next is the service agreement uh, between the city of Prior Lake and ISD 719 um,
for absentee voting on November on the November 4th, 2025 special election. So, I'll entertain a motion to accept that service agreement. So made by director Bullian. Second. Second by director Olstead. There's no discussion.
I have a question actually. Okay. Um so will this election take place at city hall? Martha, do you want to All of the polling locations will be open on November 4th. Okay. But this since the city has a question on the ball. Oh yeah, that makes sense.
There's a hierarchy and so they have to conduct their city of higher lakes portion. So we're just going to combine. Okay. But all the polling places within Prior Lake will be in the school district. In the district school district. Oh, okay. Okay, that makes sense because
there's a question. Okay. Okay. Thank you for There's no other comments or questions. All in favor signify by saying I. I opposed. That motion carries 70. And uh next is an approval of a
resolution establishing procedures for counting of write-in votes for the schoolboard election. Is there a motion to accept the resolution as presented? So made by Director Johnson. Second by Director France discussion. Okay, this does require a roll call
vote. Director Olstead. I. Director Johnson I. Director Atinson I. Director Bullan I. Director France I. And director Mason I. And I that carries 70. All right. Next on the agenda is just a
hopefully relatively quick discussion. Um just for a little historical perspective. Um for as far back as I can remember in the school district, we had what was called a building and grounds committee. Uh it goes back to at least the 70s.
Facilities. And it's been called different things. When I first got on it was some facilities. Yeah. And so, um, through the years as we were growing and doing a lot of building, it kind of morphed into more of a construction oversight type committee. You guys called it something during the
last building. We combined finance and facilities into one and then knocked off the facilities when the building construction ended. And so I'm just wondering um if it would if the board would entertain the
possibility of either um adding um a a permanent board committee in the traditional building and grounds um style which would oversee um you know help prioritize maintenance, give some assistance to Dr. or to director Powers
um or if um combining again a a adding a building kind of you know addition to the finance committee um if that makes sense. I mean, even though we are declining in enrollment and all the things that we've had a, you know, these discussions about tonight, we still have
10 buildings and hundreds and hundreds of acres and millions and millions and millions of dollars of infrastructure that need maintaining. And I'm just wondering if uh if if the board has any desire to move back in that direction, whether either it's you know a separate standing
committee or or maybe re-upping the the the finance and and building type style committee. Um I just wanted to do this because we don't have a study session this month and I thought just a quick discussion. Is there any desire to move back in that direction? I feel having
been on that committee for years and years and years, you know, before it was more of a construction style committee. Um, I felt it was it was very helpful not just to the board but the administration to kind of have that little filter before stuff gets brought
to the board as to why something might be prioritized over something else. Um, just in a on a regular basis. So, I'm open to discussion or forget it or wherever direction you guys want to go. Go ahead, Dr. Boo.
Um, first of all, I have a question if if um you could share a little bit of perspective on when finance and building was um was combined just in some discussions regarding this since the agenda has come out. Um, and when I'm
thinking about uh what our projections are going out, you know, fiveish years, enrollment and such, um, our building situation should remain constant for at
least the near future. And so um I would initially without having us you know before discussing and hearing everybody's point of view my thought would be a a whole building committee might not be where we would want to go
because we aren't really building. Um but definitely would like to know more about having that building portion in with finance what that looks like. It seems given uh um what our budget
um forecasts are that you know everything that we're doing has to do with finance. It's tied so closely together. So um I would I would apt in this stage to um buy for the the
combination of the finance and the building committee not having a another board committee. Um, Director Bullan, you asked about the history and um, so even before I was elected to the board nine years ago, um, or almost 10 years ago
now, um, they they had finance as part of the facilities committee. So we called it the finance FSC. Yeah. Flur flour. Yeah. Um, um, fine range and long range whatever. Long range planning. uh because the cost
of the you know obviously in our finances the cost of that infrastructure and we were going through bonds. So that was a huge piece of it too is having that committee look for the bonds when the building stopped when our last bond
and all that the referendum passed and that stopped uh and we made the simultaneous choice to not make it only an internal committee because it was really made up of uh administration, the finance director. Um, it had one board
member at first and then we Was it two when you were there or is it just one? Oh, it was two. Yeah. Yeah. So, it was uh I know it was one a while ago and then it became two and then it stayed two. Um um and we invited the public into that finance committee. That's when it switched and became
primarily a finance committee with of course the numbers for infrastructure, building depreciation, long-term facilities maintenance built into that with the focus being fi overall financial management. Um when we had the
flurp version um we also had our construction contractors and maintenance contractors part of that. We no longer have that. So that is uh also a consideration of why it moved to be overwhelmingly finance. Um my concern
about creating yet another committee and not just expanding or making a making a a conscious decision to expand maybe the definition of the finance committee is going to be on staff and administration time to do yet another committee. That would be my concern. We're already
incredibly lean if not under subsistence level in our administration. uh and to have an yet another committee is is management and and um the the cost benefit in that I I I do not see the benefit of having that. But I do agree
with particularly as we're regardless of whether growing or shrinking to add an additional consideration uh and maybe even section of the existing finance committee to talk about the cost of the reconfiguration, the moves, the building sale, etc., and have that be a piece of
that. I'm not the one who chairs that. The um director writer will chair that. So, and so that will be on her shoulders obviously. Um so that's that's my input, but that does add uh another section to that meeting that that would be
additional to to administration. And and I would just add um I would also envision director powers to be joining so from a co-admin standpoint to basically resurrect the finance long-range planning committee to do both finance as well as the operational
support long LTFM etc. Um because to your point um vice chair bullian it all comes down to dollars and cents. So whether it's the con reconfiguration consolidation plan or if it's the projects of the the shipping decks that
uh director powers is talking about um that's all going to come down to dollars and cents. And so I think enhancing that finance committee with perspectives from folks from the op side from our community that has that interest I think would just naturally you know kind of
fit together as well. I um yeah, I think adding a grounds element in there too to to throw um because I've been on many uh baseball fields and uh
you know, not here, but you know, and we've had to to move fields, you know, due to poor poor management and things like that. So, um, part of that, too. Yeah. um you know and I'm sure um Jeff
Marshall would be I don't want to speak for him but um I think that would be a great element to add into and obviously that all trickles down to dollars and cents and I know people have already talked about you know our football fields coming up
on its age sure um so that's where I think maybe and I don't you know I agree agree putting a whole another committee together. I I completely agree. It's a It's a right.
Nobody wants to add something else to the plate, but maybe we can figure out a time schedule to where we're narrowing down. This is where, you know, we're going to almost combine all these things together and
focus on instead of having our individual like committees this month, right? If that's what it is, maybe, you know, this quarter, right, we're going to hyperfocus on this element, right? And may
that's a way we look at Yeah. I I can't imagine that, you know, the building and grounds or facilities conversations would be necessarily regular or but there there will be times that I would think that it would be helpful for Dan to be able to come to the committee and say
generator turf lease stuff like that that's the tracks falling apart whatever it is. Yep. So and having served on the finance committee for the f past six months I think there's definitely the bandwidth to add on to the agenda as well. um and looking forward with director writer as
well to help you know work up those agendas and what we're planning on discussing. So I think there's definitely room within from what we've discussed so far. I I would agree. I mean I was going to say actually we've kind of run over a couple times too. So I don't know if we'd have to expand or you know increase the duration or of the beating or change
the time maybe. But I'm I think I'm supportive of that idea. Okay. moving forward, what would you suggest doing? So, if it's the will of the board, um, you know, I'll work with Lisa and Dan Powers and the two board reps.
Um, and then, you know, we'd probably want to cast out for folks who have a passion about buildings and grounds um uh on top of of the finance folks that we have. So, I would just add addition I would recommend that we would add additional attendees um from the buildings and grounds and ops side um
that would regularly participate and I think just be part of the discussion. Okay. Um I would add to that maybe if there are partners like PLAY or people of interest that use our fields and grounds regularly, they might be um good additions to that committee. Absolutely. Absolutely. So, yeah, we I
think we can just adjust the member. If the board's okay, we would just work with the two board uh directors and adjust the membership accordingly. Yeah. And and re rewrite the scope a little bit. And we do do we have some we do have already some new members. So I would
like to kind of go back and you know understand I think one of them particularly has good grounds or building building background if I remember correctly. You're looking quizzically. I don't know how I feel yet. And and I'll just say as I came in this
committee existed. Um I mean it was being sunseted. I mean I didn't initiate the sunset but it was being sunset as I came in. So I got a little overlap of the flurp and and I understand the rationale for it. I think it's very you know you want to talk about optimizing resources of time and people's commitment. I would
just adjust the scope of finance and resurrect flur or whatever it's going to be called. Yeah. Um uh because I think the interest is already there on the finance side. We round out the buildings and ground side, add Dan to be a co-director with uh
Director Ryder teams there. Um and it's going to be very efficient in my opinion. Okay, I agree. Okay, then we'll look forward to an update on that. Appreciate the discussion. Thank you.
Thank you. All right. Next on the agenda, my number. Next on the agenda, uh, under policy, um, we have for a second and final reading tonight, uh, 203.7, 204, 205, 206,
207, 209, 212, and 215. Uh, is there a motion to uh accept these all in one one vote? So made
by director Bully. Is there a second? Second by Director Johnson. Any discussion? Um, I thought we were going to take 209 off of that. You just read it as part of that. Um, I believe the earlier motion
to amend the agenda moved all three of the uh under letter B, all three to a second reading. Did I remember that right? Yeah, the the three 200s. That's correct.
Um I I still have my same concern about all of them and particularly the public hearings one. Um that is inappropriate for us. We didn't have one before. There was a reason for that and as I stated there's a conflation of forms and
hearings. Hearings are legal proceedings. Forms are not the language in there that's been added is not appropriate. And also the reason why we didn't have that before is we delegated truth and taxation hearings to the
finance department. Um for a reason the board is not capable nor qualified to hold those or to manage those. Um so therefore it became a procedural um item that was um in the organizational
meeting was sent and delegated to the uh finance director. Any other discussion? Okay. Hearing none. All in favor signify by saying I. I. I. Opposed. Nay.
Uh motion carries. 52. And then moving down to letter B. Uh first reading policy 9004. Uh either one of you two want to any updates since we really didn't discuss last time.
Um, has there been any in the last uh since our last meeting, has there been any any uh input from other board members since you redlining anything? No. Other than what we spoke about at the
study session that 20904 um was introduced after the board already voted for it without any board discussion of reintroducing it as a policy and then of course um the language in there is um was
misrepresented as well as uh the language in there is not appropriate. I can annotate on that if you don't mind. So I'm going to read directly from our website now and I'm quoting for the 2425 school year we have planned a
comprehensive review of policies in the 700 800 and 900 series. Additionally we will conduct the required annual review of policies 506 722 and 806. It is on our website. So it was already scheduled
to be there. I'm not done. And 904 was voted for in June. Now, yes, the previous school year. Yes, that's correct. Not the 2425 school year. It wasn't on there to be renewed every year. The correct
year for it to be redone was the 2425 school year. It was done in the 2324 school year. And it was done for a reason before you got on the board because director Bullan had asked for us
cycle was the 2425 school year. That is exactly with all due respect director Johnson 900 France I'm still talking everybody relax here right just director Johnson finish your statement and then Mary you can you can come in. So to continue I I'll read directly from
the email from director Herman to add to it. Thank you for your valuable feedback during our December 12th, 2425 policy advisory committee meeting. Attached are the final drafts of the policies for your review with the exception of
policies 902 and 904. Policy 904 based on requests for additional information. This policy will be revisited at the next pack meeting. So that came out January 17th. Understand that. Who requested it? Cuz
the board had just voted on it. It had never gone through the board ever. Seeing as it is part of the 900 series and that is the year, right? The 2425 school year was the correct year for it to be redone
and it was and that year started in July. Okay, let me finish because you weren't here. Director Bullan had asked in 2023 and again in early 2024 to have it renewed or have it reviewed for signs.
We had discussed it at I think at least more than one study sessions because you did a thumbs up for it. It was expedited because of the request. That's why it was voted on and June reviewed by the board and voted on in June of 2024.
It was expedited ahead instead of starting with the full schedule on June 30th for the 900s. 904 was moved to June of 2024 out of cycle and that would have put it out of cycle.
Director Johnson, it actually was expedited within the cycle to be done sooner than later because of the request from Director Bullan. It was discussed so it would go back on its three-year cycle after the board votes. Robert's
rules has has rules. If the board votes in order to bring it back up, the board has to have a discussion because it was now brought up again expedited out of schedule without any discussion at the board table. The the
the the direction came through somewhere the committee. I was chair in December. It never passed through me and I was on the policy committee before that when the entire cycle was started. How this got brought up out of sequence after it was already
voted on and it was supposed to start on its other three-year schedule is something that was never discussed at the board. That's my first concern. The second concern is the misrepresentation for the policy itself and that is that is a concern that that
bears on the integrity of this board. Okay. So, I I understand what you're saying, but it doesn't say in here that every 900 series was planned except policy 904,
but we did. So, who brought it up? Because well, that was in December of 2024 and as chair, you would have been responsible. Yes. And nobody brought it up to me. So, how did he get brought up without the chair and the rest of the board knowing?
Well, I don't know. Can I Can I interject? Um Oh, go ahead. Go ahead. You go ahead. Cuz you're on you're also on the committee. Go ahead. You um I'm not interested in I'm not interested in the back and
forth. Um, I think given the fact that my name was brought into the conversation regarding a request from May of 2023, that is accurate. As a board at that time, I had asked for
signage, not the policy. I had asked for a board discussion regarding um the signage in buildings because the community had emailed the board um before I was ever even elected.
That has just been a a a cons a place of concern. So in May of 2023, I asked in a study session if that would be the will of the board to have a discussion regarding it. And it was and
sometimes what I've learned in two and a half years of serving on the board is sometime some things in the district seem to seem to move quickly. Some things seem to move slowly as I had um maybe on two
occasions I I don't know how many I don't keep track like that. I had brought up at the board table again that I had asked for that and and it was the will of the board to have the discussion. I think where we're having um
um concern over this this um policy in talking with Director Herman, who is no longer here, so it's it's hard to talk about her because she's not here to
defend. Um but my understanding is that the 900s were always on the schedule and so at the last meeting when the question was arose how did this get back on the
docket um a you know it was a long meeting. It was um it it was a long meeting and there was a lot of conversation um and frustration.
Um, and I think that after the meeting it was clear that that the 900s were always on it and director Herman expressed frustration that, you know, um, the question was asked, she didn't answer at the time and none of us really
like, you know, none of us put it on this schedule, but it it was always on the schedule. The 900s were always on the schedule. And so instead of wasting time, you know, who did what or where,
um the the I've heard, you know, from the community in open forum tonight, the concerns that were brought forward, um that it was out of sequence. I don't think that that's I don't I hear that concern and I hear the questions. Um but
I I after you know the last meeting and talking with Director Herman um I don't believe that's the case. It was always on the schedule. So I don't believe the out of sequence I don't believe it was out of sequence. Um the other concerns that have been
um talked about 904 uh what has been brought forward since that last meeting. No one has brought any specific questions. red lines or like what to add or subtract. And I
think if we could just focus our discussion to specifics instead of what happened when we can move forward together as a board and that's what I propose we do. Okay. So here's the thing and and and I
do have the if I could get my juice back on my laptop. Um, it was brought up in May. It was actually brought up before then. You actually brought it up before then. May was your second request uh to do the thumbs up to talk about um signage. It was actually discussed in
that meeting that it is covered in policy 904 and 904 will be discussed according to the schedule. Can you wait? The answer was yes, I can wait to discuss the policy. Then it was brought up again and then the discussion was with the
policy committee was we're going to then expedite that and even though it wasn't supposed to start until after July 1st they had room and they brought it up in June and it was discussed at the board and that's why a policy that's normally
on a three-year approval schedule got moved up very first in the in an early portion of that next year. That's why there was so much confusion of we already voted on this. It was voted on in June 2024. It is on a
three-year schedule. So, if the 900s weren't supposed to start until the 2425 school year, we actually took that and moved it up to satisfy the request for the discussion about signs. And it was
discussed quite quite voraciously actually. It was a very very long meeting. um several of the meetings regards that were were long uh but it was moved up and it was voted on. There was no discussion with the board chair
and I believe even in I I believe we had a couple of meetings um with you myself and Dr. Thomas and I did not take notes and and record those or anything so I don't remember when but I remember when it was brought up again did we discuss signs because there was a
list of things and the answer was yes we did we talked about it in 904 and it was discussed very very lightly again I was as surprised as anyone to see it come back up in May of 2025
and I was contacted by people of the policy committee going I have no idea what's going on so I was totally surprised when then it came up to the board table. Um, but when something is voted on like that, and it is on a three-year schedule, and the board voted on it, and it passed, and I believe it
passed unanimously. Um, if we're going to bring it up again with within that three-year schedule, we're basically challenging the last board vote, and there's no problem with that. But it needs to be brought up at a board table and it needs to be discussed
that are we going to bring something up that we just voted on that doesn't need to be voted on that isn't due again. And if the if it was the will of board to actually discuss that policy that would be fine but as I've asked people I've
learned that there was a whole bunch of conversation and draft policies that were actually introduced that dealt a whole bunch of different things. And as we discussed in the last study session, legal actually got involved with a couple of draft policies that the rest
of the board wasn't even aware was being introduced to amend a policy that we had just voted on less than 12 months before. So it's it's not that if somebody has a different opinion about it, that's one thing. But the procedure
is if the board voted then and and the vote stands, you don't just rechallenge it in the background and just bring it back up again and say, "Hey, I want to change." That's not how Robert's rules works. That's not how the procedure works. So, if we want to go
ahead and discuss it, then let's bring it up formally, have a vote on whether we want to amend policy 904 and stick it on the schedule like it should be. Okay, that's not a problem. The problem
that I have is how it actually happened. That's a procedural issue. And then the and because it's not it's it's a procedural issue with rebroke procedure. Then the second thing comes in with the integrity of how it was introduced which
is a different discussion not a discussion of procedure. So, if we want to talk about reintroducing policy 904 and have the board vote on whether we're going to take that again out of sequence and vote
on it, that is the that is the will of the board. But we should do that instead of just surprising everybody. So, how was it a surprise if it was on the schedule?
So, the schedule again, the schedule was set. We expedited that one because of the request to discuss signage because it got brought up by you multiple times and it was said we were going to wait till policy 904. So with room in there, it was brought in
uh slightly earlier, just slightly earlier to expedite it. And that's why policy 904 was voted on in June of 2024 instead of July or August of 2024. That's the whole reason.
So, my recollection of that was is is a little bit different. And um again, um when 904 came up and was voted on, the the concerns regarding signs in the
buildings weren't addressed. Um, and so in conversations that I I had on my one-on ones, um, and so on and so forth, a lot of that was going to be, uh,
um, discussed with the strategic plan. Um, we were rebranding. We were going to, you know, be doing a lot of different things with signage, which has happened since the, um, adoption of the strategic plan. Um and so
um those didn't coincide and I do you know I I I agree with you that when the when I had brought it up the first time for when there was a thumbs up I don't remember ever bringing it up for two different thumbs up just one and um
uh it was mentioned maybe I think that even a director said you know maybe when we discuss 904 or however. Um, that wasn't the stipulation of the discussion that I asked for. And I would say I would redirect the
conversation because when we did vote on it, there was discussion that Dr. Thomas did lead about reviewing the signage in general because of the new strategic plan. And that that I I don't mean to throw you under the bus here or
whatever, but remember and and that was part of it that okay, here's our policy on signage and then the review of the signs in the building and what was going to happen was going to be part of the strategic plan. So when we voted on 904, that was
something that was brought up by Dr. Thomas and that that I would defer to him. um chair white as being one of the I'm sorry I just want to I guess I need some clarification then because um I think I can add some clarify
um so so you're right the procedure should be followed my question is okay it was expedited um Charles wasn't seated until January how did that get brought up in discussion at the December policy
meeting Mhm. Um I mean I think I think I think the implication is that that Charles might be driving this somehow, but it was discussed before he was on the board. So how did it was something happened at the policy committee level that
that never made it to the board as a whole, right? But I'm just wondering how that how that happened. I think I can add some clarification if you guys go back and watch the meeting in June. I went back and watched it and Dr. Thomas, you specifically say when we're reviewing that and it was a short conversation that that policy 904 had
nothing to do with posters in the classroom and it was more about um other people handing out flyers and and we had talked about the election. I brought up a concern because of the election concerns and you know different camps of vote yes or vote no and so that that
actually joged my memory. Thank you. I don't sometimes don't have great memory, but then I attended that um December meeting and I specifically remember Emily Herman saying something to the fact that um director Bullan when we
review 9002 um or whatever policy it was within the 900 series, this policy will come back up for for review for discussion. I specifically remember her saying that. Um, and I don't know if it was the procedures of
it that then addressed the posters. Um, and you know, like I understand your concern. I understand your concern, Director France. So, we have a specific policy that says any community member, board member, parent, teacher, blah, blah, blah, whoever, all the people.
If you have a suggestion for a policy, you can bring it up through the proper channels of Dr. Thomas. Um and and so this the work that was put in for this this policy six months of work or however long it was taken to reviewed
cannot be dismissed that you know Dr. Thomas was sitting there reviewing it and and if he didn't feel it was out of sequence for whatever reason at that time Dr. S. Thomas again I don't want to throw you under the bus but um you could have brought that to the committee's attention but it was discussed in
December. So there's a slight variation in the memory here. the one of the one of the issues was that 904 only deals with third parties. Okay. And the question was that came up was
policies that we don't have that addressed things that are put up internally which was not covered by 904. And so the discussion that was brought up was this policy doesn't cover that.
It wasn't we're going to go and redo the policy because it was already expedited out of sequence. It was talking about the policy that we may or may not want to have about internal.
So not policy 904. It was if you want a policy of that, that's a whole separate discussion because 904 is dedicated to external um third-party
um items that go into the school and how that is performed. So, if I if I may, I know my name's been thrown into the mix a few times and and uh like the rest of you, I don't have all, you know, notes or photographic memories of every every
meeting that I've ever been in. But I will say this, um yes, the strategic plan process, I've been very public about our brand. Christy and I have been talking a lot about being on brand and email signatures and district approved signage, all that kind of stuff. So that
was part of our our marketing if you will to rebrand um around the strat plan etc and our you know the attributes of a learner uh all that um there was a conversation at the policy committee
meeting um around some of the and 904 currently does not pertain to district signage. It is that marketing all that you know using our kids for you know pushing product etc. Um and so the the
conversation that came up initially was actually a new policy 904.1 that's how this whole conversation of internal com uh signage began and when that was introduced and then reviewed by
legal um which we do with a lot of our policies. So it's not just 904. So I want to be very clear about that too. There are some things that get pretty sticky. We'll ask our legal to put eyes on it. Um, and legal suggested that you merge this. Don't write a separate
904.1. Rewrite 904 because there were things in the 904.1 that they said there's a lot of exposure here and you're going to kind of get yourself set up. Can I ask you something? Who wrote 904.1?
Um 904.1 Director Johnson uh brought forward as as a conversation piece. Okay. 904.1 was that ever introduced to the board or to say that we were going to introduce a brand new policy? That was not brought into the board.
that was brought into the policy committee as part of our conversation of 904 because Emily also had the desk notes that I think director Atinson re uh referenced of 904 being discussed at a later date in policy committee that
was around that time as she was leaving that was the desk file note that she shared with me that this is we we also left last week's meeting or whatever it was trying to refresh our brains because it was late and people were fatigued and we're trying to play back the tapes of that so there was a discussion at policy
committee level where this was a conversation that was going to happen um this 904 904.1 and the convergence of that it was going to happen um because
our 904 only pertained to external and there was the to address some of the questions that uh vice chair Bullan brought up having something internal And then 904.1 gets introduced. Uh, Director Johnson, brand new to the
board, and we said, you know what, this hasn't been briefed with the committee at this time. Let's hold on this so we can introduce it to the committee and then get some perspective on that. So, I think that might have been the next policy committee meeting. I don't know, February or so. Um, or Jane. Yeah, February. Yeah,
that's right. Because you got seated in January. Um so so that's how the convergence of 904 and 904.1 came to be 904 um because it was advised by our
attorneys to not have a 0.1 policy um as it stood and so that got introduced to the policy committee in that February time frame and the iteration started to go from there. you know the the process
of a review started to go from there. Um so so so again I I think I mean that's my recollection of process. uh I might not have it 100% you know accurately reflected but that's my interpretation of this the chain of events that led to
the discussion of introducing um that to the committee and then what gets brought before you today and and then also I believe um I know was referenced a couple of you and some from our community from the committee I guess at the May meeting um there was bigger
discussion I was actually at my daughter's college graduation so I was not at that particular meeting where that discussion took place. Um and it must have been June um beginning of June
that um I met with Emily Amy or Vice Chair Bullan and Director Johnson and they were talking about the meeting and I'm like time out. I wasn't at this meeting. How did we get to this place? So bring me up to date on that. So they briefed me on that process of discussion
that came from that May policy meeting and then um from there a final review was given back to the attorneys I believe to put eyes on that kind of merged language and I think feedback from the committee that landed that
conversation in early June perhaps I late May early June add one bit if you remember correctly um there actually a closing discussion within within the pack committee to completely
remove it all from 9004 into a completely separate policy altogether and I don't remember that policy number I I have it written I just yes it was4 I was at that meeting it was a 400 series policy yes I just I don't have the book my other notepad
it was like an employee it's it was an employee policy Um so go ahead. So and then and then and then we sat down and basically did comparison of does this work. It was the
it'll come to me. I don't remember what it was. Um yeah. So, and then we we sat down and finalized the language because there there were notes from director Herman on there of highlights and cleanup
language, right? And not everyone is going to agree on things when it comes to policy. And that's that's okay. But that's so without the rest of the board's knowledge or awareness, a policy we had
just voted on was being revised for revote. Well, the and that's so that's where I'm going to stick with the procedure because that is and I'll just add one conversation point I had with former administration as well
and that is um keeping the 900s whole um versus bifrocating whatever policy number or sequence that we're on. If it's pulled out of sequence even if it was approved it should have come in with the 900 so it stays in the 900 sequence.
And that was one of the things that um previous administration was adamant that we can't keep handpicking stuff out and then putting it into a different sequence because then it would have been reviewed out of the three-year cycle and then we would have been out of violation of the policy of the board to review every three years
and and we did talk about that and it was discussed because of the request that kept coming up. Yes, that's how but that's how the 900 I get that but we voted on it and no knowledge to the board
from admin from um from administration came in to say oh now we're changing this back even though we agreed to the to the exception aside from the 9 it being part of the 900 batch right so when it when it's noticed to the board
in July that the 900s are going to be reviewed that includes every 900 00, right? Including the one that had just recently passed to keep it in the sequence of the cycle of the 900s, but that was not informed to the board when we said we're taking it out of sequence just to make sure we were
satisfying the original request. I I don't recall that. But I'm just saying what we notice every front end of every policy. I get that. All I'm saying is we made that I was one of the very first people on the policy committee when we set up the sequence
and we knew we were taking it out of sequence and we made that one exception and then and then said we're not going to do it again because it's on a three-year cycle. We simply will skip it where it's in that sequence. I don't recall that. I was in that conversation when we
decided to move it up because I was chair at that time and I know that that was a huge part of the discussion because it it's confusing but because we were only moving it up 30 days wasn't that big of a deal. Well, it would have been Yeah, but we wouldn't have been reviewing policy
until September. So, it was and that's well not not 30 days. I mean we we wouldn't hear what July was saying July and that's was the discussion of does it matter one way or the other because this has been it's been outstanding for a long time. It was a request. It had been
discussed. You had made the comment. I understand the logic of expediting. I don't recall the conversation of pulling it out of its own sequence of the 900s because we wouldn't want to fingerpick any policy out of any sequence because how do we keep track of all the ones that we made?
That was the discussion. So, I don't recall that, so I can't speak to that. Well, when we discussed the agenda, when I went over it with Director Herman, that was the concern. And it's like, okay, how big of a concern is this since July 1st starts next year? I mean, it's like June. So, you know,
but it was a it was a concern because it had been a request. It had been sitting out there for a while and and it was something that we definitely didn't want to keep ignoring when somebody made a request to have it reviewed. Well, not to have the policy reviewed,
to have the concept of signage reviewed. It was kept showing up on our list of things we hadn't done. So, where does that leave us now? and I leave it up to the chair because well I would say you know I'm listening to this without any historical perspective and so I'm trying to you
know jumble this through my mind um from where I sit no matter how it got there it it's here it's not we're not we're not violating any any protocol
904 is part of 900 That's just that's where I'm landing. Um, you know what? Once more time, this is a meeting in public, not a public meeting. I would very much appreciate keeping the chatter
down so we can have our discussion. Could be serious. Uh so from where I sit um we're we're at first reading tonight and I would suggest any uh red line eliminations
additions be submitted to um either Director Johnson or Director Bullion or both. Go ahead. I was just going to say by August 1st, but you go ahead. I'm the director Johnson and I were given um the
task from the will of the board on the 200s not the 900 and so I would appreciate to be that was my fault removed you are correct thank you guys are both on the policy committee when it comes to the board the policy
committee members are supposed to represent the the discussions of the policy action uh policy advisory committee in the interim, you know, chairway, if I may. Um, go ahead. While we're in the inter transition of HR, I would like to I would be more comfortable with that being submitted to
me. Okay. So that I could have conversation with the two board directors on the on the committee, please. Okay. Um, I have a few um questions, comments. Um, I know that the policy advisory
committee is just that advisory just like our teaching and learning, just like our finance. And I know that these committees don't don't vote, right? They don't take formal votes. They are there in an advisory capacity. I still have concerns about
the PA and I've talked to some, not all, um, of the PA committee members, or I'm sorry, the policy advisory committee members. My concern still lies in several have concerns about some of the
edits in this policy that the majority of the pol not all but the majority of the policy advisory committee weren't in line with. Um, I know we we heard from a few today and I know we have had some um
emails into the uh schoolboard email which to my knowledge hasn't been responded to. So, they have questions about the feedback that they have given at the pack. Um, again, I know they
don't vote, but when the majority of a policy advisory committee has some thoughts or very minor thoughts and then they see this, that's concerning to me. That is misrepresentation in my mind. Again, I didn't talk to every member of the policy committee.
So, so that's a concern for me. Now, knowing that legal has looked at this, I know from talking to one of the members, you know, is it possible, and I know this doesn't happen very often, at least to my knowledge, is it possible that we can send this back to the policy
advisory committee to review again and have another conversation because I know that they were they knew that legal was going to be reviewing it. The policy advisory committee hasn't seen what legal advice was provided. And so is that again I know this probably doesn't
happen very often. Is that a possibility that we can take this since we're we moved this to a first reading and it's not a final reading. Can we bring this back to policy advisory committee? And I'm apologies I don't know when the next one is probably when the school year starts. September. Okay.
Um so there's that's my question. And then number two, if if we have these advisory committees and collectively again majority, not
all, um if a majority, you know, thinks or has kind of a a sense of how they want to move, then I think we need to honor that knowing we don't have to agree with it as a board. We don't have to agree with everything and quite, you know, we go through policies all the
time. Um but if if this if something like this is being misrepresented, why do we have an advisory committee in the first place? So if that those are the two concerns I have. So concern misrepresentation
number one, concern number two, they had some questions that they weren't given any answers to. And then a question about if we can put this back to the PAC PAC for further review and discussion. Director Bull.
So I I appreciate your concerns, Director Olstad. Um and the community's concerns, the um policy advisory committee members concerns. One thing that I'd like to um state uh regarding
the concern regarding misrepresentation um from the May 15th policy advisory committee meeting um director Herman along with uh dire uh
Dr. Thomas um and Director Johnson and myself, we had another meeting. Um we had a follow-up meeting the following week. So there was um uh we had just And was there anyone else in that meeting? No, the four of us. Uh we we had a
follow-up meeting regarding that. Um and we discussed things. I know that there was um language that we were trying to work through. Um
you know, so I just I want to I want to say that I hear the concern regarding misrepresentation, but there was one more meeting between the district and uh Director Johnson and
I who serve on the policy advisory committee. There was one more meeting with four of us. And so then when we when the policy was um presented to the board,
things that were um not uh in um in people's perceptions if they weren't discussed at the policy advisory committee, I still can't grasp exactly what because I'm looking through all of my notes. I'm a notetaker. I'm looking
through all of my notes from all of the different meetings and yes, there's there's things that's been changed, but I don't know that it's misrepresentation. I I feel like we were trying to come to a place um to bring to the board that the board can discuss and
then move forward on. So, um I I hear you. I appreciate the concerns. I have no problem with it going back to the policy advisory committee other than the fact that it's just more time. But um you know it's
that I just wanted to add that added context. But I I hear I hear that but I don't know that misrepresentation is the right word. Mer. Yeah. Chair White, I'm just looking back at the meeting minutes. Thank goodness for Director Herman for doing good meeting minutes. Um it was introduced on
February 13th. It was discussed on March 15th and on May May 15, well looks like March 15th, the whole entire meeting was dedicated. There was only 904 discussed on March 15th and then on May 15th I
attended that meeting and that was the primary discussion of the meeting. So I that's a lot of meetings talking about one policy. So I and I didn't have access to this when I was in that meeting because I was just an observer, but I'd like to know how many
changes have been made that the policy I mean there's always going to be changes coming out of policy committee meeting and policy is board work is policy work is board work. So while I respect the work of the committee, I just think they've had three meetings to discuss
this. So I would question why we would I mean you know what else is going to what else is going to come out of that I guess is my point. Well I think that's my point is they've had a lot of these they've had a couple of meetings to discuss this and there's still a lot of confusion.
So that kind of goes to my point. Yeah. And I think director Olstead um I think that's why we're here having this discussion today. And I am grateful that it got moved to um where we're at today as a you know as for further discussion. So I don't necessarily think it needs to
go back to the um the policy committee but I think we can have as much discuss I mean we are elected by our community to do policy work. So I think we can have a lot of conversation here amongst our board members. Dr. France. So a couple of points of clarification from what I understood from the
chronology is it was 904.1 not 904 that went back um number. So, so it wasn't until later that 904.1 and 904 apparently in some meetings um outside the whole board purview were asked to be
discussed. But I do ask this, why change the original 904 that was approved in June, a year ago? What is the incentive behind the change? What is it that um members of the board certain members of
the board are trying to do here? What why the why was the change needed? In my in my perception or my understanding, it is the procedures on if there's if there is issue with signs
in the building having having that laid out. But that's not the changes that were made. The changes that were made essentially say that the board is going to determine what teachers put in their classroom. Where does it say that? Well, that's assumed in the language that's put in there. And I think that's where the
question of the Let's go to that spot. Okay. We're talking about 4D. Sorry. We're talking about the changes in two places. So would be 2e if it's formally approved by documents or
resources means any materials, documents or resources formally approved by the school board or school administration. Why is the school board in there at all? These are classroom level. We are a governing board, not a managing board. So, Director France, um this I I asked
the same question, but then my memory goes back to the fact that we just approved a library materials policy and we have the exact same um flow of approvals with that same policy. And so I I don't disagree with
us because at the end of the day um you know okay what was stated we represent our community library materials are different from instructional materials that a teacher puts in their classroom but it is in that policy and that's the
hierarchy that we approved. You're not comparing apples to apples. I am I'm clearly comparing apples to apples. So So I want to I want to cut to the chase here. The reason for the changes in here were so the board can walk into a
classroom and tell a teacher they can't put something on a wall because if that's the case then we need to completely misre misrepresenting the intent of the policy. But you're still I understand you have a question to ask. I mean, just from sitting on the board and reading the emails that we've received
about controversial um items in the school district, um we've we've all seen the emails, right? This is not this is just not one person complaining in our district. We see the emails and we I think this also goes
back to the strategic plan where we are um tasked with aligning our our policies to our strategic plan. It goes back to signage that like you said is on branded on brand. Also creating unity, creating
a um a less distracting and um learning environment. And when I say unity, there are people in this district that are opposed to a lot of political signs that are in our district. And I can tell you if somebody had a red elephant elephant sign hanging in their classroom, we'd
hear about it all also. So I I think in order what does that mean, you know, in order to um I think that's just really the the gist of it. If somebody wants to answer the question, where does this come from? I'm gonna ask another question because you seem to be more involved with this policy than the two committee members on the policy.
I just attended the meetings. I've had nothing to do with this policy. Okay. Well, that's goes beyond. But um why does that go beyond director France? And and the thing is is that I just want to say that I am not in an agreement with the changes. The changes were legal. the changes followed the model
policy. they these new changes do not follow the model policy and add in language that injects the board into a management role into the classroom and I think that is the primary goal of this particular of these changes and I think
that's what is trying to be hidden in here and that is what I think that the policy committee had an issue with that is what I have an issue with that is what the teachers have an issue with and they should have an issue with it because if you put up a map that has the Gulf of Mexico instead of the Gulf of
America on it, I have a feeling you are going to be the first one to complain. Is that a true statement? Um, if it looks like if it's if it's upsetting somebody, then we have a policy that they can go through and follow. Right now, we don't have a
policy to be honest with you. We do have a policy. Yes. Well, we did have a policy. We still do have a policy because this one has not yet been approved. We don't have a policy currently that addresses that. Is that correct policy? I mean, I'd like to hear from platoon policy members. I mean, you guys worked
on this, so to say we I'm I'm I'm sorry. I'm not following why we the comment that we don't have a policy to address signage in the classrooms. Well, right now as as we don't need a we
don't need a policy. I could go into a classroom right now and make a determination on how to regulate what is on the walls or what's in the classroom. a as as district speech because that's I mean I'm just letting you all know that's the authority I would have as a
superintendent that I would delegate even to principles or whatever like that exists right now. Yeah, Dr. Thomas, I think you make a very good point that needs to be reiterated that as um could if you could speak more about that as far as employee speech in our district, what what what
um how that's different than just um even student speech or anything? Well, there's there are laws that do protect teachers differently than students, right? Specifically teachers. Um, and I can't speak to that off the
top of my head which law that is, but there are some different ways of of freedoms of speech that teachers um or educators, you know, compared to like a student can say here, you know, different things like that, right? Um but to the question here about
which policy um currently gives I'll just use me gives me the authority to do that. I don't need a policy to do that. Um I have that authority right now to go into a classroom and say I don't want that particular
illustration of whatever it might be on the walls for whatever reason. I have that authority as a superintendent. Okay. Right. because they're they're employees of our district, right? And so I can set the context for the expectations that I may have.
Um and and so I guess I I don't know who asked that question about I the policy, but I'm just saying I don't I don't know of a policy that tells me that. It's just part of the inherent managerial rights that I have as a superintendent
and and as a board, as a governing board, we have one employee and that's a superintendent. Uh to have board members go into classrooms and take pictures of classrooms because of they're concerned about a sign on a wall or anything like that is not only wholly inappropriate,
we're way overststepping our bounds. And if we're supposed to be trusting the teachers, as by the way, a all the emails, even the ones that were pro, there were very few that were pro uh getting rid of the equity uh thing, but of those they said you need to trust the
teachers to do what's right in the classroom. And they said that you almost unanimously. What this policy does and the or statement in there is basically says the school board can walk into a classroom and say instructor so and so
you cannot put this on your wall. Okay. And and encourage people and most of the complaints about the signs in the buildings do not come from people with students in our buildings. They come from people. Point of order. Director France. Point of order. That is first of all your
point of order is a rule. I understand that. But that is completely first of all the point of order is not for first of all to insinuate that any board member would walk in to a classroom that's really that's just so sad that you would even say that. I mean honestly I've heard that too.
It's incredibly sad. I mean well it's incredibly sad. And so I I think what we're trying to do is solve a problem that we have a dis in our district. That is what policy is. It's about solving a problem. And you cannot sit here, you cannot tell me, you can honestly sit here at this board table
and tell me that you have not seen the emails of the concerns of parents about signage in our district. So, so and and and that is what this policy is trying to solve. If the parents are about signage, they can go to the superintendent. Okay. The superintendent manages that
through the principles and the teachers. That is not our role. So, if I may, I think Director Johnson's hand was the first. Sorry, I didn't see that. Go for it. I just wanted to clarify that by no way
I think to speak for myself any nor with the policy 904.1 was it the intention to have a board director walk into a classroom and tell
somebody to take anything off the wall. So I just wanted to make that clear. It was simply to make sure that one, right, there's a clear outline, right? A chain of command if somebody
has a complaint. There you go. Right. Which is in there. It has the or in there though. Director Johnson have the order in there and we have a chain of command and that is the superintendent. So I I mean when I read the language and
again I have been removed from policy committee but just reading the language and like the use of the word or I actually appreciate I think that you know we're not saying an individual schoolboard member could do this. I you
know we as a board meaning the majority vote would have the authority to like if there were a major concern brought forth that maybe Dr. Thomas approved that we were getting more complaints on. I would
think as a board a majority vote would have the authority to say no, you need to take it down or yes, we accept it. That's the way I read the language. Not any individual board member certainly and and only in the event that if there
was some major escalation that maybe we disagreed with administration like I don't but we I don't feel like this gives us the authority as individuals to remove things from teachers walls but we already have that if something comes up we can tell the superintendent
we want to have discussion or we have that with everything. Sure. So this sort of just reiterates that statement in my opinion how this reads but it has or where which or so point um sorry point 2 under definitions E is I think what we're looking at and it says approved materials firmly approved by the school
board or district administration right so maybe it needs maybe the suggestion is to reward that to say by the district administration you know ultimate authority I don't know how other policies are rewarded but if that's the concern like I I again I'm
just or wording if that matters. But um all I'm saying is that we're not giving individual authority to board members is I think is that the suggestion there wasn't a need for part E to begin with. That's the first thing. The second thing is the or in there makes a school
board equal to administration on these decisions and we should not be we are a governing board. The superintendent and we have a hierarchy. So how would you suggest the language? We don't need the language. That's what I'm saying. We already have a hierarchy
that's already in our 200 policies of our hierarchy. We already have it where we are a governing board and we delegate the day-to-day administration to the superintendent who then has the right to delegate it to everyone else. When the board injects themselves in the daytoday
work, we are introducing chaos and we are none of us here are qualified to make the decisions in that area. So the whole purpose behind this statement is not only not needed but also it in it and it injects a brand
new hierarchy that someone and people have kind of tried to take advantage of and I am not happy with that. That is not our role. So again, I feel like personally, again, me just looking at this coming not from policy and I haven't been privy to a lot
of the discussion, the approved materials language around if you took out the school board out of this language, we don't really have it anywhere stating basically that our our resources are going to be aligned to strategic plan and and district-wide
initiatives. I think that it it seems like to me that's how I read the intent of that point. So I mean again taking out the word schoolboard that's how I read the intent. Now I think the question becomes you know is it
maybe we remove that and we reserve the authority if there was some sort of escalation. I don't know but that's my perspective. We have that in procedures already. It is covered in D. Yeah. Yeah. if you wanted to take so the school board completely out of E.
I think the school board does approve the materials. Anyways, it's true. No, actually we delegate the classroom materials to the strategic plan into the the strategish plan does not say the school board does anything. The
strategic plan has a bunch of principles. The strategic plan is approved by the board. Yes, it is. But the strategic plan is not is not discreet at all. is a series of principles and that's it. And it's a principles that just about every other school district shares.
So I I I I question why and I'm going to go back to it. Why was this even modified to begin with? Are we working with removing the school board from letter E? Would would we like to go to
reworking letter E? Is that your suggestion, director? My first suggestion is letter E really isn't required at all because the the superintendent already has the approved materials that is embedded in his role
and he delegates that out to principles, other administrators and and all that. I could I could see how that E is redundant. Yeah. And probably isn't needed because if you're looking for a procedural way for someone to address a concern, it's
covered in D because it kind of works its way up. I do like the statement of having approved materials. Basically stating something that we want our materials to align with the strategic plan, instruction materials, district initiatives. I think that's the piece of
the statement that I actually like. But again, if it's the schoolboard piece that is the point of conflict, then I would say just strike that and that's, you know, we're ultimately on D. Well, okay. The strategic plan again is
not discreet. There's nothing in there that tells us what materials are in there. There's no alignment to it. It's it's it it actually opens the door to weaponize the strategic plan to try and manipulate it. And that's not what
the strategic plan is for. Basically, it's a series of principles that says we honor academic excellence, we honor inclusion, we honor all those things in there, we honor community involvement. There's no approved materials that would
you there's no line there's no linear line to that. So what? So the whole addition of e and then the or statement in there. I mean there had to be a reason why this was even added to begin with. And I'm trying to get to the
bottom of it because I never got an answer to my question about the map. What the map? If a map goes up in a in a teacher's classroom, to be blunt, and it says Gulf of Mexico, Director Actinson, are you and the group
that you have in your so-called community going to start emailing? I'm being honest. Excuse me. That is so offensive. Director France, I can't even start. And and I would say, let's get back to the language. Let's just get back to and keep politics out of our board table and keep politics
out of our district. Okay. Honestly, I believe the whole reason E is put in there is because of politics and that's what concerns me. The board does not belong in the This is a first reading. So, um do we have consensus that E is even
needed in in at all? Cuz I think I think I think it's redundant. I could I could live with scratching it because you're you're asking for a definition of approved materials. Um, and then the redundancy is board approved instructional materials and and
other things. I I I I don't think it's necessary. I think it's again redundant. If we're if the goal was to give the community, whoever that may be, a procedure to address a concern, it's covered in D. I
don't I don't think this is needed at all. And I I wonder if the board could live without it. Well, my only concern about that is when you go to the next page, and I don't know, there's no numbers, so I'm just going to say section 1, two, three, four
on section four where it's in blue, it does talk about approved materials, and I I would believe that that's why it's defined approved. Wouldn't approve materials be explanatory? No, I I think it needs to be if we take the word out
there, then I think we need to take the language from E which says including but not limited to the district's curriculum, the strategic plan, board approved instructional materials, districtwide initiatives, and other foundational documents that guide the district's mission, vision, and operations. So I think if we're going to
take the definition off, I think we need to take that sentence and move it over to that section so that we have clear understanding of how the materials that um enrich students learning experiences by supporting enhancing Prior Lake
Savage area schools. Okay. So we also have the paragraph in there that said the superintendent of schools or designate will implement this policy within the scope of federal and state laws and exercise professional judgment under three as necessary. Yep.
In the best interests of students. So we're we're delegating to the superintendent there. Also we already have a policy on approved instructional materials and again this is third-party whatever coming in here.
So E technically is not needed at all. I would tend to agree. So I mean I'm trying to get to a catch us on on this particular paragraph. I actually like it stated that we are trying to have the things on, you know, our our materials align to either the
curriculum that they're teaching, the strategic plan, board approved, you know, district-wide initiatives, whatever they are. I think that to me that's important. Like I don't um context matters. If you bring up the situation about a map, I mean, if that's
in a history classroom, fine. But if it's in another classroom trying to make a political statement, that's a different story. Like, I think it's context matters. And I do think that the things in our classroom should be relevant to the instruction, but that's covered in the very last
paragraph of section three. Exactly. Yes. I don't I don't feel like it's stated explicitly. It's not we don't we don't state it out in in like we don't we like I said if we took that definition and we moved it over here I think we'd be good and we have a policy on instructional
materials already. So my question to the board is can we live without E? And I'm looking for thumbs up thumb down. I can live without it. I can live without it. I can live without it.
All right, then we're going to scratch E. Um, question under general statement of policy, the second paragraph where it talks about federal and state laws. Which ones? The general statement of policy, uh, the
second paragraph that starts with the superintendent of schools. Um, it says the policy within the scope of federal and state laws. I I don't know what those are pertaining to any if you can shed any light. I think those would be the legal references in the back.
Yeah, those are just the legal references at the bottom. Yeah. And that that applies to fault anyways regardless. Yeah, it's it's it's it's just it's it's kind of window dressing there, but it just reinforces the statutes at the bottom of
the policy. Thank you. Um and then the last sentence in that paragraph in the best interest of students uh yeah is it starts in cases of differences opinion the decision of the school board will be final. Um
yeah I don't I disagree with that. I I disagree with that too. Um and I don't think that's needed if we take e out. Um I I believe that we already have rules that says the superintendent is her only employee and if people have concerns there's we have to follow the
hierarchy and then if we want to bring it up as a board we can bring up anything we want as a board. We don't have to have these things written in here like this and also be duplicative and and potentially
well incendiary. Thank you for bringing that up. Do we have that process in other policy? We do. the library policy, curriculum policy, it's in a lot of different policies because ultimately we're the board. I mean, that's and I get I don't
need to hear we're a managing board versus a governing board. I I'm fully aware of the difference. I'm just wondering I'm just saying that that those concerns that I'm hearing I think they're covered in D. It gives anyone in this district who has a concern as long to climb as we leave D
written as D then I can see where that could be as long as D because it is duplicative. It does say it in you could put a period after so state laws or and we don't repeat it everywhere nor do we need to um any complaints regarding
anything should always go to the superintendent or to the school administrator. We have that in our own policies and they currently do that. So again it's it's duplicative. And here's the problem with when you put duplicative language in policies is when
you change it or let's say we change it in the 200s for instance then you've got to go through every other policy and change it. You only need it once and that's the whole reason why you want efficiency in these things. And that's one of the reasons why um I believe
director Herman before she left started to make these things a little bit more streamlined to say if it's already in one policy you don't need to say it in another because it's a maintenance nightmare for administration. Chair White. Yes. Can may I suggest that we just do the period at the end of the first sentence
at the end of students? Victor Johnson, are you in 4D? Uh, under procedures second paragraph of three. Yes. General statement of policy. Second paragraph. I just I don't I don't have my other notebook here. I I switched I ran out of room.
Um, and I don't know why Director Herman put all that other stuff in there. And I know that this was sent to legal just with with all the other annotations that she made. Scratch. Um, so is it because I know you suggested
write period at the end of state and federal laws. So just scratch the last sentence as the period would be after the word necessary. No, after the word students after students. And I agree with that. I think that's and then you're striking the last sentence.
And strike the last sentence. Yeah. I agree. It is. Yeah, I'm fine. As long as Are we closer to good? So, we have E E struck up under two. And
then in the in section three, second paragraph, our period is ending after students. Students. Yeah, correct. and the rest is the same. Okay. So, second reading on August is it
11th? August 11th. When is the next policy committee meeting in September? September. All right. I appreciate guys. Um any
uh next on the agenda is administrative reports. Are there any admin reports? Probably not. No, I'm sorry. I know we're looking at 9:40, but uh so team, this is where we would typically have reports, but just for the sake of time, it's the two of
you, Michael as well, if you'd like to say anything or just introduce yourself to the board or take that time. Yeah, absolutely. Sure. Hi everyone. Uh Michael Kudson again. Um
thank you so much for the opportunity. Um really just doing my best to to keep the trains moving uh in human resources and uh administrative services. Um Emily had big shoes to fill and um I'm hoping with uh along with uh Dr. Thomas that we
can find a wonderful candidate to uh to fill those shoes. In the meantime, I'd just like to shout out our incredible payroll and human resources team. they've done an incredible job uh picking up the slack. In the meantime, um with three big transitions across the
organization, there have been people stepping up left and right the last few weeks to um just rise to any challenges that have come up and just wanted to express my appreciation to all those folks who have done that. So, that's all I have to say. Thank you.
Um hi. um very happy to be here at Prior Lake Savage Area Schools and I I echo the fact that the staff that in one day it's like it's so evident how the quality of the staff that I am going to be able to work with is wonderful. So I
appreciate that. I'm looking forward to that. And um I am I am I'm very excited to be here and to be able to provide some support and
clarity where possible. Welcome. Just to keep the trains moving. Great phrase. Um this should only take 30 40 minutes. So, um, in other roles in other places, I've sometimes been accused of being overly
verbose, but I think I'll fit right in. And so, um, I just thank you for the opportunity. It's great to join, uh, Dr. Thomas and these fine folks. Uh, I would echo the same thing. The staff is, uh, super committed. This is day five. Um, so you wait till day five. Um,
uh, super aligned and and it's clear they they're just so committed to kids and the community. Um and so it's a privilege to to join that team and I look forward to working with all of you. So thanks uh thank you very much for the welcome. Wonderful. Thank you. Thank you.
All right. Any more reports? Going a little slower right now. Anything recent? Anybody? No. Okay. Then we are to future events. Uh board retreat next Monday uh at 6:00 till 8. Hard stop at 8.
Um, as we vote on tonight, the school board filing period for the seat that I currently hold will be July 29th through August 12th. Our next regular meeting is on August 11th. Uh, if there's nothing more to come before the board, I will entertain a motion to adjurnn. So made by Director Bull,
second by Director France. All in favor signify by saying I. I. Opposed. That carries at 70. Thank you.