--------- meeting of the school committee to order and that's the first order of business is know what day it is. Um let me take a quick run through the agenda and then we'll jump right in. We will start with public comment. We'll have our focus on excellence. Uh we'll move to the consent agenda. We will take reports in the new
business section tonight. We're going to have our uh Q1 for FY26 human resources update. We'll have an update from the the teaching and learning or the learning and teaching team in the high school on on our math pathways. Um we're going to have a discussion and a vote, probably a series of votes on FY27 or
school year 27 fees. Um we're going to review school year 27 kindergarten projections. And then um you know by now everybody who's watching this probably has heard the news that Dr. Milichesky will be leaving the district at the end of the year. Um we will sort of initiate the search process tonight. We'll have much more to say about his departure
later this evening as well. Um but we'll we'll uh initiate our search process for our next superintendent at the end of the evening. So that is our agenda for today. Let's start with public comment. Um so if there's anybody who'd like to speak to anything that's not in the agenda, now's your moment.
Okay. Uh let's move then to our focus on excellence and Dr. Milesky, I'll kick it to you. >> Great. We're thrilled tonight to be joined by many members of DECA and also DECA advisor uh Miss Rosenfeld. Uh it is truly spectacular to see what's happened in Deck over the last couple of years. I think uh as you'll hear a little bit
about from them shortly. First, just the level of participation. It is crazy to see how uh how many more students have been involved in the last couple of years, particularly this year, and I'll let Anna give some of those stats. Two, just the success that DECA has had both on the team level and the individual level with most recently 50 uh students
qualifying for state. So, it's just awesome to see DECA take off in our community. So many students be engaged and so many students thriving. So tonight you're going to hear from some of our students a little bit of their pitch and then also you're going to hear uh some of the ways that the community can support DECA's ongoing work as they prepare for states and then I'm sure as
some prepare for uh national internationals. So with that I don't know if Miss Rosenfeld wants to come up or the team wants to come up. >> If you don't mind coming around maybe what do we think the chairs? >> Uh yeah let's do that. Perfect. Yeah some microphones.
>> Perfect. You need to speak once I get up. You can take and then after the camera follows you. Don't worry. >> One over there. One over there. have to come. Awesome. >> Well, this Yeah, we can do this one
seat. It works. Okay. Good evening everybody. Thank you so much for having us here tonight. We truly appreciate the opportunity to come here and talk about our success, specifically their success. My name is Anna Rosenfeld and I'm a business teacher at Reading Memorial
High School as well as the DECA advisor. DECA is an international career and technical student organization with over 300,000 members worldwide. In the last two years, um just like Mr. Milchesk said, DECA has exploded here. Um in
2023, we had 17 members and we currently have 154 active student members um participating in DECA. This month we competed at the District 4 regional competition where 50 of our members placed in the top four of their event
qualifying them for the state leadership conference that will take place in Boston this March. That's the largest number of qualifiers in Reading history. Running DECA brings me so much joy. I've watched countless students come out of their shells, gain professional skills,
and become confident leaders inside and outside of the classroom. None of this would be possible without these incredible student officers. So, I will turn it over to them to discuss some of the progress and accomplishments we've had this school year. Thank you.
Hello everyone. My name is Sabrina Sweat and I am the vice president of leadership for Reading Deca. Here with me tonight are Bridget L and Jacqueline. Unfortunately, our entire leadership team could not be here with us tonight. We want to recognize our president, Paige Cusalito, our vice president of career development, Sierra Sherman, and
our two vice presidents of school-based enterprise, Ted Ravens and Aydah Mullen. DECA is an amazing club for students to be a part of. It teaches valuable skills such as leadership and public speaking and helps students gain confidence and experience in the business world. DECA
provides business education in five main sectors entrepreneurship, marketing, finance, hospitality and tourism and business management which help provide students with pathways to explore and gain knowledge in these topics. The there there are two main types of
DECA events, role plays and written events. In role plays, students must think on the fly. They receive a real world scenario and must prepare a solution to present to a judge. For written events, students prepare a 20-page paper and a 15-minute presentation to be brought in and
presented to a judge. These events require students to not only expand their content knowledge, but also employ durable skills needed to be successful in the workforce. There are three rounds of DECA competition, districts, states, and internationals. Only the top four competitors advanced to the next round
in each level of competition. And as Miss Rosenfeld mentioned, we recently had a very successful district competition. Some of the winning projects are extremely impressive. We had students research and apply innovative strategies to existing local businesses, including iDrive or Saturday Night Lights. We also
had students create their own complex business plans for innovative products, including 3D printed braille and a canned beverage improving a woman's daily iron intake. We are so proud of our club's hard work and cannot wait to see what these students do at the state competition in Boston. But DECA is more
than just an academic club and I will hand it over to Bridget to further discuss DECA's presence in the res in the reading community. Good evening. My name is Bridget Pelli and I'm the vice president of marketing. Our goal for DECA at Reading Memorial High School is to stay involved with our
community while helping students build real world business skills. This year we focused on outreach activities that allowed us to connect with both our school and the larger reading community. At RMHS we organized a booth at the activities fair to recruit new members.
With these members we organized weekly meetings as well as mock competitions and tutoring sessions. This year we created an initiative to engage with the larger reading community. My fellow officers and I managed a booth at the Reading Fall Street Fair where we promoted our chapter and talked with
community members about DECA offerings. In the spring, we also visited both Parker and Koolage Middle Schools to introduce incoming high schoolers to DECA and encourage their future involvement within our school. We held DECA financial literacy workshops during free blocks to prepare students for
their events as well as the real world. We also had members operating Rocket Retail, our school store, where they had the chance to apply real business skills, and grow our store inventory and revenue. A big shout out to our business partner, Dynamic Sports, who provided
inventory for our school store, as well as a shout out to all of the amazing teachers and administrators at RMHS. Our club growth and involvement would not be possible without the help and support of the administrative team. Thank you to the principles at RMHS as
well as the superintendent and assistant superintendent for your endless support and for inviting us here tonight. I will pass it to L to discuss our service mindset. >> Good evening. My name is El Hahi and I'm the vice president of finance for DECA. Today I want to briefly discuss our
chapter service mindset which is about using our time, skills and connections to make a real impact on others. Service is extremely important to us. So many people in our community support our club and we want to give back to show our appreciation and philanthropic mindset.
One example of this was our bouquet making project run by junior member Maline Stairs. Groups created handmade bouquets that were donated to local donated to local women's shelters with the goal of spreading kindness around the local community. More than more than 2,000 flowers were donated from our DECA
chapter. A big shout out to these donors including Karesa's Farmstand, Readingtown Florist, Hillside Florest, and Eric Shop. We also organized a spikeball tournament aimed at providing scholarships to DECA students. Our club's largest philanthropic initiative
this year was aimed at raising awareness and funds for cancer research and treatments. We partnered partnered with the Lombardo Legacy Fund, a foundation created in honor of one of our DECA members uncles that provides financial support to cancer p patients and their
families. This initiative was led by three sophomore DECA members, Julia Silva, Zanna Jelles, and Lily Weaver. They were able to raise over $1,000 for the foundation through the Pi teacher event where 10 RHS teachers got a full face of whipped cream at the pep rally.
The entire school rallied around the cause. The Lombardo Legacy Fund partners with the Joe and Drewie Foundation created by the New England Patriots alumni Joe and Drewie after his battle with cancer. Joe and Juie came to RHS to speak about his life experiences in the
foundation. It was an amazing event for more than 150 students in attendance. This DECA assembly helped bring awareness to the cause, create powerful connections, and inspire lasting change. Together, these experiences show how our chapter turns compassion into action
through service. Hi everyone. To close us out, my name is Jacqueline Cusalo and I'm vice president of career development for our DECA chapter. Thank you so much for taking the time to learn more about our club. If you want to stay connected to what our team is doing, please follow us on Instagram at DECA RMHS. We share
updates, competition highlights, and ways to support our club members. We also offer a business sponsorship program for those who are interested in getting more involved. I am so proud of our club's growth and success, but unfortunately, more students makes for larger expenses. Our upcoming trip to
the state career development conference will be a large financial barrier for our club. The 3-day twoight com conference is an extremely valuable networking and professional opportunity that allows reading to stand out amongst other high achieving towns across the state. States provides real world
experience by building leadership skills, confidence and career readiness that extends beyond beyond competition. Last year I had the opportunity to compete at the highest level of competition in Orlando, Florida. There I honed my networking skills interacting with 22,000 students from across the
globe. DECA has made a lasting impact impact on me and how I view the professional world and I know that I'm ready for any interview or job. We are currently looking for local businesses in Reading in the Reading area to sponsor us. Any amount is greatly
appreciated. All funds will go directly towards student travel expenses, including transportation, lodging, competition, registration fees, and required materials. These costs add up quickly and fundraising ensures every student has the opportunity to compete.
As a sponsor, we will recognize your business on our social media school net newsletter around RMHS and and on our banner at the state conference in Boston. If you would like more interest information or interested in sponsoring, you can contact Miss Rosenfeld directly
or reach out to our club president. We are also launching Snap Rays beginning on January 12th. To support us, please email an anna.rosenfeld reading.k12.mma. us or you can reach out to our student president by phone at 781-670456.
Thank you again for the your time and generosity and continued support of our chapter. We are incredibly grateful for this community and for everything you do to help our six students succeed. Your support will help our current members as well as create the foundation
for DECA to expand in years to come. >> Any questions or comments from anyone in the committee? >> Um, first of all, I don't none of you were around when this started, I don't think, because you're you're a little bit, you know, older than when it first started back in COVID era, 2019, 2020.
Um, so it's it's amazing to see the growth of this club. Uh, and it was very difficult to start when it started. So I just want to, you know, congratulate you all for the growth that you did. And I have one question. Have you calculated how much you would want or need from a
fundraiser perspective in order to uh go to states? And if you extrapolate out nationals, have you have you figured out either one or both? So, the cost of our students to attend without the fundraising. Should I sit down? >> Sure.
>> Um, would be five over $500 for each student, but we were hoping to raise $10,000 to cut the cost down to 300 per student would be about 310 I believe. Um, so 10,000 off the current 28,000 would be our goal.
>> So, you need a total of 28,000 between >> student payment and whatever you raise. >> Yes. >> Okay. That's the task writing community. 28,000. >> Tom, I thought you were about to like pull out a check or something. >> Do you want this credit card?
>> It was like $1,500. Tell them >> Serena, you do. >> Um, for internationals, obviously, we don't know yet how many students will be qualifying. Hopefully many, but um last year we paid about 1,500 per student to go to internationals. So, that number um hopefully we'll be able to get it down
this year and hopefully we'll be able to get some more people to internationals as well. Thanks for >> Yeah. Anybody else? Go ahead. >> Um I'm blown away by a few things. I shared a few up front. One, growth. I think Miss Rosvelt, you shared 17 to 154
in just a couple years. That's crazy. Uh two, achievement. Talking about the highest amount of students ever to achieve uh to participate in states, which is awesome. Three, the partnerships. It's so encouraging to see all the ways that this community is engaged. but as a result of your outreach and seeking partners to think
about how many people are along and invest in this ride with you. And then fourth, like I know many of you shared that this is so valuable for you in developing networking skills and other like durable skills, but I'd also like to say I'm just so impressed to see the ways that you are also impacting positively our community both here at
RMHS and beyond for causes that I know are so personal and so important to so many of us too. So, uh, just with that, a huge thank you to all of you, student officers, Miss Rosenfeld, like your leadership is what sort of sparked this to be in such an awesome position and we are really excited to support you and to
celebrate you and hopefully have some awesome news to report from states. >> Thank you. Thank you so much. And we'll be in touch. Hopefully, we bring home a lot of trophies. >> That's right. >> All right. Well, thank you all very much. Before we let you go, we do have a tradition. Uh if you are are recognized
on in focus on excellence, you have to take a picture with us here on the front. So uh that's the deal. So if you could join us in the front, that'd be great. >> That will help the quest for 28k. >> Go in there. Lead the way. Lead the way. >> All right, sir. Smiling faces.
>> I'm getting ready to go. >> He knew what I was going to ask him. representing >> I think that's fantastic. You need more behind. >> No, you're not. I just need to get behind him so I can actually make this
work. Congratulations. >> Congratulations. >> Good luck. >> Crisscross over there. >> Thanks. >> Thank you. >> Great job. >> Yep. >> All right. So, let's move to our consent
agenda. Do we have a motion? Um move to approve the consent agenda. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> Uh we are all here. So >> Oh yeah, we need to redistribute microphones. Um while we're doing that, you can still raise your hands. All in favor?
>> I >> I see a microphone up. Okay. All oppose? That carries. Five to zero. Uh let's move to reports. >> Just make one quick comment. just like to say on the consent agenda, you'll see the last uh uh uh donation came in through Claudia uh Mix and Fernaris for
the fitness center which completes the entirety of the 500 plus thousand donation. So, a huge thank you to Claudia. Anyone who's been by the fitness center, I know a ton of students have been peeking in. Uh flooring is down and equipment's coming in tomorrow in the fitness center. Uh and then also
flooring is also down on the athletic training room. That leaves at this point just uh equipment, mirrors, and decals/branding. So that by the end of the first week of January, uh that should be all set. Uh we will have a ribbon cutting ceremony and things like that, too. So more to come. But since
that last piece came in, I just want to say a huge thank you to Claudia again. And things look great. >> Absolutely. >> Awesome. And >> if anybody out there watching hasn't seen it, our last meeting, we had a good uh video demo and runthrough of what that facility is going to look like. So you can get a get a preview for that as
well. Um, so let's move to reports and, uh, we'll start with Alex. >> All right. Awesome. Thank you guys so much. Uh, I am all alone tonight, so I'll have Sachi to help me out. So, I'll take the, um, the brunt of it. Uh, first thing is actually in relation to the new fitness center. Uh, the word has kind of
gotten around. It wasn't as public before, but now things are spreading. People are talking, and I just want to report on behalf of the student body that everyone's really, really excited for the new equipment. Um, I know and I may have been responsible for this, but the word spread around about all the the great equipment that we're getting and
the new flooring. I talked a little bit. Um, but it's something to be proud of uh for the school district and of course everyone's super excited. You know, it's it's a source of pride and it's a source of we are going to be able to upgrade our facilities, our athletic department. So, we're all super grateful for that and really looking forward to it. Um,
but for the usual stuff, the upcoming events, first tonight is the winter choir concert. It's happening right now. I'm probably going to head down there just when I'm done with this um report. Um fantastic. The band concert was last week. Everyone's expecting the choir concert to be the same. It's all great.
Thank you, Mr. Mullen, for putting that together. Um on the 23rd, we have early release for our winter recess, which all of the students once again are really looking forward to. Super long break this year. A good chance to relax, get away from school for a little bit before coming back for midterm season. Uh, on
that note, midterms are happening January 20th through 23rd. Uh, like I said last time, it's kind of hard to believe that it's coming up so fast, but it's something we're all getting ready for. On January 26th, there will be a PTO board meeting. Uh, it's the quarterly meeting from 7:00 to 8:00 p.m.
here in the RHS library. On January 29th is career day. Uh, that'll be during the school day for the junior class. Um, and any interested seniors just to kind of go around, take a look at different career options that we want to explore uh after high school, after graduation. And also on January 29th is eighth grade
arts freshman night. Uh time is still be to be determined, but it will be in the performing arts center downstairs. Uh for the news, RMHS's new financial education and early college credit partnership. Uh RMHS is partnering with empower edicott college and the reading cooperative bank to bring a financial
literacy dual enrollment course pil uh which is also a pilot course to seniors this spring. 25 seniors will take the pilot course with Lis Liel and an Endeott College professor at no cost to the students thanks to a very charitable donation from the reading cooperative bank. Uh the goal is to run this course
for students in the 202627 school year for um any student at RMHS. Uh like I mentioned earlier recently the winter band concert was a great success and much of the band then got on a plane uh and headed down to Disney World to perform in a parade which I've heard from a few of my friends in the band was
a huge huge success. They had so much fun. got to see some stuff behind the scenes at Disney which not a lot of people get to do. So that was pretty awesome for them. And once again, thank you so much to Mr. Mulligan and Mr. Mullen for making this a reality for our students. Uh and then the last thing, uh all eligible students in the junior
class will soon be invited to apply to the National Honor Society. Uh students that are interested in applying are reminded that they can build service hours starting freshman year. Students need 40 service hours, two leadership positions, a 3.5 GPA, and to be in good standing academically to be a stu as a
student to apply. Uh more details are included in the student handbook located on the RMHS website. So that is all the news and updates. Thank you guys. >> Thank you. >> Awesome. >> Dr. Milichesky, >> no report. >> No report. All right, let's move to leazison reports. Aaron, >> no report.
>> Tom, >> no report. >> I'm gonna save Carla because I know she's got one. Laura, >> uh, no official report, but can I give a couple quick shoutouts? I went to the, um, friends of METCO holiday brunch a couple weeks ago, and that was lovely, and I just wanted to say that it was
really nice to see the support for that program um, continue in our community. So, I just wanted to give a shout out to the Friends of Meco Group for that. Um, and then I also went to the J fourth and fifth grade musical this week, which is a new endeavor that um, Caitlyn Shelurn
and the specialists at JE put together this year and that was really fun and I think the kids enjoyed it a lot. So, I just wanted to give them a shout out as well for taking the time and energy and putting that uh, together for the parents to enjoy. So, thank you. >> Excellent. Thank you,
>> Carla. Um, just a quick um, Kellum update. We had our um latest um KSBC meeting on December 15th. Um we recently put out three requests for services for um code reviews for a tax consultant for
any grants um associated with the inflation reduction act. Um if we we're bringing on a tax person for our tax corporation for that in case we have to make any um changes to the design um to
incorporate so we could potentially go for um reimbursements when they're done. Um and the last one was for materials testing and um construction inspection services. The bids were due back to the OPM this past Monday, so we'll find out.
Um, we actually didn't get any back for the tax consultant because they want more information. So, we're going to extend that. Um, there's a lot of interest just um, they want more information. Just I I figured it's easier just to talk about some of the meetings that
have taken place over the past since our last meeting. There's been a lot of meetings on um, the rise preschool design. Um, the layout of the big room. Um, it sounds easy and it's actually not. The themes that we're going to use
in the preschool, um, we have a a riveting meeting today about the sign, um, on the outside of Kellum. Um, it's not easy, um, to to pick things like that. Um, and we, um, in our last meeting, we're setting up a pre-qualification
like working group. So, we have it's part of Mass General Law with um, subcontractors. They're called filed sub bids and um contractors and they all need to be approved um by our group prior and the state
prior to us going out for bid. So, we're going to be going through that process. Um the committee approved um an ad alternate which I think we talked a little bit about potentially last week
but it was approved by the committee to do um offsite work on Charles Street and Haveril Street. We it's something called an ad alternate where you have a base bid that contractors um will bid on, but then there's these other options that we
as a committee after the bids come in will decide if we want to add on any of that additional work. And um the the premise is if you're under budget, you could take on those items. Um
and if you're not under budget, then you don't take on those items. So, that's something we'll be looking at. Um, we also approved a 1099 position um for a facilities clerk. So, that's someone to help us out um during construction. Um,
our facilities department has their own full-time jobs where they have a skeleton crew to begin with and then they're going to have every other construction project that goes on in addition to um the Center for Active Living and Kilum. So, we feel good about
bringing on a person to we're going to be bringing him on shortly to um start um some of the design review so he is up to speed and then he'll be on the um in the site on the site um kind of monitoring um construction. So, we're
looking forward to that. And um we approve the committee also voted to approve an early package um for its switch gear electrical equipment that has a long lead time and we don't want it to delay um our contractor in any
way. So we are going to um put that out on the street as well. >> Questions? >> Carla's got her hands full. It's not obvious. Um, I will also say, so, you know, we've said it publicly, I'll say it again. We're incredibly lucky to have
Carla is your the level of commitment engagement we have to this. We're also incredibly lucky to have all the the expertise that we have on the permanent building committee because these this stuff is in the weeds and I I my eyes glaze over in some of these meetings and I have no idea what they're talking about and having all the PVC members who know exactly what they're talking about
is invaluable. So, um, it's uh, we're very lucky to have the people that we do at the helm of this thing, I would say. So, >> good move on the town's part to to enact a permanent building committee. >> Yeah, absolutely. >> Okay. Uh let's move then to new business. We will start with our HR
update. And Michelle, if you want to uh >> have a good one. >> I suppose take Alex a spot up here at the microphone. >> Thanks, Alex. Good evening everyone. So this update is to provide a snapshot of the HR activities um to date for school year
2526. I'm going to focus on hiring retention leaves internal mobility and long-term trends with some year-over-year context were helpful. So my first slide to date we have filled 92 positions across all
roles this school year. Compared to this point last year, teacher hiring is down from 39 last year to 26 this year. That reduction reflects fewer vacancies and stronger retention. We currently have zero open teaching positions, which is a meaningful indicator of staffing
stability. Hiring levels for administrative, secretarial, and facility roles are largely consistent with last year's numbers. Food service and pareducator hiring totals are lower than last year. Last year's higher numbers were driven by turnover and
backfill needs. This year we're seeing fewer vacancies overall and the five pareducator openings that we currently have open right now um are all recent as of def December 1st. This reflects normal movement within that workforce rather than persistent vacancies. We
find around this time with the winter recess coming up that this is a natural breaking point where if we are going to see vacancies, this is typically when they occur. Um, and that's been cyclical over the school years. Our long-term substitute hiring fluctuates annually
and is directly tied to leave volume. So, comparisons in this category tend to normalize year-over-year. Next is our school year leaves and terminations, all roles. Year-to- date, we've had 12 resignations compared to 23
resignations at the same point last year, which represents a significant reduction. We have had zero teacher resignations to date this school year. As I mentioned earlier, the majority of resignations are concentrated amongst PAR educators and many of those occurred
after December 1st. Up until December 1st, there were only six resignations across the district for the school year. Another important trend is tenure. Most resignations involve employees who are relatively new to the district. Only four individuals had worked in the
district for more than three years and six were hired within the last year. This pattern is consistent with what we typically see where early career attrition is more common than departures among long-term staff. Leave activity remains active and expected. A
significant portion of these leaves are instructional, including maternity leaves, which we plan for annually and we manage through an established coverage process. Overall this data this these data points improve point to improved retention and workforce
stability compared to last year. Internal mobility uh it continues to be a strength in the district. Pair educators represent the largest um area of movement often transitioning into specialized programs or long-term roles. We're also seeing upward movement in
operational roles and specialized instructional positions. These transitions reflect intentional career pathways rather than turnover. And finally, we have resignation data by bargaining unit. This chart shows multi-year resignation trends by
bargaining unit. And the key takeaway is the stabilization across most groups compared to the post-pandemic peak. The year-to-date data aligns with what with what we've reviewed. fewer resignations overall and fewer departures amongst long tenur staff. Taken together, the
day data reflects a district that has moved into a more stable staffing phase with fewer vacancies, fewer resignations, and stronger internal retention. I do want to pause to acknowledge the work behind this. Much of this stability is the result of the consistent, thoughtful work of our
principles. I also want to thank Andrew Gutis and Kristen Cohen who have been instrumental in supporting hiring, onboarding, leaves, and day-to-day operations. So, as we move through the remainder of the school year, our focus will remain on maintaining this stability, responding to predictable
staffing needs, and continuing to support schools and staff as needs arise. Thank you. And I will now take any questions that you have. Go ahead, Carl. I I'll I'll make a comment that um in the majority of us up
here who've been um in this role for five plus years or more um I have seen a drastic change in the services we're receiving out of um out of your group and the
level of professionalism the um these these numbers tell a story and I know it's not one person, but it's it's a whole it it's reflective across the district. Um, it it is, I think, so
key to to have HR professionals who continually head off issues that arise and deal with difficult issues when they come up. um you know to have exit interviews and and things like that is
just um it it it is so helpful. It's one of those behind the scene things. But um I I I I'm going to say I'm going to speak for the committee that we really value you and and what you and you know your department do for the district
because it's it's huge and we've we've seen it in at all different stages and all different times and um we really appreciate it. >> Thank you. >> You're welcome. >> Well said. >> Thank you. >> Yeah. I think we need to put these
indications of stability in our perspectus for for prospective superintendent candidates because uh this is not something >> talk about that. >> Well, you know, we're about to. So, uh it's not something you see in every district. So, um you know, just echo everything Carla said. We really appreciate the the work that you and
your team do to put us in this position. Um and the whole team does to put us in in this position. So, thank you. >> Thank you. >> Yep. >> Anyone else? >> Great job. >> Thank you. >> Nice clean update. Thanks, Michelle. Thank you.
>> Uh so from there we are moving to math pathways. I think we have all of our resident experts here in attendance. Dr. Hardy, are you kicking us off on this one? >> I am. Yeah. I'll just wait for the team to come up and get situated. >> Should we move some more microphones? >> We need microphones again. >> Yeah.
Are we sure the camera was picking them up? Because I >> It picks the first seat up. So stay okay if I'm not in >> stretch with me. >> Viewers at home want to see. >> She's making you get on camera.
Well, we we are excited this evening to be here to talk again with you about math pathways here in the Reading Public Schools. As you know, this has been ongoing work um over the years as we've sought to ensure that the course options available to our students um really
reflect what we think is um rigorous uh courses that all of our students can select um regardless of which path they take. Um, we also have worked really hard to ensure that there's flexibility and so that students have options as they go through their years in middle
school and high school. And finally, um, wanting to make sure that all students, regardless of if they are sort of a top math student or a more typical math student, that they also have choices that are going to support their college and career plans. And so tonight we are
going to have um some options presented to you that we are considering that the high school is considering for the program of studies that I think is going to fix a few of the like lingering problems that we've had in our math pathways. We've made some tweaks over the years and I'm really excited um to
have the team talk us through these options and then we'll have some time for questions at the end. So turn it over to Trey and um Principal Kalan. I just want to say I'm going to let Mr. Skan talk uh predominantly, but um he's the expert. However, uh the department
head Adam Kupchair planned on being here tonight uh virtually, but he had a family emergency. We've been working in concert with him and um Dr. uh Hardy and Dr. Milichesky throughout. On to you, Trey. >> Where do we want to start?
>> And it's up there, too. >> All right. Um, so we're looking at three ways of addressing or three courses kind of to address some of the lingering problems that we have had in the math department for
>> 12 years, >> 13 something like a while. >> But who's counting? But who's counting? >> Say a while. All right. Um, so these are the three courses just as bullet points. These are the three courses. Actually, one of them is two classes. uh uh that
I've been thinking about for a little while. Um the first is honors algebra 2 with trigonometry which would be available to students coming out of honors geometry. Um and this would uh this would accelerate them uh in a
one-year course that would get them over pre-calculus and get them into an AP calculus course uh after taking algebra 2 instead of a year in between. Uh the second one is an integrated pathway
um for ninth and tth graders to more uh heavily focus on their algebra 1 skills to prepare them for success in our uh standard college prep algebra 2 course as juniors. And the third one is to take
the current AP pre-calculus and split it into two different groups. Uh the the um course is designed around four units but the test itself is only dependent upon three of the units
and um it is the idea of many of the people who designed the course to uh open opportunities for kids to take that class. So we would offer two different levels of it. One which would cover the full four units and the second which would cover just the three units. Um,
this makes a little more sense if we take a look at the flowchart here and uh should be somewhat colorcoded where the new courses are in green and where they fit into our pathway. So,
as you can see, the algebra 2 with trigonometry would take the kids and accelerate them through um taking out the redundancies that occur between algebra 2 and pre-calculus and just accelerate them from honors geometry
into AB calculus. Uh kind of doubling up the same way they do with the seven and eight and they squeeze those together, get rid of the redundancies. This would be a similar idea. Um, one thing that does come out of this is to move to a model that I have found over the last
five or six years, a lot of schools have moved to or have had for some time, which is to instead of offer AB or BC to offer those calculus courses in sequence. Um, I've been teaching BC
calculus since uh the 19 2019 2020 school year, which was a great way to end my first year with it. Um, and I have found that the end of the
course is always very uh kind of hit or miss uh because there's so much curriculum in it that we are pushing kids to learn what to do without really thinking about how it's done or why it's done. Um, and I've
reached out to some of my students who took BC calculus as juniors or took it as seniors like my son did. and offered them this this uh idea and and asked for
their feedback and a lot of them liked that idea of stretching it out so that they could go into more depth with the more complex topics that happen at the end of the year. Um, it also would allow for some of our highest achieving kids
to get a foothold with uh some of the higher level u math topics that they might encounter in a physics or math or engineering curriculum in college like uh an introduction to linear algebra or some of the multivariable calculus
ideas, parameterization, stuff like that. Um, so that's the first one there. Uh some schools already have this in place where the students do skip skip uh pre-calculus as a formal class and go
from that trigonometry algebra 2 course directly into AB calculus. It also gives a lot of those students an opportunity to take an AP math course as juniors, get a score, put that on their college applications, and decide whether they want to take the
BC after that. Maybe they don't. Maybe they want to study something which isn't so math heavy and they've got that done as a junior and they can look at other options. They can take the economics course. They could take statistics and not have it be a total clog on their schedule. So the uh the other one the second one
that came up was the integrated math pathway which is really designed around kids who are um coming out of 8th grade who maybe don't have the strength of algebra 1 that we would hope for success
in a full year uh fullyear paced algebra 1 course. So this would be taking the algebra one and geometry curriculum and kind of taking out the redundant geometry or the less important geometry topics and really focusing on the algebra 1 so that over that 2-year
window they get an extensive algebra 1 background so that when they go into a CP algebra 2 course the chance of success in theory would be much higher. Um, it also does allow for students who maybe did struggle in algebra 1 as ninth
graders to go into that path as 10th graders without putting them in this um, you know, forever negative pathway in math because they can get right back into algebra 2 after that. So, there are ways that kids
can rise right back up into what would be an expected pathway. And the third one there is right in the middle. It's the AP pre-calculus with three units. Um, this in our in our uh mind would be available to students who
maybe didn't have the best algebra 2 honors experience, who struggled a little bit in there and they can go down into that course or they were in algebra 2 CP and they did wonderfully and really excelled in there. And this would give them an opportunity to take an AP math
course um as a junior or as a senior uh and be prepared for the test, be fully prepared for the test. Um and actually that course does give them the the basic requirements to if they do
really well in there uh to have the base to be successful in AB calculus. I mean, it's probably a stretch for some of them, but it is it's not something where there's a foundational piece of AB that
they need that they wouldn't get in the three units. So, that's my spiel. >> And I just want to add a few things. Um, >> what >> what did I forget? >> Well, I I think you'll jump off of the things that I have to say. Um, one of the big um, you know, Trey and I and
Adam have been talking about this this last summer um, and brought it to um, Dr. Hardy and Dr. Milichesky uh, at the start of the school year and then we talked about it again uh, recently. There is a push because we're we are in the process of updating and publishing
the program of studies for next year. We're already in that uh, choosing your classes uh, time frame um, or we will be soon. And so we feel like this is really important as a continuation of the work that we've done um and and the team has done and the math pathways but also
really emphasizes a lot of elements of things being equitable for students and not relying on outside math courses to uh be able to ex access uh highle math you know at the high school. uh this gives kids an opportunity to do those
things within the confines of the courses that we offer um already. Uh and I think it also correlates with um which is somewhat of a new requirement at Reading Memorial High School of four years of math um which our students all are required to have four years of math
uh which aligns with the mass core upon graduation but it just gives some other options. And so I think Trey said that in the past some people some students were like okay I'm a junior and I finished AB calc what next right and and and really want to go into mathematics
or into that field in college and they they still want that hard math. We are going to have to make some um decisions around who are recommended for these classes teacher recommendations but also using probably seventh grade math data or MCCAST data because we won't have the
eighth grade yet as well as um I ready. Is that right? Um I ready data to determine where students um are recommended, you know, coming into uh nth grade and and we and they intentionally use first year, second year, third year because it's not
necessarily nth grade, 10th grade, 11th grade. Um and so I it looking at it, it looks very linear, but that could there are different entry points for kids coming into high school. Um I think that's it. One of the goals of this is to really
create an easier path for kids who are highly successful to challenge themselves without being having to be too much of a challenge. Um there are ways that kids could take that challenge. If it doesn't work, there are still really high level courses for them
to slide back down into uh where we haven't had that in the past. Um, another one is um, uh, the equity piece comes back to a lot of these kids that I have had who are juniors taking BC
calculus have done outside pay for programs. So there are a lot of kids who are definitely capable of that level of work who don't have that opportunity or just haven't wanted to spend, you know, two nights a week for the last four years doing some program like that who
definitely could have done it. And it would be nice to give them that similar opportunity to do within the confines of just take these classes and you can do that. >> I've got questions. I'm sure others do. Aaron, >> you want to go first? >> Um, no questions. I just want to say how
much I love this. >> Um, we've been talking about this for years. We've been pushing for more options for years. Like, this is a thing of beauty. All the arrows, all those on-ramps are possibilities for students to switch
tracks depending on where they're at. And I think um for people who have had children go through high school math um you can especially appreciate this that that I feel like you represent all
learners on here which is just so vital and it gives students the opportunity to get challenged where they're at get their needs met and there's there's really no cap on it either which I love. I mean, there's there's probably a
scenario where a student could take summer geometry, come into algebra 2 trig as a very advanced freshman, um, and, you know, have an open option senior year for for
something else. So, I just I love that we are embracing that kids uh learn at different paces and that we have kids that are are highly motivated and highly gifted. We have kids that need more support. Um I'm very very excited about
this. Thank you, >> Tom. Go ahead. >> So, I'm I'm equally excited. I do have one concern. >> Like, you don't sound excited. Uh the one concern is at the far right,
right? Um is that it feels like forcing AB then BC does do some limiting for the highest of highs. We've had plenty of people get fives on BC. >> Right. And so um and that was when it was the whole class. >> Yeah. >> Right. So it it reads as though we're
forcing them to take AB then BC. >> Yes. >> Is that the intent? >> Yes. >> Well, there's some shifts in the context. >> Yeah. That's why you know so that that's the one caution or concern I have is that it doesn't allow them to go algebra trig to >> but you but
>> abbc at the same time for that >> right I know there's a rationale and I >> no I think it's it's important to explain it because there has been a change in the >> go ahead >> college board >> so I have been of the mind that um I tell my students if they get credit for
calculus one and calculus 2 or three if you go to WPI because it's like three courses or whatever. >> Um, if you get credit for that, then they should skip to Cal 3. And some have taken that and some have not. Um, what
tends to happen is that they're fine because they're brilliant. I mean, these are brilliant kids, right? But a lot of them do come back with the mindset of it was a big lift because kids came in knowing this, you know, these five
things that we didn't get to because they're not part of the curriculum >> where those can be part of a two-year curriculum that would better prepare them for extended success through a math pathway at the collegiate level. That's
one thing. The second thing is for some of the students who have jumped into BC as juniors, they now have this gap where uh they're not and a lot of these kids are going to go and study. You know, I
can think of a kid who just came back last week who's studying physics, a freshman in college, and they were saying how the year off really wasn't great for them because now they're back in and they don't have it. So, I I agree that there is that one downside. I do
think that if you have seniors in AB, they're going to be really prepared for what they're doing in college. >> Agree with that. >> And if you have juniors who go ABC, they're going to be extremely prepared for whatever comes their way in the math and physics and engineering path. Um the
there there is an opportunity to do in the AB like we AB uh sorry BC became a class in reading I want to say in 2010 prior to that we didn't have it. We did have kids take the BC exam and it was kind of a that point we're going to
cover this here's some extra stuff if you want to do it. >> Yep. >> And that's almost how it feels when we do it in the classroom because of the pace because it's so break neck. Yep. >> That um >> Yeah. I mean, >> a lot of kids make it to unit 8, which is the AB curriculum, and then we get to
nine and 10 and they just go, >> "Yeah." Yeah. So, >> is you know, spring of senior year and you get all that to >> totally get that. And I I guess um this isn't even for personal stuff, right? It's I mean, you know, mine in my personal case, um you know, I had one who did really well with AB and that's where he stopped and it was awesome for
him and he did great this year, you know, and got credit. The other one who did BC but only did well in the AB test, right? But there are others and we have some that are coming up um that are coming through seventh grade right now that I could totally see taking ABBC at
the same time kicking butt and then not stopping and going do uh dual enrollment related stuff. >> Well, that that definitely could be an option. I mean, and those students I've heard they're very bright students coming up. One student in the middle school is currently taking a class at the high school. Uh those are pretty
isolated cases where we would find some sort of an opportunity for them as well as we're exploring and adding I mean we added one half of AP economics last year. I know it's not the same as BC calc we're adding the other uh or hope
to uh AP computer science principles in addition to the other AP computer science as well as stats business and finance. Um, dual enrollment. I mean, we've had added a ton of dual enrollment. It's always an option. I always want to find the dual enrollment
that is the best experience for the student. Uh, which is sometimes hard to do. Um, because I don't love asynchronous. Uh, we do that sometimes. Uh, I think I'd rather have them that authentic experience with a a college professor even if they can't be here
every day. Uh, but if we have students in that situation, we'll definitely do it. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, and I all the feedback, you know, Trey, you and I have talked about this at soccer field on soccer fields the times, right? So, it's not I mean, I I get it. I just want to
make it just feels like we're we're doing that one box, right? We're blocking that one box. So, we've done all this great stuff, all the green arrows. I I really do love everything on the left side of that, right? I just I want us to be cautious. And you know, I also want to be I'm I'm I'm concerned
about myself conflicting with myself here because I want to be careful that we don't create so many classes that we have five kids in a class and we need so many different teachers as well. So I think that's the other challenge on this. So I I'm I'm aware of that too.
But I if there was some way to say that there is also a ABC at the same time like there used to be uh then this would be perfect >> like there currently is. >> Like there currently is. Yeah. then this would be perfect in my mind and it would allow a lot of the like full
flexibility. I think it has all the flexibility on the left and it we just removed flexibility on the right and I understand why. I'm not saying it's wrong. Well, I'm saying I disagree with it. I'm not saying your logic is wrong, right? If that makes any sense.
>> No, I I I I know what you're saying. And that would be the offering in that fifth column both an AB standalone a BC which is the full 10 units as opposed to the other one which it would be a BC after
AB >> right plus BC plus. >> Yeah. Yeah. Whatever you're going whatever you want to call it. Yeah. >> So sorry Sean. Sorry about that. Go ahead. >> No it's good. I I one of my questions was in the same vein, so I'll consider that one addressed. Um my other
question, so echo everything they said about sort of the you know broadening different pathways here. I think it's great. Um I just have a question about the pre-cal class that's three units instead of four. Yeah. >> What's in that fourth unit that doesn't get covered? Um and >> are we worried about what's the
incentive for a student to take the pre-calc class that's an AP class that they get, you know, the same uh the same GPA waiting for and all that? presumably they're equally as prepared for AB given that we're providing this as a pathway into AB. What's to pro what's to incentive student to take the four-unit
version versus the three-unit version? >> So the fourth unit is um parametrics, vectors. Um >> so like they just have to geek out on math. Is that the answer? >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Well, and I I think too >> but a lot of that does a lot of those
those topics are applicable in the higher physics courses. >> Okay. Um so there is a lot of overlap between that and the physics one AP course in terms of you know if if you are in that course then you're going to
see a lot of the same topics um >> the idea is that I guess the four unitit one would be more of a we're here to get you to AB where the threeunit one in our estimation will be
more seniors. Uh but if there are juniors in there, they can still jump back up into AB. >> Okay. >> And the goal is to open up opportunity to more students. So right now the pace of the AP pre and our our scores are amazing. Like I'm not bragging because I
don't teach it, but other people here do. Um and so what that that's great, but what that means to us is they're probably more students that could take that content um that could achieve a little bit like more challenging math. So, I see that there will hopefully be
more students coming from the algebra 2CP trying the AP pre-calc um that haven't been doing it in the to since we started it a couple years ago. >> Yeah. And over the this is we're in the third year of the AP pre-calculus and
we've each year we've had u between I want to say six to 10 kids drop and they go from that AP course into CP. And some of the feedback from the CP teachers is, "Boy, I wish we had something in between." >> Right.
>> Right. So, this is kind of that in between. Cynically, nothing. Nothing is to stop a kid from saying, "I'm going to take the three-unit one." >> Okay. Ideally the way the courses are described
in the program of studies um they will choose the more challenging course because it's known as a more challenging path. >> Right. >> Right. In the same way that there is no difference in waiting between BC calculus and AB calculus even though BC
covers 20% more material. >> Okay. And I think your point about sort of the better preparation for the advanced physics courses and whatnot is a good one as well. Lyn and team will sort of make sure kids get to the right place if that's that's part of their path. So >> yeah, and that is one of the things that did inspire this a couple years ago in
my head was um the the the physics splitting the physics C which is a calculus based physics splitting into two years and which is probably the right idea given the depth of course. It's it's a it's a lift. Okay. >> Um, but those kids are doing a
calculusbased physics class as juniors, >> right? >> While they're sitting in pre-calculus. >> So, every kid in there who has a calculus background or is currently in a calculus course while they're taking that class makes that class more successful for everyone else in there
because it's not just the teacher, it's the other kids in the room who can assist with the the nuance of the math and they can focus more on the physics. Any other questions?
>> As far as the um might require supplemental work pathways from algebra 1 CP to geometry honors and then geometry CP to algebra 2 honors, would those continue to be options that are provided through summer school um availability or would that then are we
back to requiring outside? >> Uh so there's different summer school to me as you didn't pass the class, you're taking summer school. The only thing that we offer right now, we do offer a summer geometry course. Um that could potentially, you know, still happen and
kids could take that um if they wanted to give up that time in their summer to skip over, you know, to get to the algebra 2 sooner, faster. >> One thing we've noticed over the last few years is that it has been nearly impossible for a kid to jump out of CP
into honors and be successful. >> Yeah. Uh the idea here is that if we can give the kids who need the most on hands assistance in those foundational courses, the algebra one, uh especially, then the CP courses can beef their
curriculum back up to where it was possible for a kid who had an A, >> okay, >> over those two years to say, I'm going to go to honors algebra 2, okay, >> and be successful. >> Okay, >> that might require additional summer work. It's really kind of an independent thing. Okay, >> you're going to jump up. We recommend you do this.
>> Okay, but it wouldn't be a situation where it's like you have to find a class to take that would not >> it would be more of a a supplemental request. >> Okay. >> Suggestion request.
>> In your best interest. Yes. >> Yeah. >> Yeah, please. >> And and the um the option to take algebra 2, double up on algebra 2 and geometry is still available. >> Should be is the requirement if you're taking algebra 2 honors that you have to take
CP geometry >> algebra 2 honor no it's not a requirement you could be in >> that >> if you doubled up you could be in both honors classes >> okay >> uh I I would like to reduce the the need for students to double up because that is very hard for kids to do
>> fit everything in their schedule and to do two math classes at the same time >> it's hard especially when they're usually sophomores Because I know in the past that you had to take like a CP geometry when you took algebra.
>> Oh, no. Yeah. Is that true? >> I don't know. Oh, >> yeah. One of my one of my one of my daughters did that and they said, "No, you have to take if you're doubling up, you have to do it that way." >> I don't. >> But that was years ago. >> Okay. Sorry. >> Yeah. >> Thank you.
>> Awesome. >> Yeah, this was great. Yeah, >> this was great. >> Despite Tom's reservations. teas. >> I'll try to figure that out. Best >> credit card. >> Remind me not to go to a soccer game
with you. That's my takeaway. >> You would be on the on the field out there coaching. >> Tom, I would uh I would point out that um that's year five. >> So, there's a lot of time before that would come to fruition. So we can we can
work out any of the kinks or >> or address whatever the concerns are over the next >> you know year or two. >> So that makes me ask the question of implementation then >> that that's the question. Um as I've told them the pre-calculus 3 unit is
could start tomorrow. >> Yes. But the BC one >> so >> might be delayed a year or two before we do that. Ideally, ideally we would like to have the integrative one next year, the algebra 2 with trigonometry next year as well as the pre-calculus 3 unit
next year. If there's a realistic pick two, then it would be next year would be pre-calculus and the integrated one. >> But the kids that are currently in uh the kel class are already receiving the full curriculum. It's not broken
already. So, they will have finished. So next year we're still going to have the existing BC class as it is. That is correct. Right. And then maybe as this evolves, if we agree that that's the right thing or you guys still hold stronger that's the right thing, then maybe we
>> lengthen out or make them take AB and lengthen out BC. >> Yes. >> So that that one is >> still to be determined >> within a couple years. >> Whatever color that is, I don't know, not green. >> Um that box is the the >> coral. Let's call it coral. >> Sure.
That is definitely the the late the longest delay on any of these. >> Okay. Okay. >> Can I ask a clarifying question because now I'm more confused. So if a junior right now is in AP pre-calc and excelling Yes.
>> they could take BC next year. >> No. >> No. >> That's that's one of the things. So, first of all, the juniors and and this is um this does go back to a little bit like where this comes from, which is having the kids skip and why they're able to skip and who gets to skip. Um
right now there are four juniors in BC calculus. There are none who are in AB calculus. We have had a couple juniors in the past take AB and then turn around and take BC the year after, which seems a little
unfair. because there's so much overlap, right? >> There's yeah, twothirds of the classes is redundant and here they are receiving two AP math courses when they're really only doing what other kids do in one year. So that that's always been a little bit >> okay
>> stuck. Um right now the four juniors who are the three juniors who took it last year, they're now seniors, um are all doing kind of an independent study. Um and the four who are in it this year
approached me yesterday about would you be willing to run you know I was like h you know >> what comes in so it's calculus >> yeah it's calc 3 it's multi multivariable calculus or or linear algebra or a combination of the two
>> okay >> and um yeah they want me to to run their independent study for that it's like >> with all your free time >> yes exactly yeah >> but to re ask her question. I think she said if you're if they're a junior in pre-calc in a junior in pre-calc. >> Okay.
>> Can they as a senior I'm sorry. >> And a senior they can take the BC next year. >> Yeah. Oh yeah. Yeah. Absolutely. >> So they could choose depending on how well they're doing in pre-calc and what kind of challenge they want as a >> senior. As it stands right now, the kids in pre-calculus still have that option next year for AB or BC.
>> Okay. Yes. >> Thanks. >> Right. >> Right now I think we're done. Thank you. >> All right. Thank you. >> Great. Thank you so much. >> Okay, >> long goal. >> Let's move to um >> this has been a long running goal. So, thank you.
>> Um let's move to fees. And I think Phil, we are kicking it to you. >> I'm up. Excuse me. Um I I will preface this by saying that discussing fees is one of my fe least favorite topics. Um if you went through the memos that came out u one of the goals that we did
because this is uh done just two years ago. So we're trying to get more on a more regular schedule to review the fees so we don't have big increases um when we go and do it. Also we tried to keep the fees as low as possible. You see that there aren't I don't want to use
the term insignificant or minor but they're not big increases. And we've also across all of them have kept the family caps unchanged. So, I want to keep that in mind as we go through this. Um, also for anyone who's looking at this, you'll see that we use the word
approximate increase because I decided to round off the increases, the whole percentages. Instead of having 5.3, I just said five. So, yes, it will be off a little bit if you want to calculate the math on that. But, uh, we'll start off with transportation fees. Um we are
proposing that we increase uh the current fee from 475 to 500 and that's for one student and from two students from 850 to 900 and the family cap will stay unchanged at 1,200. So that's an approximately uh 5% increase over the
current rates that we're paying right now. You know this is one of those situations where we're required as we all know we're required by law to provide transportation. And so in order to beat the law, we require two buses. And if you round it off, each bus this
year is costing us $90,000. Uh the law also allows us that if we have space available on the buses, we can offer it up to other students who are otherwise not uh entitled to a seat and we are allowed to then charge a fee for allowing them to ride the bus. And so if
you look at this and if you did some quick math, u what we're charging at $500 is about onethird the cost of what it costs us for a student on a bus, assuming we can fit 60 students on a bus. You have 60 students on a bus, you
pay 90,000 a year for the bus. That's $1,500 a student for transportation. So um you know, it's just a way for us to help offset some of the cost of transportation. If you look at over the history over the last 20 years or so, uh if you go back to like 2009 2010, at
that point in time, the fees that we collected were covering about 40% of our transportation costs uh for regular transportation. I'm leaving out special ed and all the other stuff. Um now the fees that we're collecting are covering somewhere between 15 to 18% of our
costs. And by increasing it by 5%, we'll stay within that 15 to 18% range for uh next year as well. But you'll also see that if you look at right now, we have a we signed a three-year contract with the bus company with two one-year renewals
and each of the renewals coming up are over 5%. Um so again, we'll be keeping the increase is uh pretty much keeping in line what the increase is in terms of the contract with the bus company. So that is our proposal. $25 increase for
one student, $50 increase for two students, and three or more no change. >> Do you want us to go through all of them or pause one at a time? >> Yeah. Why don't we take one topic at a time? >> Yeah. >> Um,
you good on the transportation topic, Phil? >> Yes. There >> any questions? Go ahead. Um I don't even know how bad when So when did we last change our rate that we're charging people? >> Two years ago.
>> So it's 24. And what was it at that point? Was it I mean you weren't here, Phil. I don't know if you have the records, but if you know it off the top of your head. >> I knew you were going to ask that question and I didn't go back and look. Um shoot >> 450 something like >> it's got to be probably around 450 or
425. So, we're we used to pull in 40% to cover fee, cover the cost. We're now pulling in I would say it's approximately 25% if I look at the 53,000 versus the 211,000. >> Yep. >> Um
so, of the So, the two buses we have, those are mandated for what? Students going to Killum and students going to Parker. Yeah, it's the law is any student who lives outside K
through six more than two miles, but I think we use a mile and a half here. >> So, >> and then we use it for the high school as well. And that's where most of the revenue comes is high school. Yeah. >> Or do we have do we have elementary and middle school students that are >> we have a pretty good spread across the three
>> that are paying? >> Yes. because it's required or because they chose to or combination? >> Well, we wouldn't have to have any buses for the high school because there's no requirement for the high school. So, we have enough students up there that each of our buses has three tiers. So, the
first tier does the elementary school, second tier does the middle school, and the third tier does high school. Not in certain that order because the middle school actually gets out before the elementarymentaries. So, that's how the groupings are done. So, we have to have the two buses for Kell and Parker and we're just reusing
them more to do the rest of it. >> Yes. >> Is is our rate is our rate just flat daily no matter how many times or how many routes they run? >> A flat rate. >> I'm struggling with the fact that we're only getting a quarter of our our cost
covered. That's what I'm struggling with. But at the same time, I don't want to throw a bunch of cost on the families either. Yeah, that's what we're trying to balance as well because, you know, if you raise it to say 800, a lot of those kids will just drop off and, you know, we've gone beyond the point where people
are willing to pay for it. You know, if if you look at other districts, uh, we're in line with a couple other districts. Some districts are lower, some districts don't charge at all. I mean, it's all over the place. >> Yeah, I I I sort of agree with your
sentiment, Tom. I don't um I wouldn't necessarily support a significant, you know, overnight raise here. I do worry about us not, you know, not keeping pace with the increased cost on our end at least. Um and I'm just looking at your projections
here from 26 to 29. You know, looks like our annual cost is going to rise by about $34,000. If we just raise the fees at this rate, you know, we're only going to recover 7,500 of that. we're blowing up, you know, $28,000 hole in the budget. Essentially, it's starting to get to real starting to become real
money. Um >> in in a time when we have to worry about real money. >> In a time when we have to worry about real money. Yeah. Um and I I certainly appreciate that there's a you know, there's like a supply and demand question here. You know, when do you start having people opt out? Um I don't
know that it's at $500 when you're at less than three bucks a day. >> Um I don't think we're at that tipping point yet. So, you know, maybe this is the right answer for this year, but you know, going to 525 next year, which would only be another 5% increase. Maybe
next year is the year to go to 550. And, you know, then your sort of two or three year average is more similar to what we're seeing in rate increases. Um, you know, we're certainly not trying to turn this into a profit center. I just I just don't want to see it blow a bigger and bigger hole in the budget. >> Yeah. It's never going to be a profit
center. >> Yeah. >> It's just a matter of how big is the hole. No, it's just, you know, $50 odd thousand dollars a year is, you know, out of the operating budget is half a teacher or, you know, a little over one par. It's always the way I've looked at it. >> I was we tell people in a prior
district, every time you saw a yellow bus go down the street, there was a teacher going down the street because it was a comparable cost. >> How many do you have any idea how many families we have in the one, two, and three plus buckets? >> Off the top of my head, I do not. I can get that information for you and get it
back to you by um next week. I'd be curious to look at some of the two three numbers as well. >> Um the fact that we're keeping three flat. I mean, I know there's three kids, so but and that's a lot of money. $1,200 is a lot of money, but
>> I I I'd love to see the distribution of this if if possible. >> Okay. >> Obviously not. I don't want to know who it is, but um that was actually one of my questions like why why keep the three plus flat just because we feel like it's already a
high number. I mean we we're raising everything else. I wasn't here when this was done, but I'll give you my personal perspective on it. Once you get up to 1,200 bucks, it's real money, so to speak, and it looks awfully expensive. But again, back to uh
Mr. Wise's question, I'm not sure how many families we have that have three or more students taking the bus. So, >> I will get that distribution. >> It is a large, you know, it is a large number, but it's also an optional service, right? I mean, you know, and and >> significantly cheaper than a child care
arrangement or, you know, some other transportation arrangement that a family might make. So, >> um, you know, I I agree with I think we should look at it and understand what the numbers are. It's probably vanishingly small, but you know, we should look at it. I I'd be supportive. You know, we we go from 500 to 900, so
we increment that second kid 400. You know, I'd be supportive of doing the same thing for the third kid and having it not not cost as much as the first the first rider, but um you know, >> but only Yeah. but only costing ing more for the third. >> Yeah. Go to 1300 for, you know, for for
the for the three plus situation. So, you know, I'd be surprised if it's more than you can count on one hand in terms of the number of families this applies to. So, it's probably not a big deal in the grand scheme of things, but I do think just from a fairness perspective, that's probably appropriate. Um,
>> so do we do we I mean we don't none of this has to be voted on tonight. No. Um, do we want to sort of get some of these questions answered from a follow-up perspective before we vote on this one? Okay. >> This feeds into the budget conversations in January, but we can certainly pick it up. It's good to pre pre-plan for the
budget, but >> yeah, I I think my my overarching thought on this and probably some of the others is we're not in a position to increase the amount that we're subsidizing some of these, you know, some of these fees, right? Um if we have rising costs, we probably need to be as
close as we can to sort of passing those on um in particularly in these some of these optional some of these optional services like this. Dr. Corin about 100 kids. >> Jeffrey Corum Ridge Road. Um, grow I grew up riding the bus to school all the
time. I'm always just sort of a different perspective. I think that I'm always surprised at the traffic jams that we see around, you know, particularly the Birch Meadow Coolage or MHS area that all of the cars that are here, all of the time that, you know,
people get stuck trying to drop their kids off like in the turnaround at Birch Meadow for example, you know, do we actually in fact have extra par staffing needs because we need somebody out there directing the traffic? And you know, I understand that we want to save money, but are we saving money on the buses
only to end up spending it on additional crossing guards or additional paras to I don't know. I just somehow, you know, I want to kind of encourage us to, you know, use the buses, which I think are more efficient in terms of getting a bunch of kids together and not having a
whole line of cars idling waiting at the pickup for for coolage or something. Anyway, just a another piece to consider. Are you advocating for universal busing or just warning us against uh reducing the existing writership? >> Um I yeah I think you know universal
busing has has some benefits but I I don't think we we see that in the budget right now. So >> I was going to say you're wearing your fing hat when you say that. >> Yeah. Yeah. I I mean I just speaking for myself I certainly agree. I mean we don't we don't want to raise fees to the point where they're you know cutting you
know cutting writership significantly. I just I when I think about the alternatives for the families who are choosing it, I I I don't think we're in the neighborhood where that's likely to happen in mass, right? You know, so um but yeah, >> well, and just to add to that, right, I mean, it would be good I mean it would
be good to look at this as well versus other needs these families may have, right? If there's a a way that we can do it in a in a in a way that if a student or a family simply can't afford more and we need to account for that, then we should account for that. >> Yeah. Um we do in the fact that
>> not all of our community is in that bucket and quite frankly most of our community is not in that bucket but for those that do need it you know we should figure out how to how to do how to manage both. >> Students who are eligible for free lunch do not pay for the bus. >> Okay. So that answers
>> the fee is waved >> and I believe for reduced it's either waved or it's reduced. The only the only caveat to that is I think we've seen less maybe keep me honest if you if that's the case but I think we've seen less applications for the free lunch because everybody gets free lunch right now. >> Right.
>> Right. So I just I want to be cautious that we they may not be aware that they're eligible because they're no longer applying because everybody's getting free lunch. >> But it impacts all their other fees. It impacts the athletic like participation fees. So so it is worth it to families to fill out.
>> The families are reminded for all the other fees that >> Yeah. Please send that in. >> Yeah. Okay. >> But that's a good Yeah, that makes me want to raise them even more to be quite honest because that was my thought. I was like, well, who's using the bus? What's their situation that they, you
know, are not in a position to get their child over to school. Um, but yeah, >> so to make sure we have the next, we'll give a little bit of a distribution of the 123 riders, but then maybe also a couple of proposed is easier if we just lay out a couple of options. >> Yeah.
>> Of increases. Yeah. >> Yeah. Especially with the numbers because some of it might >> not move the needle much and some of it might. >> Right. I mean if if every if everything is in the one one writer versus two writer versus Right. It's good to understand the distribution how it applied how the math works.
>> Sounds good. We'll have that ready for upcoming January meetings. >> Yes. >> Okay. Do we want to move to driver's ed? >> Um the next one in the packet is um proposed fee changes for the driver's ed program. Um we are proposing a $40
increase for the driver's ed class from $710 to $750. Um an increase uh from $15 an hour to $20 an hour for the additional driving lessons and a $5 increase on the road test sponsor from 95 to 100. If you look
at what we're charging compared to some of the other programs around, we are still the lowest by at least a hundred if not more dollars. You know, in some of them were a couple hundred dollars or $300 less. So again, this is just uh
this increase is proposed for the most part to cover increase in the uh costs for the folks who are running the classes. Um, luckily gas has been pretty flat, so that's not as much of an issue. But the town did come through from the
capital side and bought we bought another uh driver's ed car out of that as well. >> Are we using both? We're not using both of those cars at the same time. >> We are right now. >> We are. >> Yes. >> Which has been, as some of you have talked about over the years, how
difficult it was to get road lessons. So, I think now families and students have said having both sort of on the road has opened up doors for kids to be able to have more consistent access to uh driving lessons, which has been really helpful. Uh we don't that won't last forever just given the condition of
the >> car that's been on the road a little longer. >> What's the rationale for being so much lower than other comparable programs? >> Part of it is we're not a for-profit
So, you know, you take out the profit margin right out of there. >> And, you know, we're also trying to do it as, you know, part of a benefit to the student population as well. So, >> want to make sure we cover our costs, but, you know, we don't need to be making a 30% profit margin.
>> So, that goes to my question. Are we covering our costs? >> Yes, we are. >> All of them? >> Yes. >> Including debt service on the car and everything else? >> I didn't calculate the debt servicing on the car. Did we buy it outright from the capital and so we own it or is it being No, we own it. We owned it outright. So
there's no debt service at all then. >> They didn't they didn't take anything. They did not take any debt out to pay for that. >> We could amortize it. >> Cover that. But it's a depreciating asset. >> Well, then we'd have to start we'd have to change our entire accounting.
>> I'm not I would I'm not being serious. I'm >> When you go to approve >> Tom's digging for an excuse to ask for a bigger number here, so I was trying to help him out. We got to remember this is, you know, we're in the public sector. We work on a cash basis >> for the most part.
>> So, >> Dr. K, >> so that's our proposal for this one. >> You want to hold off on improving later? >> Sorry. I just curious um you had nice comparisons against the commercial programs. I wondered, you know, in the light of comparing with others, whether
we looked at other districts like, you know, Wuburn that's also served by the Tritown Argonis, you know, how do we compare? Are we, you know, if if they're closer to the commercials, then I I could see us going up. But if if they're providing the same service for their
students as well at a lower rate, then I would say stick with with what you've got. Thanks. How many driver's ed lessons do they get for their dollar? Is it 10? >> I should know this.
>> It's I think it was 10 for It's 10 for iDrive. So it's forget how many hours it is because the state keeps changing the requirements. >> Okay. Depends >> how long there's there's it's hourly requirements to
Okay. Um, just take the polls here. Do we want to we ready to take a vote on this one or further discussion on this one as well? >> I could approve this one. >> And I could raise it a little bit too. >> I could I could too, but I mean it's
we're we're not if if we're saying our P&L is flat with this, we're not making money, we're not losing money, I can I could approve this. >> That's where I met as well. Do we have a motion? >> Motion. >> Do you want um >> Do you want piece?
>> Right. Uh move to approve um the driver's ed fees for fiscal year 27. What do you want through the school year? >> No, that's good. >> Okay. >> Second. >> Seconded by Tom. Any further discussion? All in favor?
All oppose? The car is five to zero. Thank you. Uh let's go to extended day. Next one's extended day and I'm going to let the superintendent take the lead on this one. >> Great. So, we are not seeking a vote tonight on these. Just wanted to talk through with the committee. Just one thing that we're uh talking through
internally at this point. Open any feedback tonight or moving forward. One uh the question for us around extended day and whether or not we build in some of the enrichment programming uh into the costs. So you'll see that also as sort of listed what those costs would be or whether it would be a pay for the
additional enrichment blocks which is our current model right now too. We have uh put out a survey to all current uh extended day families asking for their input on this. Uh survey went out earlier this week. We've already had 100 respondents. Uh survey will be open until uh first week of January. So I'll
share that feedback with the committee. So that can just help inform your perspective as we figure out the best path forward here too. So again, just wanted to start the conversation to think about that's really our big decision point here uh outside of just what we think is a pretty small increase to the uh to the tuition.
>> Go ahead. >> Can you I've lost track with some of the changes. Can students who are not in extended day partake in the enrichments currently for a fee? >> So we have a determined fee. >> Yes. for those enrichments and we have
space in the enrichments for >> non-extended day kids. >> Uh I don't know for every enrichment in every school. I can't confirm that but I can find that out. >> Okay. >> Are the fees are the fees the same for students who are in extended day
participating in enrichments versus students who are not in extended day participating in enrichments? >> I'm not sure. I can find that out as well. >> Yeah, I don't think I don't think they should be. I think I think students who are not already in extended day >> should pay more for the enrichments,
right? They're getting sort of more incremental value, if you will. >> Um, so just maybe it's just something to kick the tires on as we consider this more fully next time. >> Great. Any other questions or things for us to consider as we
>> Yeah, I I I guess just in looking at the numbers, what I want to understand is where where so let's say it says um after school three days a week with the enrichment is $335 is what we're proposing. If a parent
instead was like, well, I can actually pick up at 4:00. I just can't pick up at 2:45. Um is that how much three enrichments were caught? You know what I mean? Like is it is it sort of comparable? Is it um is it less? Is there a savings there
because you don't need your child to be at the school until 6:00? Does it, you know, allow some families to bypass extended day but take advantage of the enrichment to get some extended child care? You
know, just sort of exactly what the options are for families, if that makes sense. >> Great. Any other initial thoughts this evening, Tom? >> I'll just say I like the optionality, right? Um, if I don't want if I don't
want or can't afford to have my child engaged in the enrichments, I don't want to have to pay for the enrichments. Um, but I also want to say that with three enrichments included, do I get to choose which three? Right? You know, there might be five offered. Do I only want
three of the five or am I forced? is my child forced into three that he or she may not like. Um and so I just you know to Erin's point about providing some of the clarity around that that would be good to understand. Um and is it right
if it's maybe some of our enrichments are more expensive than others as well right? So how do we how do we manage that properly? Um so I like the idea of giving the options of building it into the price. I I I agree with Sean that if you're coming from a non, you know,
extended day just to do the enrichment, it should be a little bit more. Um, but I also want to make sure that the optionality of I just, you know, I don't need it from an enrichment perspective or don't want it from enrichment perspective is maintained. >> Great.
In for our next conversation around this, we'll do two things. One, we'll get uh some more we'll get to the survey data. Two, we'll get some clarity from Chris Nelson around some of these programmatic pieces, too. and maybe see if he can be present for some of those questions as well. I think those are all good questions. >> Can I say one more thing that I know
came up this past fall when I was talking to parents about this? If someone did want to go the route of just paying for enrichment and not paying for extended day, like separated out. Is there what's the continuity in that? So, if you're a parent who needs
that every week, are we talking six week cycles and then two weeks off in between or or is there continuity for the year? Because I know that was a concern that some families had that they need to rely upon that continuity >> enrich. Yeah. Extended a becomes your
insurance policy at that point in time, right? You have to pay the insurance policy to get access to the enrichment. >> Yeah. >> Okay. I think we have uh follow up on that one. Uh let's go to athletics and arts fees. >> Do we have to?
>> We do. >> Um let's do the uh what I think would be the two easier ones first, which would be drama and uh the band. And for both of those, we're increasing a we're proposing a $10 increase. Um it it's a little bit higher in terms of percentage
increase for drama. And that's because drama for the last couple of years, we've not been covering our overall costs. U the costs of the licensing fees on some of the shows that they've been showing um have been very expensive. And
I I also think we need to raise our ticket prices, but that's just a personal comment on that. Um and so that's in terms of the drama for $10 and band is just about breaking even. We're a little short. So, the $10 increase will get us back up to break even on the
band. And again, we're um also not we're proposing to not change the family cap on both drama and on the band. And then finally, um the third rail of this is athletics. Um right now, again, we are
just proposing a $10 increase on athletic fees with no change in the family cap. Uh right now the athletic fees for the last four to five years have been covering around 35%
of the overall athletic budget and this increase should keep us at that percentage for the next at least for the the next year. Now if you look at the package in the back of the package there were some comps in there. Um there are schedules that are all over the place. Some have
different fees for different sports and all that depending on how complicated you want to make it. Um, you know, that's really up to my from my viewpoint that's up to the committee to decide how you folks want to proceed with this. Um, but that's where we are in terms of what
we're proposing for for these three programs. >> I have some questions. Anybody? Uh, >> you want me to be unpopular first or do you want to be on popular first? No, no questions on athletics. >> You you uh >> can start. I'll I'll sit back and
>> I can start. I So, I have a a few thoughts. Um one um and Sarah Mclofflin is at the choir concert tonight, so she couldn't be here and she she raised asked me to raise this and I totally agree. Um it it's never occurred to me before, but it's a little bit odd that our caps
apply sort of per segment versus having any kind of cap for student activities holistically. um you know so and what I mean by that is if you've got a family where all the students are all in on you know drama um they're capped out much
more quickly than a family that has two or three kids at the high school that have a variety of interests right um and they might they might hit the athletics cap and the band cap and the drama cap and so um doesn't mean the students are doing any more activities at the high school or or getting any more you know sort of support from from staff and
whatnot um but because of the way our caps are structured that you know family B could could end up spending two and a half times what family family A does. Um, so that's one thought. The other thought, and I wonder if this is where you're going to go, Tom. Um, actually
two more thoughts. You made the comment that historically the athletics fees cover about 35% of the costs >> over the last five years. >> Over the last five years. I I'd love to know how that compares to the percentage of costs that are subsidized, if you will, for the other activities for for
band drama. Um my sense is um the percentage of fees that's covered for abandoned drama is probably higher than 35%. And so to some degree you could argue we're subsidizing athletics at a higher rate. That's my just my
hypothesis. And then the third one is um uh this is this is a third rail um is as we think about different sports you know we've talked about it and been afraid to talk about it in the past you know does it make sense for us to to
charge equally you know it comes back to this question of fairness sports that are more expensive should we be thinking about the fees more differently if the intent is if the intent is that the family's bearing the brunt of about 35% of the costs. Should we be thinking about a, you know, a fairer model that
sort of makes that consistent across different sports? Um, otherwise, you literally have families in lowcost sports subsidizing families in higher cost sports. Um, so those are my three questions. Sorry to have questions about athletics and they're not really for you, Phil. They're kind of for >> No, but as I said, you look at some of
the comments from other districts, they do do that. And so when we get down to excruciating detail where it is essentially by sport, it's a different price. >> Your comment that that 5-year average is about 35% is helpful because I, you know, I think we should be thinking
about this in in context of a benchmark of the fees for student activities that are borne by the parents versus, you know, versus being subsidized by the operating budget. And and to put that in perspective, prior to um COVID for like from 2010 to 2018, it was running closer
to 40 to 45%. >> Yeah. >> For athletics. >> Yes. The fees were covering 40 to 45% of the budget. >> And do you know off hand for the comparable ones for the band or the drama? Um, at the top of my head, I believe the fees that the folks are
paying cover 100%. >> Interesting. >> So, you know, it's >> Well, I mean, well, for band >> drama, they have ticket fees and stuff for performances. >> I'm sorry, I forgot. Yes. >> Yeah. >> Well, but so do some of the teams. >> They they bring in enough revenue with the with the fees that they're collecting to cover all their expenses.
Y >> I I misspoke on that. >> Yep. Do uh can I ask a couple of questions? >> Of course. >> Um so first a clarifying one. The the athletics family cap. So let's say $1,000 a family. If I have three kids at
the high school all playing three sports, I'm only paying $1,000. That's a crazy bargain. first of all. Um, second, do we do because I confess I've not had
a child in in in band or or drama? Um, is there the equivalent of the fundraising for assistant coaches on the band and drama side? Are the families fundraising >> drama? Yes. >> To supplement assistant staffing?
>> Drama? Yes. >> Okay. So, families are paying for that. band is essentially all mulligan. There's nobody but mulligan basically, right? >> Not for the coaches, but for other things. They they still do fundraising. The band >> band does fundraising for other things. >> Yeah. For trips and >> but not for staff.
>> Not for staff. Yeah. >> Okay. Because I again I always need to point out like there's so many costs that aren't even accounted for for families to participate in athletics in this fee. um because there's assistant
coaches, because there's uniforms, because you know there's just a lot more that families are paying that's not even reflected in that. Um >> and they vary too. >> And they vary. It's not the same by sport, but I I'll just say I would be
open to a discussion on like tiers. I'm not sure that I would want to single out a sport, but but I'd be open to um and again, just one opinion, but like saying these these sports are maybe at a higher
tier than these sports. Um that's how it was at my high school when I was in high school. So, and for that very reason that some of our athletics require renting outside spaces um and some
we have the facilities here. Um so, you know, I think that's at least worth exploring. Um I would like to see us get to a point where we're covering more than 35% of athletics. That feels very low. Um just
p again personally. So, the third rail is the rail I was going to touch as well. Um, I'll call the sports out that need to be called out as well. Um, hockey, football, swimming, >> gymnastics. >> Do we rent space at our Okay, so
gymnastics as well. >> I know. I just signed the contract for the swimming pool at the Y. >> Yeah. And that went up significantly a couple years ago. So, you're probably just signing the renewal of that. So, I think that I would like to think of it and see these and and I know they're not
profit loss, but I want to see what the expenses are per per sport. >> Um, so we have some basis for our decision >> um as we go through this, whether it's taring as Aaron suggests or whether we have a drastically different cost basis
on each of these. And I realized as well that some of them are not yearby-year costs, but you make an investment like in football, you're going to buy helmets every five years or something like that. So, we have to be careful about how we
look at this. Um, as we look at it, uh, so it's it's it's accounting for multiple years of expenses as opposed to a single year of expenses. Um, so that's just one thing I want to be careful want to look at there. I'd be surprised if drama was 100%
covered. >> I mean, I really would if that's the case, especially considering that some of the license fees that are being paid and whatnot. If it is, I'd love to see that, too. If that's great. Um, but >> had been pretty much covering it up
until the last two years because of the increase in licensing fees >> and those. So again, I'd like you to go back and look for other years. Um because the the last before the last two years, the two years before that, we
sort of did no name shows for two years or three years in a row. Well, if you look at some of the previous ones we did when we did like Mary Poppins and Jeff, keep me honest, there's been some MMA Mia and uh Chicago and others like that.
I would expect that it's a vastly different number, you know, three, four, five, six, seven, eight years ago when we were doing much much more bigname shows, >> but we were bringing in a lot more audience for Mary Poppins. >> Yeah. So, I'd love to see the breakdown as well of fees versus tickets as we
talk about some of that too because if it makes sense to pay the higher license because we'll get more gate receipts in most cases, I I can I can buy that argument. I I think our our drama program is phenomenal and that that's biased because I had a member of that
drama department for a while as I think Dr. Cororm still sits there and works with them on a regular basis at this point in time. But I' I'd love to see that. All of this I think is a common theme of of this is really kind of getting to the the P&L of some of these and what does it look like at the grain that that can help us make decisions.
>> But thank you Phil. >> Can I tack on one thing to that? >> Sure. >> So With all of these, I'm interested not just in like what are we paying to rent ice or to get the pool at the Y, but
also like because I I genuinely only know that like I bought the swimsuit for my son to be on the swim team. Like reading doesn't provide the uniform for swim team. I imagine, you know, we have multiple sports and activities where we
provide the uniform. I remember whole conversation on band uniforms previously. So, um that's a whole other thing of um what are we paying for? What is a necessity to participate but we're
not covering that I want to make sure we're aware of before we're going ahead and saying, "Oh, you need to pay more to do this sport because technically they already are." >> It's it's Sorry, didn't
>> Yeah, go ahead. it it's also different um for the level of team you're on, right? So, if you're on um and you're on the varsity soccer team versus the JV soccer team, the the uniform rotations are going to varsity and not to the other sports. So, they're getting handed
rotate down, >> right? And then and I don't know if there's actually a schedule for how the rotation happens. It's how pathetic we look in the uniforms before we, you know, there's enough um noise to to kind
of change it out. Um >> we did a lot of investment about five years ago when we had extra extra money in most of our uniforms. I I I know for my children, I had three in high school at once and I had between two and three children in each sport. And then I had
one who was also because she was in chorus, she was doing sports and we were getting charged for for um the arts as well. Um, and then you're you're talking about the, you know, each team, the parents group who's asking you for
money, and then you're doing fundraisers on top of that, and you're making donations um for for foods and, you know, for snack bags and all that kind of stuff. And when you start adding that up, it's just um and uniforms. I mean,
you're buying uniforms. You're buying uniforms for tennis. You're, you know, the bottoms and track and you're buying socks and, you know, for teams. These are the parents groups that are doing it. Um, it's an outrageous amount of money to to to play even one sport. And
I'm not saying that the school should pay for that at all. I it just would be nice to see um it would be it would be nice to kind of not have um some teams supplementing other teams as well.
>> I've somewhat related one more question Sean or point um all of this that we've talked about is okay this is the expense and how can we feed family we haven't talked about how can we have other income to support this as well.
Um, I had it in my head for a while. I think we probably have to go through bylaw committee. So, it might be another issue, but I really think we need to do more with advertising around some of our around the football field and around the fieldhouse
um as an income source um to see if there's something else we can do to supplement some of this budget as well. We leave so much money on the table because we don't do anything in that space. Um, and you just heard Dynamic Sports is
funding DECA, right? I love the fact that Dynamic Sports is funding DECA, but it's Dynamic Sports and it's not funding anything for our sports programs, right? >> We do do banners on the football field. The football field? >> No, we don't. Friends of Reading Football does.
>> Oh, right. >> Okay. I didn't realize that. >> And they have to take it down immediately after the game. Right. They get it up right right before the game. They take it down immediately after the game. Right. Right. It does not It's not permanent. You go to Wakefield and you go around their field at Galvvin. >> Yep. >> Every business in town has a sign up and
they pay some port of some amount. It's it's not a ton, but they pay some amount for the the marketing that goes with having their their stuff right on right on the soccer field there at Galvin. >> Um >> Wuburn, too. >> Wuburn does. I mean, we have a sign bylaw, I think, that is against that
that we'd have to go back and say, "Hey, you're you're actually blocking us from making money as a town, um, if you allow for certain spaces." I don't think it prohibits us in the fieldhouse, but I think it does prohibit us at the high at the high school football field. Um, and so I think it's something we should look at to figure out if there's another
revenue source here that we can be talking about. >> I think we'd be exempted from that as a town entity. >> Maybe >> by law. We'd have to look at that, but >> Turf Two, too. >> Turf two is another one. Yeah. baseball field.
>> Anybody have thoughts on the the uh one of the the issue that Sarah, you know, had raised around thinking about kind of a holistic activities cap in addition to these specific caps. >> I think Go ahead. >> Yeah, you go first. >> The athletic one is too I personally
think the cap is too low. Um, but if I do like the idea of there being the ability to reach some sort of combo cap because there are plenty of kids that are doing both, right? They're doing the fall musical, then they're playing a sport or, you
know, things like that. So, um, I do think we have to take that into consideration, too. >> They're not doing that in the same um season, though. >> They can't. They refuse to let them. >> They're not allowed to. You don't have
the time. You could do >> like a select chorus and a sport even though they still overlap. Um that I >> the course isn't in here because course is a is a curriculum course. >> But the caps are for the year, not for the select course is not.
>> Yes, it is. Select course is a curriculum course. >> Um >> trust me, I know she was in it for three years as a curriculum course. Her first year was not. It became a curriculum course her sophomore year. >> Okay. Well, I paid for a select course for my daughter and she did sports and
they over overlapped and and we paid for it. So, it's good that it's not now. >> But Sean's right though that the cap is for the year, not the season. >> Right. >> Right. >> But you could do two sports and one, I don't know, drama band and
not meet the >> not meet the athletics cap. >> You wouldn't meet either cap, right? because it's calculated differently >> or as I did one year. >> I think I think it's the family cap more than the student cap that was relevant as you look at the combined at the
combined view. >> A combined cap. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Because with two or three students, you easily could hit the, you know, the athletics cap and then blast through that, you know, the total spend with additional band and drama. >> Yeah.
Um, so you know, I don't know, maybe that's something to think about as well. It sounds like we're not probably in a position to take a vote on this tonight. We want to sort of explore some >> tearing opportunities and there's some some specific data we want to look at. >> Um, so maybe that's something just for
folks to ruminate on is what would be a reasonable number for like a family >> activities cap >> total. >> Um, yeah. um you know comprehensive of athletics band and drama. >> Great. Okay.
>> All right. Um I'm more optimistic about this one. Facilities rental fees. Phil, take it away. >> Another third rail. Um there are three um groupings so to speak. So, we are
proposing that for and I can't read this cuz I can't wear my glasses on. Um, for reading nonprofits, uh, it'd be a 5% increase and for reading forprofit and out of town nonprofits also 5% increase.
And then for out of town for profits, it would be a 9% increase. The thought behind this is that the last time um, two years ago when this was done, the increases for the facilities went up two and a half percent for each year. So, it's a two-year uh change this time. So,
that's where we come up with the 5%. Um, and the 9% is just that we think we could um we want to, you know, be we want to keep we want to give the benefit to the reading locations and the out of uh out
of reading uh nonprofits in terms of um not quite a big increase in the fees. Also, one of the things is going to be we're not sure of what the demand's going to be like now that we've got the fieldhouse that's been renovated and other things whether that going to
increase um demand on the use of the facilities. So, this is another one that I don't know if you folks want to spend more time on and there's other information you'd like from us and we'll be happy to get it for you.
I'm I'm good with these personally, you know, and I like the idea of um you know, sort of shifting the cost structure uh in favor of reading based organizations um particularly given how overs subscribed most of our facilities are like I think there's slack from a
supply and demand perspective there. Um you know the one observation would be two you know 2 and a half% again and we we don't want to make the the price increases um unpalatable but does two and a half% keep pace with the increase in costs um during this time if it's you
know custodial fees which you know our contracts our custodial contract is north of that um it's insurance I mean I you know I I just I just don't want We can't be af, you know, I don't think we can be afraid to pass on the
increases in costs as a general rule. Um, this probably isn't way out of step with that, but I'd be surprised if two and a half quite gets there. So, >> I would tell you that for these past two years, we all know what inflation's been for the last couple years. So, you know,
five may be a bit on the low end, but again, it's for the benefit of the for the most part the writing organizations. But, you know, we may need to look at that. the the next time we do this, which I'm hoping we can get on a regular schedule. >> What is the overall P&L for this as it
stands right now >> on this? >> Yeah, >> these are really designed to cover your incrementals. So, you know, if we didn't rent out, we wouldn't have any additional costs for um you know, custodial staff. We
wouldn't have any additional wear and tear. So, it's I I can't say I can tell you that it's covering the incrementals and you're not getting much more than that out of it. We're not using this like we are in
terms of trying to offset some of our basic costs for transportation. Again, these are fees that we're getting to cover whatever our increased costs are to be able to rent the facilities out. which otherwise would be sitting empty during the period of time they're being
rented basically. >> Okay. Because um let me just check something here. Yeah. Um for fiscal year 25 we brought in about 300 a little over 325,000
in building rentals whereas in 24 it was 225,000. >> So it it it's doing this in terms of how the rentals have been going. It's been up and down for the if you look at the last 20 years it's been doing this
>> and our custodial expenses were that amount >> I'm sorry >> and our custodial expenses correspondingly were that amount were those amounts they were net net zero or >> well I mean >> I mean it's not perfect right but >> no >> got electricity you've got
>> yeah should be less because there should be there's there's a wear and tear assumption in here as well right so >> should be an >> accelerated wear and tear on the facilities So, other discussion on this one. Should we take a motion?
>> Move to approve the facilities rental fees beginning fiscal year 27. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> Seconded and give it to Tom. Um, any final discussion? >> Okay. All in favor? All opposed? And that one carries.
>> All right, Phil. We got I like the homework. >> We got two for five tonight. That's that's Hall of Fame stuff if it's baseball. So, congratulations. Um, all right. So, let's move on then for this evening. We'll move on to our kindergarten projections and Dr. D is up
here. >> Yep. This should be pretty straightforward, too. So, uh, all you're going to see in the packet and on the screen momentarily is just, uh, kindergarten projections, uh, basically based off of census data and also other known, uh, students who are either
potentially staying in kindergarten or students who are uh, sort of like what's happening with some of our students in rise. We try to also, you know, break down the census data now by knowing uh street locations too, addresses, try to start to break that down by school the best that we possibly
can here to give you an early indication of sort of what our projections are looking like by school. Um you'll see there that it looks like there's a chance that we may need one additional classroom. Uh we also know that we're about to jump into budget season. Budget's extremely tight. So obviously we'll have to be really creative in what
it looks like for us to be able to ensure our classes have the appropriate level of staffing. But before we go down all of that road, kindergarten registration, we know open up first week in January. So still this is could be off knowing sort of how projections have been off the last couple years with
census data too. So this just early indication obviously keep the committee informed as we move forward uh over the next couple of months during registration season. >> Any questions? Tom. >> Um, so a quick observation and knowing
where the lines are and knowing you can play the game if you need to a little bit. Kllum 69. >> Yep. >> Could be 66 or less if you move people to Wood End or you move people to Birch. >> Right. >> If you count Kllum, if you count Kllum as four and you count J as four, that's
four classrooms. You're actually going up two from where we would need for this year. So we're assuming that Kllum number is going to be going down the number in the way that you're talking about also knowing their space sort of on both areas geographically. Kllum also doesn't have space for another classroom right now. So there's no way we can add
a kindergarten class there too. So that number cannot be above you started to say the magic number 60 yeah 66 63 that range. So but I I I don't think we'll have any problem knowing Kilum geographically to shift some of the students around.
And as far as the J students go, is there any wiggle room for the line between JE and Barrows? >> Yep, for sure. Although you look at Barrows, there's not a lot of there's not a lot of flex at Barrows. You know, you could >> barrows to Birch, there's wiggle room,
>> correct? So, we're just and and we know how we've done this the last couple of years is we've said if families get their registration materials in by a certain date, then they're guaranteed their home school. If not, we can't guarantee home school. And that's when we've had dozens of conversations with families to
say, "Hey, you we we can't, you know, support you in homeschool at this point." Or you're a first-time family in the community. You may not have sort of family, you know, cousins in one of these schools. Would you be willing to go to the school that's sort of like some of these are right on the line, other side of the streets going as you know. So families have been very
accommodating. So I I think this year you'll see in the kindergarten numbers, we've almost hit like exactly where we want to be across the board. I have no worry that we'll be able to do that as well this year, too. Do we have actual lines? >> We do, >> which I I didn't think we did. Like the the whole like abyss of the library I
thought was gray. >> No. So that that's a it's interesting. We've gone through that a couple of times with families to say, "Hey, I thought years ago I should have actually been here." We have sort of the the packet that says this address is this school. Uh and we haven't Oh, Sean has it. >> Okay.
>> And we haven't touched those. >> Okay. The only spot where we touch them is if we say, "Hey, one, like for example, kill them right now." Where we're gonna have to go down a little bit. We have to get creative with it. >> Sean knows where it is. >> Yeah, I've looked at this once or twice. >> So, I guess the other thing here is you
have Birch also as plus one. So, you have Josh Weaten plus one, Burch plus one, and Kellen plus one. So, that's plus three, but we're only asking for plus one. >> It's also because some of those are dropping off too on the other end. So three to three,
two to three, three to four, three to four, two to two. I don't Where's the drop off? >> So birch, right? If you look at Birch, >> those are I'm looking at first grade, stupid. Okay, sorry. >> You got it. Birch is a plus one and a minus one. >> Okay, >> that's the Okay, got it. Got it. Got it.
The school you're doing overall school adjustment. Got it. >> Correct. >> Yeah, you've got a bubble minus one plus oneus one plus one minus one plus one. So Kellum nuts out as well. Okay. >> And you know, there's also spots where the numbers sort of appropriate of classroom guidelines does change over
the years and there's some spots that are right on the line in our fourth and fifth grades across the district. So, I just think there's going to be more conversations to be had as we move in the spring as we do every year. >> Those are always super wellreceived. >> Super wellreceived. Yes. >> Y >> people are really happy.
>> Um, just to call a spade a spade here, we're not necessarily saying we're adding a a body correct budget as part of this conversation right now. Right. >> Correct. And I'll say if you remember last year in the budget process we said we thought we needed an additional kindergarten teacher and we sort of through the budget process and you know
managing lines did not need to add that teacher position. I'd also name that this year even adding a teacher sort of is we know is sort of not the path forward for us too. So we have to be really creative this year especially.
>> So yes you're correct Tom. Okay. >> Okay. We don't have an action on this one. This is just a an inform I think tonight. So, okay. Um All right. So, let's move to Did I skip anything or we moving to our last order of business here?
>> Um yeah, last order of business. So, um you know, again, for anybody watching at home, uh I'm sure everybody's heard the news by now of of uh that Dr. Milesky has has uh accepted a you know an incredible professional and personal offer outside of the district um at the
end of this school year. Um we're going to have plenty of time to you know sort of have nice rosy things to say, but I I know you wanted to make a few comments before we jump into our discussion here on the uh on the search process. >> Yeah, thank you too. And I think with six months left in the school year, these are not going to be my closing remarks. My closing Thank you. Plenty of
plenty of school year left to go. But I just want to share a couple of things I think that relate to the process too. Uh one I just want to start by um obviously this is unexpected for me and I just want to start by saying first appreciation for the entire community from school committee principles
teachers staff you know community members. I think we all feel really proud of what's happened in our district over the last five years. Um and just know that that's been an entire community effort and I think that's what it takes and what is a challenging time in education. It truly takes an entire
community and this is a community that really has invested in education, you know, obviously from top top down here. So, just uh a sincere and genuine thank you and appreciation for everyone's involvement in getting us to a position where I think we all many of us feel very very proud of what's happening in our schools. So, a sincere and genuine
thank you for that. Two, I just want to convey my utmost optimism and enthusiasm about the position of the district uh and sort of where you know someone would be very lucky to step into this role. A again based off what I just shared with the community but also a really good
strong team. I think some like really exciting things in place for someone to be able to step in to continue and to build on what is I think a district that's a really desirable district. So I just think this is a really going to be a really desirable position for people and just to say it's a great district to
be able to step into and walk into and I have a ton of faith in the team that's here as well. So again, as you start to talk about the process, just wanted to convey again my sincere appreciation. Much more to come over the next couple of months. Uh and two, just want to obviously convey my enthusiasm and optimism about the future and the
trajectory of the district. >> Great. Agreed. Agree with all of that. I think um you know, these searches are never easy, but we have a we have a lot going for us. You know, the I mean you saw we saw the the stability from a staffing perspective with Michelle tonight um in conversations with Colby.
you know, she she called out that, you know, sort of the stability of our committee and sort of how functional we are is a big deal. Um, and will will help us quite a bit. So, and she has a lot of experience with districts where that's not the case. So, um, she speaks from experience. So, we've got a lot going for us. Um, and and and as it
turns out right now, there aren't a ton of searches sort of in our area actually. So, um, I'm hopeful we're going to have a lot of great candidates uh, for this position. Um, from a search process perspective, you know, this obviously came together just earlier this week, so there wasn't a ton of time to uh, kind of get the ball rolling. So,
what what I wanted to do tonight was two things. Um, one is, and again, consulted with Colby on this. Um, one is to get the committee's approval for Carla and I to begin uh, you know, sort of reaching out to to search firms. You know, MASC and NZDC are the obvious ones. and we'll, you know, kind of see if there
are any other opportunities out there, get some proposals and potentially um go forward with engaging with one of those on behalf of the committee so that we can get things moving over the next several weeks before our next meeting. Um with the intent being to come back to, you know, our meeting hopefully on
the 8th with uh with you know an actual sort of search process outlined for feedback and then and then approval um from the committee. I think my bias would be to largely emulate the approach we took last time which involved a lot of initial uh gathering of input from the community on what they're you know what we're looking for in the next
superintendent. Um certainly uh you know a screening committee that included you know a wide cross-section of the community included uh folks from the RTA and other unions included parents and staff and folks on the town side. Um and then ultimately obviously a school committee decision to evaluate a number
of finalists and choose a uh choose a superintendent. Um so broadly speaking you know I think we would we would largely emulate that. So, that's that's one thing is to hopefully walk out tonight with with the committee's agreement that Carla and I can kind of get that process started on our behalf. Two is um I do want if we're going to
get it started on our beha if on the committee's behalf, I do want to gather any initial input that you all have or thoughts you have about things you'd like to see reflected in that search process so that we can um you know, we can come back with a draft that's somewhat you know, as as reflex reflective as possible of of the
committee's desires as far as what that process looks like. So, let me I'll open it up there for discussion. We don't we don't need to move to a vote just yet. Um thoughts folks have either on what I'm asking for from a vote perspective or or input on the process itself.
>> So, just a clarifying question. Um we would be giving you and Carla permission to choose between MASC and NASDAQ and and who we use. I'd be fine with that. I I'm worried about slowing anything down.
So given that we are, you know, going to have a few weeks off for the holidays and whatnot, um I will say I was extremely happy with the support that MASC gave us. Um five years ago, I was a part of the initial screening. Um
even though I had COVID during it. Um, but I um, you know, I'm I would totally trust you too to pick what what you thought sounded good for us so that we could like get moving on this. Um, and I agree. I thought we had an incredibly
thoughtful, collaborative, thorough process. Um, and it got us someone amazing. So, um I like to think if we do that again, we can maybe get a clone or someone similar. But um yeah, so I I I
agree with just pretty much emulating and and I think it's to our advantage that what at least four of us went through it last time so we know what we're walking into and >> yeah, >> I agree with you on getting ahead of it
and and getting ahead of any other potential searches if we could get on that side of it. Um, so, um, timing and and I agree that, um, MASC was was great. Yeah, >> you could almost rinse and repeat what we did, but
>> almost rinse. I'm looking at all the materials. I have them all on my computer. >> I Yeah, I I also dug up all those old packets and everything, you know, and um, I'm of the same mind. I mean, I think we need to do our, you know, we need to do appropriate diligence and get proposals from at least NASDAQ, who's the other sort of viable option in the
space. I think um you know we'll we'll talk to uh MASS and others and see if there you know MASC and others. I guess MASC is not the right person to ask but the right group to ask but we'll see if there are any others that are viable um currently and and get proposals but um you know agree with everyone's comments
so far and just and Erin to answer your question that that's what we're looking for. It's not ideal. I mean I think I would prefer to have a little bit you know obviously have a little bit more time and get proposals and have us come back and decide as a group and that kind of thing. I just I don't you know we don't want to lose you know a month or
more that that would that would cause in practice. Um you know looking back at the timelines um not even our timeline last time looking at timelines for searches that generally you know generally are happening you're seeing them with application deadlines in like the late January early February time
frame. Um so we you know we've got to get the sort of district perspectus out there. We've got to obviously have time for candidates to ask questions and do their investigation and then and then submit their applications. So, um time is certainly of the essence here.
So, that is the ask. Tom, go ahead. >> Um echo what what Erin said, I think the process before worked wonderfully. Um if I recall correctly, we chose MAC because it was significantly less expensive. Um and you know, composition of the search
committee as well. I think if you're wanting to prepare that for the ETH for us to officially vote and say so we had two school committee members, one central office at MI admin, one building principal, four staff members, one from each level, rise elementary, middle, and
high school was the goal. I don't think we actually achieved rise if I look back at the numbers. Five parents with representation across the following categories. Rise elementary, middle, high school, CPAC, and METCO. uh the town manager or delegate and chief of police or school resource
officer. Um so it covered a pretty broad range. Um the network just died here. RPS guest just died. Um so anyway um I think yeah we we need to escalate and move on this quickly. Um we're already
five weeks behind where we were last actually more than that. Um because we sent a letter to the community on November 10th of 2020. Um, so we're going to need to get a letter to the community in early January in order to get them engaged in applying for this. >> Yep.
>> Uh, appropriately. Uh, so we'll be two months behind, which puts us into, if everything goes well, an April or late March appointment, um, give or take. So, yeah. Um, I'm sure
we'll come up with a great person. Uh it's going to be hard shoes to fill, but hopefully um and I also I would say this as well. I was reading the charge from Chuck um that was given that and I think we should echo this as well that anybody that is a member of the existing staff who wants to apply is is granted an
interview of the screening committee um as a as a mandate, right? um doesn't mean they'll pass the screening committee, but they should be granted the interview. Otherwise, the screening committee is will be generally going through all the resumes and picking say the top 10 or 12 they want
to interview, >> right? >> Before they bring it down to three or five that come to us, >> right? >> And I would expect Yeah, I would expect we'll do the same thing as last time. You have to sort of protect the anonymity of the applicants until you get to finalist stage. So, yeah. So, um, we'll have to do that again as well, I'm
sure, to make sure we get good good candidates. >> Um, any thoughts? >> Sounds good. You guys have all been through this before and I >> I was on I was on one of the principal search committees for the elementary school at one point, but um I'm
>> gonna follow your lead. Um, and I did talk to Matt today and um, mentioned that last time around, you know, town manager was one of the screening committee members and he told me he's he offered he's happy to help in any way, you know, anyway. And obviously his department heads and others as well,
you know, he's volunteered them as well. So, um, we'll certainly certainly be able to get uh, townside representation because that partnership is so important. So, >> okay. Um, so let's uh move to a vote or let's move to a motion, I suppose. Um, I
don't know what framing you have, but >> I um move to approve the superintendent search process as proposed. >> How was that? But >> yeah, why don't you try something? Move move to improve move to move to empower
Shawn and Carla in their roles as chair and vice chair to search for find and select a search firm to start to kickstart the superintendent search process and to report back in at the first meeting in January.
>> Second. >> I think that is the spirit of it for sure. >> Works for me. >> Good job. >> Any further discussion? Okay. All in favor? All opposed? 5-0. Thanks everyone. Um, that's the end of our agenda. Is there a
final motion? >> Motion to adjurnn. >> Second. >> Seconded by Carla. All in favor? All opposed? You're adjourned. Thanks everyone. Part: 2
All right, everybody. I will call the December 18th, 2025 select board meeting to order. First item on the agenda is 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. >> All right. Uh, this meeting is being recorded on RCTV as well as Zoom. Uh, overview of the meeting. 705 will allow public comment for any items not
on the brief agenda. 7:15 discuss and vote to execute a new grant agreement with Reading Community Television RCTV. 7:45 discuss Burbank Ice Arena memorandum of understanding master license agreement. 8:15 discuss and vote
on set date extension for ad hoc commemoration establishment committee AC. and 8:25 discuss and vote on procedure for town manager evaluation including selection of direct reports to participate in a 360deree assessment as
outlined in section 5B of the town manager contract. Uh 8:35 approved meeting minutes from December 2nd and December 3rd. All right. So first item is public comments. Anybody in the room?
It's Maddie online. >> It's It's Jackie tonight. >> Jackie, nobody on Zoom, Jackie. >> No hands on Zoom. >> Wow. >> All right, we will move on to second 15. Discuss and vote to execute a new grant agreement with RCTV, page four of the
pack. So, I guess Melissa, did you want to start on this? >> Yeah, sure. >> Thank you. Um, before I walk through the specific changes, again, I want to express my sincere appreciation to the RCTV board, the negotiation team,
Angela, Kathy, Bob, um, and staff at RCTV. Uh, the process involved many hours of thoughtful discussion, collaboration, and compromise. I believe the hard work on all sides have resulted in a solid balanced grant agreement that supports RCTV's mission, provides
stability for the organization, and ensures accountability and transparency for the town and our residents. Um, I'll outline the changes of the grant agreement that have been made since our December 2nd meeting. Uh, many actually I believe all of those changes came from
feedback from our board. So, those are the um items I'll outline. I'm not going to outline what I had already stated at our last meeting. Um, in section 4B, we removed the phrase free of charge um, on the
leas on the lease agree or lease option um, which Karen had asked to do and that was in agreement with the negotiation team and their board. Um, on section 4C, there was some wording added for fundraising requirements, which I know
we're going to discuss more here tonight. Um, this was input from Chris and Carlo. Um, we did strengthen the language, but we did also add that there were four calendar uh four fundraisers per calendar year. Um, but that I think is going to get brought up again to
discuss a little more. Um, the grant term and renewal structure. Um, one of the most significant changes from the December 2nd one to tonight is that we're going to move to a straight three and a half year agreement. Um this substantially lengthens the baseline of
the contract period but it also provides RCTV with greater certainty and helps support them um the ability to hire and retain staff. Um the end of the agreement date also wanted to mention so it's three and a
half years and this is done purposely because the end of the grant agreement aligns with their fiscal year. It also um aligns I think with their what their lease would be which would be the end of June. In addition, Carlo, we added um
the 90day notice. Um so that's the requirement in their lease agreement. So this would allow if there was not going to be a renewal at the end of that three and a half year period, it would align with their current lease at least. Um
we added in section 11 C um notification to the town on any executive director changes um at RCTV. Section 12A um we added a requirement that all recorded meetings to be posted
online within five business days just to ensure timely public access to meetings. I think this was something um Karen may have brought up also. Um another item on remote meetings on 12C, we clarified how remote or Zoom
meetings are handled. Um and then we added that Tom will provide recordings to RCTV of meetings that are just done on Zoom and that we've asked RCTV to upload those within five business days to their YouTube. Um
and that process we will once this contract is signed and executed that will be a process that we can um establish here I think at town hall with staff that those meetings will just sent get sent over to RCTV and there won't be a requirement for them to request them.
Um exhibit C 14B um clear um as I said a clear death. Oh, in exhibit exhibit C was the outlines of um the procedures for each
location that RCTV has equipment at. So, we just um set clear deadlines requiring to make sure those procedures and steps are um in place. What else? Uh September uh section 18 material breach. Um we added that a
determination of material breach requires a simple majority vote of the select board. Um, we also added that failure to comply with 4C, um, which includes fundraising would also be considered a material breach. And then we agreed to provide
RCTV a 90-day grace period, um, while they get settled currently. Um, this grace period does not apply to any misuse of PEG funds, but otherwise, we're just going to give them a little
um, time to little transition buffer. And then we go down to exhibit A. There was changes made. Um we expanded a requirement to do some outreach to inform um local sports teams and youth programs, which I actually think was something that they were doing, but we
just added that to exhibit A. um just the requirement to reach out to those teams or programs that RCTV could lend equipment and is could train
volunteers for them to record or live stream their games or programming. Um, we also added that a candidate forum would be live streamed
or recorded by RCTV, which is something they historically have done and we just kind of put that in the contract to make it for more formal. and >> in exhibit B and added a requirement
that assets transferred to the town or instead must be used solely for PEG access. This was something I think the attorneys worked out. This wasn't something that I was actually involved in. So, um but I think altogether that you know these changes strengthen the
agreement and you know hopefully provide RCTV with longer term stability and ensure our transparency for the town. But if anyone has any questions of me, I'm happy to answer them.
>> Who wants to go first? >> Um, I don't have a lot. Um, fundraising four times a year. Does it matter if it's quarterly or can it be at any time? >> Um, at this it the way it's worded currently, it just says four times a
year. there's no um requirement on the timing >> and um I kind of didn't want that to be a material breach. I kind of wanted it to just to be in there. >> I mean, it is for their benefit. So, they would only gain if they do it. So, I kind of didn't want that to be a
material breach. um grant there's a somewhere in here um about grant funds and try letting us know what they're spending the grant money on >> quarterly findings. >> Oh, there is a
>> No, as a courtesy they will provide town manager of a new program developed not utilizing PEG funding. I don't think that that we should require that. >> What was the purpose? Can you tell me the section so I can? >> Of course. I don't know what it is in the one on there, but the one that we got the other day, it's expenditure of
PEG funds section five, >> which page number. >> Well, I have page 13. >> Well, it's >> but it's pro, it's probably page three and it's on the second. It's towards the end of the paragraph.
It's like the last sentence. As a courtesy, our strategic board will notify the town >> page four. page which we got for the packet. >> No, it's page four of the agreement. >> It's the last It's the last sentence, right?
>> So, I know it says as a courtesy, but >> do they have to >> seven? Part of me doesn't feel like we need to know what they're doing with their grant money. We're only really responsible for their PEG money >> as far as knowing what they're doing. >> Not that there's going to be anything nefarious, but I feel like that's a
added burden on them to report to us. Unless it's easy for them to report it to us, >> we can ask them. Um, >> and I don't want this to prevent us from signing it. >> No, no, no. I think this could be a um like tweaked a little bit >> maybe. I I think the reason this was put
in was um of some of the concerns over the Reading Post and how that was handled with RCTV's board. Um, so I think that's why this was put in is just to keep the
lines of communication and clarity and transparency open with the town and their board. >> Um, >> but do you know what I'm saying? As far as like grant money, >> peg funds is one thing that's very
controlled, but as far as how they spend the money they fund raise with, I think that they should have more control over that than we do. >> I'm marking it off here. >> Um, and this is kind of silly, but not
silly. In paragraph 10, the annual review, we have um December to February. I was wondering if we could switch to January to March because December is really busy. >> Agree. Um we actually discussed that a lot um that time frame. Um but they felt
like it was realistic with their when they have to submit their financials and when they they can get them to us. We did actually talk about that a fair amount. As long as >> And I mean, I'm fine moving it that month if we did think it had to be moved, but we did talk about that a fair
amount. >> Okay. >> Um um and then some of the changes to resolve some of my questions. So, um yeah, my other note was material breach. I don't want to have anything to do with
the fundraising. Um, and that was it. Thanks very much for all your work because I know this is for all of you. It was a incredibly difficult long and I think it came out great. Thank you,
>> Karen. >> I don't have anything further. That's good. Thank you, >> Carl. >> Yeah. Um, so to Karen's first point, Karen Rose Gillis, um, that line, it says as a courtesies, I
>> I I don't have a problem with it. >> I just don't want them to be all of a sudden us dinging them because they either forgot or they didn't or whatever. Do you know what I mean? >> Yeah, I I guess. Um, I mean, I'm Yeah,
you're right. But it's like it's it's vague enough that it's not they're not obligated to do it. >> Okay, >> that's the way I read it. So, as a courtesy that means >> it's a nice to have. It's a you know, but again, >> um because we don't want to give the lawyers too many changes because
>> that's all I'm saying. >> I know. and to the the fundraising. Ever since the beginning of all this, the goal was to tighten this up and have
RCTV move forward because they've been stuck. In my opinion, the board's been stuck, leadership's been stuck, and so the fundraising, yes, it only benefits them. But if we put nothing in there, yes,
it's on them, but it's very easy to do fundraising. It's a flyer. It's an email to their base. It's social media. So, I I I want some accountability from the board, from staff. It's not a
heavy lift in my opinion. It's not a heavy lift at all. They used to be much better at it. Um, and either one I I initially put quarterly and I guess that's a little bit more pressure, but four times a year I I'm okay with. I
didn't like once a year because they're only going to do one. >> I don't have a problem with the four times a year. I just don't want that to be a material breach because I think a material breach is really, really serious. And I think if we're touching base with them every six months or so,
then we'll have we'll have our eyes on it all along. And if they're not doing as well as we kind of want, then I think in those times is when we can kind of encourage them or find out what the issue is or if they're having a problem. >> But Right. But if it's not in here, then there's no accountability if they don't
do fundraising at all. You know what I mean? I'm trying I'm trying to make this so RC RCTV can better themselves and and and raise money. I I I want them to raise money. Hopefully they want to raise money. >> But can't it still be in here without
being a material breach? >> Not not for me, but I'm just one person. For me, I I >> I'd like it to be in here, but I don't want it to be material breach. That's >> I hear you. Let we can have that discussion as a group. Uh the other thing on the elections. So, exhibit A
uh 1 C. Let me go to >> what page in the Oh, I'm getting to it. It's hard to navigate this. So I guess if Jackie can also share this online, whatever page number he ends up sending >> 18 on the packet.
>> Exhibit it. Yeah. Exhibit it. Yes. So yes. Okay. Correct. >> It's C and then it goes. Is that an I? Yes. >> I don't know. All right. >> So A, there's a typo. It says viewing on candidate forum. I'm assuming that
supposed to be a one. >> One in the yellow supposed to be. It should be one candidate forum. I assume not on candidate forum >> process reviewing >> but for me there's four elected offices
and they used to do forums I don't expect any kind of forum this is streaming or recording but it should be for all the elections not pick and choose not one one year we'll do board of library
trustees one year one year we'll do arms MLDD. So for me, I would just like to tighten this up and make it all elections, local elections for elected official, which is there's four of us. Well, five if you count town moderator,
but there's no there hasn't been I should say that there hasn't been any any kind of debate or forum, but this is just recording or live streaming. I no hosting at all. So I like that tightened up. And to me, that's again, they could be pulling a
recording from somewhere and just posting it. I think a lot of people rely on RCTV to watch these forums. Um, and so I'd like those I guess five, sorry, select board, school committee, board of
library trustees, RMLD, and town moderator if that ever happens. Um, and that and that's it on that. Um, >> can I respond to that? Yeah, >> Mr. Chairman, through you to Mr. Bosi. Um, this the intention of this language
is it's it's that they agree to do one forum any with all the candidates in it that are running or whoever's in the forum per each election cycle. So, if there's a special election, so it's not limited to um a particular seat or
particular office. It's it's one candidate forum. So typically lately they've been school committee and uh select boards but >> it doesn't say it in there though at all. >> It's just the form. Yeah. >> So >> election quarter course online subsequent period one candidate. It is a
the the typo you said one candidate forum per election cycle. And so this is that they're committing to do at least one at least one forum right because last year there were multiple forums. So they if there's a they don't want to
be in a position where they have to choose if the local Democrats do a forum and the local Republicans do a forum you know although last year I understand so this was the conversation that was had >> so clarify your question um
so the one that was done at the library between select board and then they did a school committee would that be considered one form or one. >> Okay. That's what I thought too. >> But is one form or >> that's what I thought too is and that's how they usually run is consecutively.
It's the wording's a little I I understand what you're saying but I thought that I was understanding it that it was >> one event >> one form >> what >> one host forum for all elected boards. >> Well, they don't host so it could
>> not them. I'm saying whoever whoever that one host is, but it's for all the elected boards for that election. Correct? >> Yep. Okay. >> But if there are multiple entities that bring forward >> different obligations via this contract is only to have to commit to one,
>> I believe the board would try to get to multiples, but >> yeah. No, I just wanted to make sure they're only obligated on to one forum under >> What if they're on separate nights? Is it two? >> One night you do this. >> Typically what happens?
>> It depends. Depends. >> Sometimes sometimes boards aren't contested. If uh board of library trustees sometimes it's contested, some people sometimes it's not. So there's no forum because there's no need, >> right? >> Uh RMLD, same thing. Obviously school
committee and this board usually there's more people that run for the seats that are coming up. >> Sure. >> So I just want this tightened up. Um, so if that's what's the if that was the the way everyone understood it, let's just tighten it up because this is very vague
and I I I didn't interpret that at all. >> One candidate forum. That's the way that I interpret it though is one candidate forum. Meaning the same thing that happened last year there every seat is contested on every
single border committee. RCTD is going to do one night, commit to at least a minimum of one night of recording that and doing it that way and regardless of the participants who are there. Um, I mean, obviously I think that's fair. They can cover more, but I I I read it
as completely open-ended and doesn't pick and choose, and I think it would be obviously in their best interest to cover everything, but, you know, it's hard to obviously organize and and run these kind of things. So, if they can at least cover something, it's better than
nothing. I don't think this is something that like one of I'll go over my stuff after you're done. I sent Maddie some changes uh in I have some change to this as well, but I don't think this is this specific spot needs to be changed for
that. I think I you interpret it one way. I kind of interpreted Jane's scenario way. I think they have to at least do something. And if they're saying that, you know, they're not even saying if the same forum last year was held on March 13th, they're they would
cover if there's only one forum March 13th, they're covering it. If it's on for the whole day, because every board and committee is contested, they're covering the entire day of it. >> And what if it's the 13th and the 15th? >> They only have to do one day. And if it if they if whomever is running the thing
splits it up like that, it's they only have to do one. I don't think it's a hill to die on on on the contract kind of to to make it because who's to say that there could be like 10 different forms. You always have
to scale it out to something extreme like do they have to cover all 10 now? Now they did these two over here. Are they going to do eight this way? like no I'm picking the the exact five that people get elected. Same school committee given what's happened that there's five people for two spots people
are going to be very very interested and that's on a different night >> and for scheduling reasons or whatever they do RMLD and in in us then school committee doesn't get covered because it's a different night that we all we got to do is spell it out. I don't know
what the big deal is. >> I can understand that where I think it would be in their best interest to cover the subsequent night. >> So, let's spell it out. That's all. It's not a big deal. >> Melissa,
>> I think if we made a simple change of just saying um RCTV agrees to live stream or record and post online for subsequent viewing. um the candidate forum
sponsored by one host during per election season. >> Then you're you're picking and choosing. If the form becomes split instead of joint, then you run the risk of picking
sides and we don't want that to happen. >> And you can't do two and now you're just selling two. I mean, we could do two, I guess, but we could do one instead of and change one for all. And this is just recording andor live streaming. I don't know what the big
deal is. >> I think I I think and maybe I'm wrong, but I think the issue is not um it's they're offering to record or live stream, for example, the one that was done at
the library. I think this is the easiest way to explain what I'm trying to say. The one that was done by the library, which was done by the Republican and Democratic committees. So, they're saying whether that my understanding of this is that whether that goes one night or two nights, they're going to live
stream or record that set of forums. >> Not the way this reads. >> I don't interpret it that way. I think they would just do the one >> one one night. I mean, I just want to tighten this up. That's all. Can we can can we who does anyone want to clarify
if I'm understanding this correctly or if you guys disagree with what I'm saying? >> Yeah. >> So my interpretation what you are >> Angela Merrill interim executive director. Oh >> look at that. Thanks Karen. >> Angela Merrill interim executive director RCTV. Um when we met and talked
about this, the understanding was that yes, how Melissa was just descri describing it that if there was one group hosting, but it did extend multiple nights because the select board would take up, you know, longer because there happened to be five people and
then so school committee happens to meet that Thursday night, we would then cover both of those. So for whatever elected board is up for election that year, we would cover them. So even if it ended up meaning that there were five of them because board of library was one night, select board was one night, school
committee, we would cover them, but we would only cover one of each because if multiple groups within town decide they want to run candidate forums. That is what becomes very daunting on us on us. >> 100% agree with you. Let's spell that out because this is big.
>> So we can tighten that up. I just to let you know that's that's how we are interpreting it. So I think I think we are all on the same page. >> Yeah. >> And Melissa can suggest some language. We could say something along the lines like RCTV agrees to live stream or
record and post online for subsequent viewing candidate forums so that a forum for each ele elected position is covered per election cycle provided a forum is held for such position during that cycle. >> I'm so glad. >> So we can put something along those
lines. >> I did not. I'm so glad Jackie got that. I started to write and I lost. >> Jackie, be prepared. >> That's okay. But I mean, I think we can I think we can work it out with Bill, RCTV's attorneys, uh, now that we understand specifically what the intent is.
>> Are you good? >> It's exactly what I said. >> Okay, perfect. All right. Awesome. >> Why didn't you say that? >> I did say it. I did say it. >> Not in lawyer speak, but I said >> Thank you, Andrea. Thank you, Angela. Um, and I think
I I I I want to I'd like to see more. I know we have the core events uh annual events. Sorry, the annual events. I forget what where that is, but um I think we all I think we're on the same page. I think we all know what we're talking about. Um
uh veterans memorial day, all that street fair, family. I'd like to add at least to the annual events, uh, the manora and the tree lighting as annual events. Um, and you know, if anyone wants to add
more like Winterfest, but I'd like to eat at least add those two to the annual meetings. And then I know there's there's notice and there's you know they don't I know the staffing or whatever but it's I was really shocked last meeting
when tree lighting hasn't been filmed for 15 years and then the manora has been filmed every time. That's not putting one thing against the other but I'm like tree has been going on for a long time and I didn't know it wasn't being recorded for 15 years till that
meeting. I just assumed. Um, so I I I just think those two need to be added to that. Obviously there's a lot other ones, but those are the big ones. So that would be from 8 8 to 10. And that's what I'd like to see added to that clause, that paragraph. And then
whatever they can do, like you know, they can do and um, you know, because Porchfest is more recent than others. Junth is more recent than others, but we've had some long-standing ones uh, particularly friends and family day and veterans and memorial. So, I don't think
that's a big ask to add those two. And then I'm done. So, while we're on that topic, I sent Maddie three items. Jackie, sorry. Three items. So, I guess if you want to bring that one up first.
So, this would be the Which did I name this one? I had three. It was fundraising, core meetings. Yeah, I think it was core meetings. Um, no. Or core events. Page 18. >> Yes.
>> Page 18. >> So, that's currently where we are. Page 18. >> Oh, this is new language from >> Yeah. So, page 18, I just copied the top so people knew what I was speaking about. And then at the bottom is where I changed it to
historically RCTV has recorded and broadcast local community events and shall cover these events. Meaning it is no no longer optional. It's no longer we have staffing and all the other 18 reasons
prior to why they may or may not be able to cover it. It's they shall actually cover it now going forward. So, in the list of annual events, I cleaned up the language because it said Memorial Day parade. It's Memorial Day. Veterans Day
parade, it doesn't have a parade. So, I cleaned that language up. Um, I struck the state elections because we don't cover state elections. The news does that. So, they don't have to worry about somehow covering a state election. Um, local
election obviously stays there. But I added also the tree lighting and monora lighting to that list. But more importantly is that it's it's not optional. We're going from an 18month contract that we discussed last time to
all of a sudden tonight discussing like 42 months which is significant. And to me that says that we want to have tra uh uh you know that RCTV wants the runway to land, you know, talk to a talent that
may or may not already be existing and to be able to go from that and offer somebody some job security for the next three and a half years. Um in doing so, I think that we have to have some security here uh as the select board that certain things are going to
actually be done. um and are no longer optional. So that's kind of why I want to see shall include those events. And then have the same language at the bottom. If RCTV is unable to cover the listed event or request an event, RCTV shall provide
72 prior 72 hours prior notice to the event organizer. Currently, it's just provide notice. So I guess I think you need something specific in there because you can't say prior notice. Well, it's 5 minutes before the event. Obviously, that's not going to happen. I could. And
like I think we need a defined number in there of what would be considered um you know, valid notice where someone may or may not be able to scramble and do something else in the interim. Um and then the other thing that I
changed is if more than one event is not covered within a calendar year, this shall be considered a breach of the contract. The only exception shall be a 90-day grace period of an appointment of a new or interim executive director. Once again, to Melissa's point that you brought up earlier, there's going to be obviously some leeway here in the
beginning for RCTV to get organized again and on the right path, and I don't want this to hinder that um in that aspect. But I think that it has to be put in there that there is a penalty for not actually recording these events
anymore. I don't think that it's fair not to cover them. Um, I believe that the board and uh staff can work out scheduling to make sure that these things are done internally. I'm not going to tell you what you should or shouldn't should uh not do, but I think
that uh in order for us to be heavily investing in in RCTV now, I think we need a commitment to beyond what was already given to us because I don't want to dimminimize the entire contract, but essentially all our CTB has to do is
record five meetings a year and have a teacher over at the school. That's it. All this other stuff is filler, fluff, guard rails to prevent XYZ. Don't even have to fund raise at this point. All of
it is just filler. Five meetings and a teacher over at the school. Like I I I I cannot in good conscience continue with not having events covered in town. I mean, the the community clearly wants it. Uh and I think it's in
RCTV's best interest to do it. So, that's kind of what my proposal is for covering this um going forward. Uh, and like I said, I I provided the the grace period in here for somebody taking over because I understand it's
it's not as easy as flipping a switch. But this way here, the next executive director is going to look at this and they're going to realize I have these nine days. Pretty much all of them are already predetermined dates ahead of time. I get these nine days. I got to cover the year. set the schedule at the
beginning of the year. My wife uh at Children's Hospital, they book out the entire year of on call coverage. Obviously, it's Children's. They got a little bit more money. Um but there's no reason why this can't be done with scheduling it. That's all it simply
scales out to be. >> So, that's my bigger change. The other two are the fundraising thing. and I changed that to quarterly and now it's four events or it's not the hill that I'm going to die on because I understand that um PEG funding is only going in one
direction without um the state intervening like they're currently doing with uh doing the PEG funding for uh you know ISPs and all that stuff and getting the money that way which will be a significant influx of of money if they can get it flipped to no longer require
cable access to end up needing you know, internet access instead. But if that does not happen, when you look at RCTV's finances and scale out salaries and expenses and everything that goes one direction and the PEG funding goes in the other direction and you scale it out
to five years and you know the writing is on the wall. So to not have fundraising in there, it is to your detriment. I can suggest very simply Mandarin, Dandelions,
um, Fudruckers, and then, uh, forgetting one. Uh, but there's your four fundraising events a year at minimum. You can do more, obviously. Um, oh, Chick-fil-A does them. Any one of these things, it's fill out a form thing and and you're good. But ICTV has to do more
than just quarterly funding to um in my opinion stay funded in the next five years without intervention from the state and I think those were my only so I had that oh so somebody missed and so if you want to just bring up core
meetings real quick Jackie the other email I sent you not that this is massive But under the list of core meetings, which is page nine, um they list out all the core meetings that they were going to cover,
blah blah blah. Board of Library trustees was omitted from that covering. Is there a reason why >> it I feel like there was but I couldn't. It has never been a core. It has never been a core meeting. It started um
obviously like things in co when we started with zoom and then after co library they reached out to us and we had said you know it was not a core meeting so if long as it continued on zoom we were able to make that capability because it's at the it's at the library so if it does meet on the
night of another meeting like here if CPDC and select board meet on the same night we can handle two meetings at one time um but it starts to get tricky when these meetings start to separate so as long as I've been with RCTV, library has never been a core meeting. It's always
been wasn't even a non-core meeting until we took it on a few years back. >> So, in my opinion, uh and just one, I think that they're an elected board. They should be covered. You're covering them anyway already. So, in essence, as long as the remote participation
continues, you're not going to this isn't going to really affect you. >> Yeah. uh anything I just about anything on Zoom is not problematic for us. My only concern would be turning into poor is that then the expectation is that we are sending a crew to the library every
time there's a border library um meeting and when that like I said that was lower on the totem pole for us. So if it continues on Zoom not a problem. So I wonder because I would still like it to be in
there because like I said it's a it's an elected body. Finance committee is not. I thank you for covering finance committee. Um I still think that we should have it in there like and I think by the time that the 36 months is up maybe remote participation might be over. And
obviously there's a little wiggle room but I don't see why you can't just remain in there for now. And then if remote stuff gets taken away, believe me, you're going to have to do a complete overhaul. This is going to be a complete overhaul. So, I understand that. >> But I I think that library should be covered. There's no reason they shouldn't be.
>> Like I said, as long as um you are all okay with it being a remote Zoom covered meeting because they do have a tendency to meet when other CPC and other groups are meeting at the same time, then I'm that's not a problem. So for the public to know how we're differentiating these,
it's essentially somebody zooming in on me right now as opposed to getting the overview which is the zoom and sometimes has a speaker view. >> Um that's all that's really changed. >> So um obviously covering the Zoom meetings is super easy and the quality
is significantly better. >> Super easy to a degree. The we can do four meetings at one time with the equipment that we have. So, anything that goes beyond that, uh, as of right now, four has always been the max that the town has ever had. >> Like, if you were to email me and say,
"We had a problem." We try to cover five. Yeah. Like, I can understand. >> Well, typically that's what we I do. I reach out to Matt and I say, "Hey, you have a couple extra meetings happening that night. Can you give me a a tier of, you know, what you want live and how we can sort of play around with that?" That's usually what I do anyways. So I
think if we can add this under the understanding of what we came up with now and then obviously when the contract gets redone five years from now um or remote participation changes that you know we can work together on something.
>> Can we just add via Zoom to that last paragraph to make it simple? I mean >> we could do it now real easily then. >> So board of library trustees and then zoom in and quotes and that's it. Would that
>> I mean if it was me I would say remote only because we don't know if the technology would change. Yes. >> Okay. >> Yep. >> So if we want to add just remote and quotes on that one um that would be fine. I just want to make sure that all the elected boards are covered. you know. >> Mhm.
>> Even though you've been doing them anyway. >> So, those were my changes. Changing this the fundraising thing, like I said, it's to their detriment if they don't. I think that whether it's a material breach or not, you can scale it out and in and wonder if they're going to be
there in five years. Uh, you know, due to funding. Um, so that's not the hill that I'm willing to die on for for that. I would just caution that they absolutely have to do fundraising and more. It's going to be more than that without state
intervention. It's unfortunate. Um, so those were my changes. Obviously covering events now going forward is is my bigger one. And then thank you for covering the um
sports and offering to train and uh help everybody over there. I don't know if you want to just briefly explain the scenario with the hockey game thing. I knew you thought you were going to get away, but I I have to know because >> it's not to me being able to explain it
because as everyone pretty much knows, I am not the tech person. Um but we did have our um contracted IT tech out today looking at many locations here in town. Um and we still just can't get that feed
from Burbank. So we don't exactly understand last year how that feed worked as we are not the people that had set up that feed that feed that person is no longer with us. Um so we're trying you know the best we can now. We're
struggling into the holidays. So, obviously, this is a hired out contractor. He's not somebody that works for us full-time. Um, Gabe even giving us today was because he had a cancellation um that he could give us today. So, I'm waiting back. He's supposed to be sending a debrief. I
actually think I might have an email from him for us to be able to look at it, but again, I am not the one to interpret it. One of our board members, um, who unfortunately is not here today, Jake Bley, here is helping us with that understanding of the IT piece of everything. Um, so we are we do think
that we have figured out a way to at least take the stream that they used last Saturday and get it onto our YouTube and onto the channels. There's a key code. Um, you know, I have smarter people that work at RCTV that understand
these pieces than I do. So again, I don't want to be quoted. Um, but they are working at that. And I understand that where the the parents who are recording these games are struggling is because they're they're not used to this either. So there's a lot of pieces that are involved for them that they're
trying to work through. Um, so we're doing the best that we can to work with them to give them the support that we can give that we have at this time. Um, and like I said, I don't all of those little moving pieces. I am not the one that particularly understands how all of
that works. I think in the interim until a fix is implemented, um I know that RCTV can take the feed that the parents are using on YouTube and simultaneously live stream that to RCTV's YouTube and
cable channels. >> Yes, there's a key code that we're working with >> that and as a compromise until it's done would absolutely um work. >> Yes. And that's what we're that's what we started working on today once we once Seth realized okay there there was no
way he could fix it for us today. And unfortunately their next after this weekend their next game is New Year's Eve and then the next one is immediately after New Year's Day. It's just we're we're in a very precarious situation with the holidays and with this being an IT contractor and not one of our full-time employees that's handling this
situation. >> It is definitely in demand, you know. Um, so I think that if you can also communicate, my one of my biggest criticisms before is communication all the time. I think that if RCTV can just
um take a page out of the food pantries book she's posting, I assume it's Simone over there or somebody daily nonstop updates on this that the other same thing. So RCTV used to you know put that the select board would be meeting
tonight or whatever. Here's the link. I think that you have to carry that and use that going forward. It's only going to grow everything that you're doing. >> Um, but more importantly, just posting after you get the information and when you think you have an ETA, >> we're currently working on the hockey thing. It's currently down expected fix
by the end of January. We're working on it just so people know, you know what I mean? >> Um, >> but it's good to see that you are actively investigating it still. So, those are my changes. I got I got
one more. I uh I apologize. My mic was on last time. Sorry. Uh I apologize. I I assume that the grant agreement was the same as last for the year and a half to coincide with the
lease. So my concern is I guess by having this longer and maybe you guys can answer this with your current landlord, maybe not tonight, but I think if you have to move, right, because you want to get bigger or
whatever, or the Pleasant Street Center, whatever the scenario is, if you have to move, you're probably going to have to sign a lease if it's with us or the So I I I would rather see it be the same term,
total term. I'm not trying to undercut anything, but I think it' be, this is me talking, maybe a will say no. Uh, that we do what we had originally and then you have the option to renew that, whatever that equates to for this. You know what I mean? You guys know what I'm
saying? No. All right. So, your lease expires September of >> 20 June. June of >> 27. >> June of 27. All right. This goes beyond that. >> So, you're gonna have to make a decision
whether to stay or move in and your current location. Correct. So, if you move, your lease is going to have to coincide with the contract to just how, you know, so you guys know
>> what you're paying for rent and how long and whether you get options or not. That's a lease negotiation. I'm just trying to maybe I'm not I'm trying to protect you guys that the grant agreement right now should run with the current lease that you have and then
it's your option to renew until 2029, not our option. That way you'll know if you're staying or not and you go to that landlord. I need a lease until June 20 30th of 2029. Do you know what I'm getting at?
I think what he's doing is giving you the power as opposed to us having the power which is relinquishing control from us which I'm very difficult at actually giving up. But in this instance, I think he makes sense where it's your option now, not our option. >> Cuz I didn't understand it was going
till 2029 till tonight cuz I I just assumed it was from last meeting when it was 18 months. And I'm okay with this all the language, but I think it behooves you and I could be wrong that everything should coincide with your
lease because if it goes beyond that, then you're kind of like, well, what do we do? the landlord doesn't agree to the exact term that we want and then we're in limbo again or we'll give you a one-year extension a one year I just think you need to be you need to know
where you stand as far as your location >> did you have something >> yeah I would just want to be really clear that if the if RCTV is going to have the option to extend that we have
sufficient notice if They're not going to extend because we don't want to be in a situation where our um PEG funds that we are receiving from our uh cable licences is at risk. If
RCTV tells us a month before that they're not going to extend, we'll be in a scramble to get a new PEG provider. So, you know, I think if you are going to flip it, we want to make sure there are clear notice requirements.
>> I think how it says in there period of up to six month um six Well, I think that's something else, but I would say they would require at least six months. be changing the dates, but it'll be still notice. >> I mean, 6 months is something that >> hold this.
>> So, if even if in the case that they would have to get a new lease and move, wouldn't it still be a June 30th date most likely because of their time of moving from their current location to their next? >> But we don't know what a landlord's going to offer them. fair, but I would
still think it's within the same time frame because they're going to have to leave. You know, it's going to be the same. Like if you're renting September to August, you go somewhere else, it's September to you know what I'm saying? >> I'm trying to control something we can
control by wording it to benefit them. >> Yep. I mean, >> that's all that's all I'm trying to do. I mean, I think the other reality is that if they're struggling with lease terms, we can always revisit the grant
agreement. So, there's nothing precluding RCTB from coming to us and saying, you know, we we want this to be a shorter term period, >> the grant agreement or there what what's the >> the grant agreement? >> Oh,
I I I like to hear from one of you guys. Any thoughts? Kathy, did you have something or >> you understand this piece a little better? What you were just >> Bob Beckman, Sunset Rock Lane. Uh would
like to keep it the way it is at three and a half. Our renewal uh agreement with our landlord is very favorable for us. So, we're not concerned of it coinciding down the period. So, we think the way it uh is currently is more favorable for us.
app appreciate your concern, but I I think knowing what our renewal period is afterwards um or at least going from what we believe our renewal period is afterwards, uh we think it's best just to stay the way it is, >> right? As long as they're comfortable.
>> Thank you. Thank you for your concern. >> You know, for some reason someone him someone offers him double the rent and he's kicking you out and then you're scrambling. These are all hypotheticals, right? I I just I you know, as long as you're okay with it, I'm okay with it. I
I was thinking we would go the 18 months and then renewing from there, but this is fine. Um the contract is to echo what Chris said, uh not as strong as I'd like as far as what we're going to do in the future, but it's much better than it
was. So, if you guys are okay, I'm okay with it. That's all I have. >> So, I guess to summarize kind of where we're at now, >> Karen wants breach scenario struck
>> for the fundraising uh and the fundraising aspect in general wants to be stricken. Is that the deal too or just keeping >> No, I think >> removing the keeping the keeping the floor but striking that it's a breach >> or at least have it be not
I don't want any gotcha moments on something like this where, oh my god, you didn't do the fundraiser, you know, in the right quarter. I just don't want it to be one of those kind of moments. I'd like it to be give a warning before all of a sudden it's a material breach. You know what I mean? Like if it's if they don't successfully fund raise two years in a
row or for 18 months, then that could probably be one. But if it's the first six months and they haven't they've only done one, I don't want to have that be the material breach. >> It's not quarterly anymore. It's just four. It's just four, not quarterly. >> Okay. So, you're good with four and striking
it as being a breach. >> Material breach? >> Yes. >> I'm fine with that, Carlo. You're fine. >> No, I'm not fine. No, >> you're not. No, >> I thought then I just And then I just heard her say that after two years, then it's a material breach. >> No, I'm I just want to make sure that
it's not one of those gotcha moments where we're going to trick them into to re making a material breach based on a fundraising issue. Why is it I got your moments in writing? I don't know what you mean. I got your moment. >> I just I I understand that >> we have to have some accountability for
the RCTV board. That That's all I'm trying to do. If there's no accountability for the board, there's no incentive for the board. >> But can't there be accountability without it being a a material breach? >> Okay. So, I get to get hired by somebody
and not do my job and keep my job. I mean, where's the accountability? The >> accountability is that we're we're not going to not be in contact with them. You know, before it was kind of a big huge communication issue where there wasn't a lot of communication between the town and RCT.
>> So, I'm trying to avoid that by putting >> So, now I think it's set up in here that we have plenty of opportunities to communicate with them so that we could, you know, check in with them. I think that's the more way of holding them accountable for the fundraising as opposed to just having it I I think
they'll be more accountable for it if it's part of the discussions and the communication rather than it being I just I think it's implied almost. >> So would you be more comfortable instead of for fundraising a number a goal reaches goal?
>> Four. I'm fine with the four. I just I think we're misunderstanding. doesn't want she doesn't want the breach aspect, >> right? >> For me, in this scenario, I would wave the breach aspect knowing that they have to fund raise or five
years from now, we're going to be having a different discussion on this in general. It's at their own peril. I understand that they don't know that. >> We don't know, but the accountability is implied. Do you know what I mean? >> I'm going to go to I'm going to go to this party and if I don't go, what's the
ramification? I didn't go to the party. There's no repercussions for me. The problem is Karen, the contract is the contract. Before we all we heard ad nauseium um not from them is it's not in the contract. We don't have to do it.
It's not in the contract. They didn't have to cover the graduation. They didn't have to cover the election. >> Okay. >> It's not in the contract, >> but it is in the contract now. >> Well, what I just mentioned it is. Um so, but what is the ramification for it being in the contract? and then not
following through with it though. >> Melissa, >> can I offer a suggestion? >> Okay. >> What if we take four out? They make fundraising a material breach but not a required number.
>> Then they could fund raise a dollar and satisfy. >> Well, in in reality, they can fund raise $4 from four different fundraisers. The number doesn't really matter. The number correct the number doesn't matter. It's the effort behind it and it's it's a
behavior that will change now that it's >> but we have the behavior has to be accountable. >> Well, this does make it accountable because if we it's staying in >> if we get rid of as a breach. >> No, no, no. I'm saying keep it as a material breach. Take four out. Keep
fundraising in just like we had it originally, but keep it and keep it as a material breach. If fundraising is not done, that's a material breach. But we're taking out the number four. We're not requiring them to do four fundraisers. We're just saying
fundraising is a requirement. >> I'm okay with that. >> I'm okay with that. >> I think it's See, >> and I think your board's fine with that. >> Everybody's on board. >> Okay. >> So, I think the only other thing
>> they not on board. Yeah. All we saw was nodding. Is it my shirt? I think it's my turn. >> No, we're talking right now. We like to hear from you now. If you have an opinion on this, >> if you don't like what we just said, then please speak up >> because you have to you have to sign this contract after the fact. Doesn't
matter what we put in here now. We can 5O this whole thing. And if you don't like it, then you don't like it. So, >> as long as I have more than one opportunity to speak, >> you just um Kathy Krook, 137 Pleasant
Street, current president of the RCTV board of directors. Oh, should I? >> As long as it's green. >> It's green. It's green. Sorry. Um, we So
I have a problem with fundraising uh with the number being in the um being in the contract. So I understand that you just kind of got rid of that. So thank you. However, because well, let
me just say in part of that is if we had first of all the fundra the fundraisers Chris that you just mentioned, you know, Mandarin and you know, Chipotle and all stuff like that, that is in no way ever
going to fulfill the um deficit >> correct >> that Peg is heading towards. So, I could do all those fundraisers and that's all well and good, but it doesn't it's
the intent isn't there. Um, so, so anyway, with the number and even if it was quarterly, what if Stonum does this ginormous or at least they used to ginormous um,
uh, >> teleathon >> and they that was their major fundraiser, but it took them all year to kind of do. So, I'm not saying that's what we're going to do. We have no idea. But >> you said it.
No, no, no. But what if we get an idea that requires more than >> can legitimately be done? I'm just This is where I was before you got to taking the number out. I just wanted you to
understand where some of my um thought process has been going. I do have a problem though with it being a material breach because my understanding of material breaches are
big deals and like you know misspent funds. We'll just go with misspent funds. And to me fundraising it, as you've all said, it only benefits
us. and to say, "Well, you didn't do it, so you know, you're you're in a breach and you owe us all this money back with all the new material breach language." Um, I I just have a problem with it
being held to the sick. >> I don't standard. >> Yeah, that's exactly what I was going to be say. the same standard as that because we understand the funding's going down. We you do have
fundraising as part of the contract period. We are and you talked we you talked about kind of increasing communication. Um we we have quarterly meetings. We
have quarterly reports to do. We have to quarterly report on what the fund you know what what we've done for fundraising, what we've raised for fundraising. Um we have um we've we're starting in
the new year once the contract signed monthly meetings with the town manager. you know, we're we're doing all that that I I really believe with all that that is in the contract. If fundraising
is just part of the quarterly agenda, no one's going to be surprised. And so I that's why I feel really strongly about it not being a material breach because it's already in the
contract as well as in several places as well as reporting. So that's all I have to say about that one. >> Thank you. >> In that aspect, it's like I said, this isn't the hill that I'm willing to die
on. they know uh uh which direction things are headed. It's clear uh that they are going to do anything in their power to prevent that from happening. Um so like I said, I'm I'm fine with striking whatever in here
that happened. My hill to die on is the covering of the events being required. Um and I mean that's that for me. So we can strike this. We can do whatever anybody feels like. It seems as if that we should remove it
out of there to give because Kathy made a case that, you know, they're going to be doing XYZ now going forward. Um, and yes, the fundraising is a couple thousand dollars of what I just mentioned, which is you need a couple hundred,000, not a couple thousand. Um,
so I guess I'm fine with removing it >> as a material brief. as a material in keeping fundraising in general in there. >> Yes, >> sir. No,
>> there's no accountability for the board. None. >> Mr. Speaker, sorry. >> There's no accountability for the board. Kathy, I appreciate what you just said and you may have good intentions, but the reason this has been so contentious
and and what we said six months ago finally actually happened and I'm happy about that, but there's still no accountability. How do I how many how do I feel comfortable that the board is going to
be energized, going to be proactive if you're not even willing to commit to fundraisers as a breach because then there's no accountability. >> But it's already in the contract about
having to report quarterly >> that that has nothing to do with fundraising. >> Yeah. Yes. the that we have to report >> what we've done for and how much we've raised quarterly. We have to report on it. Why?
>> That's a good thing. That's a good thing. >> Right. So why >> and that was not in there before, Kathy? >> No. >> No. >> Okay. >> No. So >> our report the what's in there for reporting now was not not in anything
because we took to heart stuff that had been said and needing more transparency and communication. So you know all summer we're working what makes sense what what reports do we want
to include? What reports do we not want to include? We've had all that conversation. Fundraising is still listed as part of the reporting mechanism quarterly. So if that if we're reporting it
then it has to happen to report it though, right? >> Well, yeah, but I I'm sorry. any one of us if you know if I have to have a report I'm gonna at least have two or three emails that I'm trying to set something up. >> So in the past two years how many
fundraisers have you done? >> Carlo can we just not can we just go forward instead of go backwards? >> I'm trying to go forward. I'm trying to make >> I understand I understand in the past two years what hasn't happened. We're trying to go forward to say it's going
to be different. I think the way to fix this, Carlo, to hold them accountable is to have them covering events. Now, that that is a sign not a significant I think it's a bigger change. They may not agree to that and and that's on
them, but I think it's holding them accountable is is having them covering these events now going forward. Not the fundraising scenario, the hill to die thing. like I I would rather have events covered than them dealing with uh
you know four fundraising things. I think that is the bigger way to hold them accountable. They're going to still be able to do fundraising in the background regardless of of what we do. I think the bigger way to hold them accountable to show that instead of just five events and a fantastic teacher at
the high school, it's I mean five meetings and a fantastic teacher at the high school. is uh the core meetings being covered and now core events being covered here in town. That is the way that we hold them accountable that they have to cover these things going
forward. Can you just imagine if so enlisted in there is that the RCTV graduation >> is an event that they may or may not cover. Can you imagine the upper decided to skip the graduation? >> I understand that. >> Like that's the way to hold them accountable.
So I I I guess a question for the board members that are here to Chris's point what he just said. Do you all in the room agree with that? >> What Chris has added? >> Who's talking? >> Oh, I'm sorry. >> So given Chris's point that he's kind of
countering me that covering the events and adding the two annual events and helping with the school high school sports parents. Are you guys all all okay with that? or you're gonna have to think about it and get back to us or get
back to the attorneys because we're running out of time. >> I know we're running out of time. Um >> the one the one of you all of you that are here, I'm not expecting all the vote tonight, >> but are you okay with the stuff that we added, let's forget about the fundraising right now, all the things
Chris mentioned to hold RCTV to do a little bit more. Not a lot more, to do a little bit more. >> Yes. Bob Beckman, Sunset Rock. Uh, so in principle, yes. Uh, Chris, you mentioned
a couple areas that have me concerned. Um, so let me just touch upon one little thing. Carlo, you mentioned the that we haven't done the Christmas tree lighting for X years, but we've done the manora lighting each time. Every time that we've had a request by the organizer of
the event, we've done it. So the difference is that the Christmas tree lighting organizer has never contacted or requested it. The minor lighting has always uh contacted us over three months before. So we could very well easily schedule it. So just kind of in a point
of >> that you're aware of. >> I mean I I can confirm. >> Okay. >> I'm the I'm the one who gets contacted so I can confirm. I guess I don't know if I would have put it that way, Bob, because to say it that way, you're you're it does you're you're
you're putting it on the chamber as them being the issue instead of being proactive in offering to cover the event yourself. You've got to be proactive. This is that's the direction I see. >> I I I'm defending why that wasn't done in the past. >> I would go with Tyler was speaking and
it really being like nine time since 2016, not years. I'd go with that. But in X years, we've never been contacted to do it. So, it's um the So, in principle, yes, we're willing and that
couple items that had me concerned was the uh you were saying required to uh if we aren't able to do it to notify within 72 hours before. Mhm. >> In theory, that sounds okay, except we're a very, very lean staff,
especially right now. If we align someone for it and they get sick the day before, we might not have a way to do that. All right. So, 72 hours for a staff of three people is really tough right now.
>> I Well, I agree. And that's why I put the 90 days in there because I I put the 90 days in there so that you have 90 days from whenever the contracts signed or the grace a grace period. So I put a grace period in there because I understand things are in flux now and
you know um you need that runway to be able to go forward. But any executive director that you are interviewing and hiring, you have to let them know I need these events covered and if you do not have a staff member to cover them, you're covering them. put it in their
contract. Do whatever you can to make that happen. I I I don't want to go to Beverly at 10 o'clock when servos go down. Guess what? I'm going. That's the way it goes. >> So, my request is please be flexible on that 72. >> Oh, absolutely. Like, if somebody gets sick, I'm I'm only putting 72 because
you might know um like a month in advance that you're covering something and then you're good. You're not giving You don't have to give notice that you're not going to do it. I understand if someone gets sick as long as it's communicated. None of us are going to be the bad guy. You know what I mean? Like I hear you on record letting you know
that as long as Matt >> is touch base with the 72-hour thing. I I mean I understand you're saying they could be sick that day. >> You just got to you you just have to inform the town manager and if it happens seven times then you you know >> so the instead of 72 I guess I'm
requesting 24. >> Okay. And then I'm fine with that if you're willing. >> Yes. And then the uh other issue that had us concerned is and you said if we miss more than one item in the contract that's a material
breach. >> I I think that so I rack this in my brain going back and forth of what I would do in this scenario. I I would have to hold RCD to a high standard obviously to be able to do this. But at the same time,
how am how are we going to to prevent it from just oh, we going to do it six times and then you have like three events and that's the end of it. Like there has to be a a way for that to be remedied and maybe you have something that's better than that. I'm open to it.
>> I I don't have a solution for that right now. I I'm just looking at saying, wow, one time is so everybody gets one. It's one you get like >> baseball three. Baseball you get three. Um so that that one has me concerned. Uh
so uh and regarding the uh the communication we've also uh our interimm executive director has now scheduled a monthly meeting for the next four months. I think it is three months. >> Uh proactive. >> That's what I'm talking about. and we're doing that and that's helping the
communication and we're going to be going through all this. >> Hopefully, we're going to be moving forward all in a good light. >> Uh but a comment was made about the contract as the contract and putting strike one and you're out is
>> Are you good with contract? >> Are you good with the three? >> Three. >> Three. >> Three. What? >> Sorry, I didn't. >> Three. Uh we don't want to do three. >> Three events in one year. They're going to skip and they get to ski. >> Carlo, it's not >> We're not skipping. It's We have a
problem. >> I said I said it wrong. I apologize. >> Please. >> I said it wrong. I I I didn't mean skipping. Sorry. >> So, I apologize. So, not skipping. >> Three. >> How about we go to two then? >> No. >> Melissa, did you have something
different? Like I there has to be like I said, if you I know you're not going to skip graduation. We understand that. we've always covered it that this isn't a a thing to but hypothetically if you did you the RCTV knows you're going to have a billion parents out for you and
I'm just trying to be like listen it when it's in that contract like this is the best that we could do to to do that I I know you're going to cover the graduation I I have complete faith in that but like we need a number in there
I I sorry >> um I'd like to defer to because I actually think um with we may not need a number but I'd like to confirm that with under our material breach section 18 isn't there an area that would already
cover this if multiple meeting or events were missed that that would be considered a material breach. I don't think we have a specific number, but if this was an occurrence of something that was happening over and over, I think we already are covered under material breach.
>> I think it would be covered under 18A subp part two in the definition of material breach, which is failure to achieve or pursue the stated object objectives of the grant, including programming standards. And I would consider these to be programming standards. So I do think that if
there's, you know, repetitive non- coverage of these events, it would fall under the definition of material breach as outlined in section 18. >> And so that makes sense, right? So it's not a number. And so that allows it to
hey if we have a legitimate reason that the board will be understanding of it as opposed to in a contract with a a number again I heard it here tonight the contract is the contract right so this allows it for the communication valleys
to happen and occur right so our intention is to film them all >> correct well before it was maybe now it's shall. So before it was we've done historically this that the other thing. Now it's we shall actually cover.
>> Yeah. The the intention before was also anytime requested we shall. >> And we just weren't requested. So and being a lean staff we didn't necessarily >> and like I said it's you can work this into a future thing and handle things on
your end on on other ways to do it. you say you go to work this day to rob and you get Friday off, you do like you guys can work with stuff behind the scenes to make sure it's covered. But I think this is where we are able to hold, you know, RCTV to a higher standard to to
increase programming because these events should be covered. Uh a good portion of them were. But I think that having it in the contract now that they shall be is the direction that I would like to see. Especially with it being like you said 36 40 months whatever this
ends up being like you have to understand that that where we were 6 months ago to now discussing uh three and a half years nobody thought that was happening and now we're at that point and I think that we need a level give and take. So I think you're
understanding that in every of my explanation of what how I want this to be like. So do you believe that we're covered by the the language that's in here of what I'm trying to do by just having stuff covered? >> Yes, I do. I I I think I'm playing
around with the wording right now. Um but I do think this would cover it. So I would say that RCTV shall cover the events and then they'll be listed as you've articulated Chris um with a minor tweak. I think we should say Memorial Day celebration and Veterans Day
celebration instead of just Memorial Day and Veterans Day. I don't I don't really know what that means. Um, and then, uh, to the extent that these events aren't covered in a way that's repetitive, that would constitute a material breach and
you could seek you the remedies outlined in section 18. >> Can I ask? >> Yeah. >> So, Eva, I'm just Isn't that open to interpretation? What multiple means? >> Yeah. I mean, there's going to have to be some level of interpretation. I mean,
if if you miss one event, is that a material breach? Probably not. But if you're missing more than than one every single year, I think an argument could be made that you're not meeting the performance um goals of the grant agreement.
>> So, I think that was was Chris was Chris's intention. Um >> I mean, if Chris wants to put a hard and fast number in there, we can negotiate that with RCTV. Um >> I'm fine with the multiple language because when I hear multiple I think two to three and like
>> I'm I'm understanding that you know in the scenario we have you know Angela's husband is is doing the meeting right now >> like that is what I'm talking about of of going the extra mile like you know thank you to him for doing it um because
Rob's doing the school committee so you're you're already doing things that you know it seems as if they should be obvious, but you're going in the right direction. So, I think having the understanding that you're going to be
reporting that if something happens and it has to be reasonable. The same person can't be sick six times. You know what I mean? I know it's getting to the end of the year, employees of mine are, you know, sick on Fridays or Mondays. How convenient is that? It's just the way it goes. But not for these events.
Otherwise, you're going to cover it yourself. But I think we have a general understanding. And if if three and a half years, four years from now, you know what I mean, that this was taken advantage of, you know, it's going to be a different story then. As long as you
are on the path, right pathway and you believe you're going to be able to fulfill this now, then I think having it in with the language still saying multiple is fine because I would interpret that as to three or more um not one. So that kind of satisfies Bob
and me in that aspect. So, the only other um and this is just I just to kind of speed along the process. My concern is that RCTV's council may say, "Well, what if the Junth celebration is being held someplace and
we are denied access?" Um or what if it's being held somewhere and it's not technically feasible for whatever reason for us to to record it? >> That's notable. That's reasonable. like if if Junth was held in Montana, they're
not going to Montana and covering it. Maybe they can, you know, live streamed the feed from Montana's person, but like this has to be a a general understanding. And I understand it's wishy-washy because the contract is the contract and we're kind of getting
away from that. But as long as there's the understanding that we're going to shall before it wasn't using that language, it was May and you had 18 things of how great things have been. I think that I'm going to be sufficient with any kind of language that conveys
that with any lawyer. >> Okay. So I'm just saying can you the board would be comfortable if it's you know said you shall cover the following events where the event organizer pro provides reasonable access and recording or live of such event is technically
feasible like some like a caveat in there. I imagine that's what their council would come back to us with. >> People in the room are saying everywhere >> and Chris I agree with you and I think by taking the number out that allows us to have that flexibility of the communication of gee but we couldn't do
that because of blank right so that allows the opportunity to have >> open dialogue about it. I just I'll use the tree lighting scenario that you know nobody asked kind of thing. I I want that to go away. There's no more asking it's we are doing >> that for these events. That's the kind
of >> my my sovere had made a comment about the providers. So which we some of you saw me really nodding my head because that gives me now a contact person. So as of right now with treelighting I don't have I don't know who to reach out
to who to talk to. So if somebody simply reaches out to me and says from whatever organization is putting on tree lighting again I don't even I think it's the chamber um that now gives me a contact person for me to say so what time are you doing the lights what you know
because again with staffing it may be if the entire event is four hours long I can't necessarily cover four hours but there are important parts of the event for >> you know for example with Junth Junth is an all day event so when they send me that schedule, it's easy for me to then
look at that schedule and be like, "Oh, there's speeches happening at this time." Like, "These are really the core events." And then it gives me that contact person to talk to and say, "So, this is what I'm thinking of sending staff for is to cover from 1 to three. You have speeches happening." And then they said, "This is that's fantastic. I
love that idea. That's a great plan." So, that's my my reasoning when if people aren't coming at us, then I don't necessarily have somebody else to have this conversation with and to clean those pieces up. I think what we can do as um with our liaison at the beginning
of the year since we know it's going to be seven or eight events kind of thing. Do we have the contact information for all of these people? Yes, now we do. We are adding it to our schedule for the whole year. We're going to work it out. We're good with that. Um, so it requires
some interaction from town hall or from our leison on >> absolutely as long as we have this, you know, back and forth kind of open communication. >> Just let Matt know, Jane know, organizers, the public
just continue down that path and we're not going to have a problem. Everybody understands people get sick, cover other meetings. >> Like none of that or you're not going to be faulted for that. It's just the packing it in. That's where you involve and I don't get that sense.
>> Yeah. I So from me, my perspective as someone who has done the scheduling and you know working with the organizers of these events, it's simply to have that contact person to then be able to say, "Okay, so this is a 5-hour long event. Realistically, I can get somebody there for two. What are your most important
two hours of that event?" And things of that nature. And yeah, historically, tree lighting has been the Sunday of Thanksgiving. What happens that one year when something happens and they bump it a week early, they bump it a week late and then I had staff ready to go for that Sunday of Thanksgiving and then it
happened to me the next week and you know >> I think it's good to touch base like I said at the beginning of the year see what you can schedule out from the people that you know and obviously things may or may not change um as long as it is communicated >> then nobody up here is going to have an issue.
>> Okay, >> that's you know my opinion. So, >> are you good with that, Carlo? The changing the language where now the So, not putting the number having it. Is
everybody else good with that? I don't think there's anything else, is there? So, just work on cleaning up the events, right? We got that board of library trustees remote. >> Yep. >> Contract length. We already squared away. that's remaining the way that they
wanted it to. >> We took four out of fun. >> We took out the four of fundraising, but they're still going to actively fundraust fundraising as a material breach. >> Yeah, fundraising as a material breach is >> that was out. And then the changes that
we had up there for um this is exhibit A. Um section C1 which is what we just discussed adding manure and tree lighting and then also making it 24
hours not 72 hours. >> Yes. Not the other thing. >> Every was working on the wording also for the candidate forums. how we say one host but that includes >> could potentially
>> is it possible I I don't know Jackie is it possible for me to share my screen >> yeah you should be able to >> let me absolutely >> awesome >> um is it too small
>> it's too small >> sorry is that better people see that >> what are we looking accurate. >> So, this is the provision we were just working on around RCTV. I just want to make sure if you guys can give it a
quick read that you think it accurately covers what we've discussed. I think that's fine. Yeah, that's good. >> And um is local elections clear to everyone in that room what that means to me?
>> That's April or a special election? Is >> local elections? >> Yeah, local. Anything >> is does RCTB just like talk about the results? Is there like a >> No, they have Yeah, they they post the they have like the thing that starts at like uh 8:05 or something with
>> Okay. Okay. I just I've never seen it. Um so I just want to make sure it's clear to everyone in the room that >> Yeah. I think if they want to expand upon that and go back to their roots of interviewing people and doing all that from the fieldhouse, be my guest. Um
yeah, but I think at minimum, you know, >> covering the elections would be but yeah, I would assume it's any April or if it gets moved to March or a special election. >> Okay, great. Thank you. >> So, I guess the way that we can vote on
this is we can vote on the changes that we just made and then Matt can get the signature stamp as long as the RCTV board in their lawyer agrees to things. I think I signed the agreement to the >> So, we're authorizing you. >> Yeah, exactly. So, yeah. So, the
signature stamp won't won't be needed, but yeah, RCTV's attorney would have to approve as well. Hopefully, he does. So, >> Carla, thanks. Uh, yeah. So, again, a lot of work done by all, but I I guess I would like an update
from six months to present. what what what happened in six months ago when people were so adamant and now it's different. So I'd like someone to walk us through that because six months
ago I was never against RCTV ever for one minute. I was against leadership and leadership has changed but I'd like to know what happened from six months ago to today. >> Can we take that off? I'd rather not be
on topic. We we can't >> we we can talk separately as much as we can are allowed to but I definitely don't want it to be a >> Okay. >> Thank you.
>> Anybody else have anything else? Public comment. Kathy, did you have something or you're good now? >> Well, I'm >> Well, get on the talk. You got two minutes. Name and address. >> Two minutes. >> All right. No, Kathy. Nancy, two minutes
have an address. >> Nancy, Dr. Pill Street, and an RCTV member. Um, listening to your discussion about the additional filming you would like. Um, is there a reason why uh you don't reach out to the people who are hosting, whether it's the Norah
lighting, the tree lighting, the chamber, and they get their volunteers. Um, I will tell you, um, there wouldn't be any filming of girls basketball had there not been volunteers. There wouldn't be filming for a number of different activities,
uh, Papa Wither, if there weren't volunteers. So, this is a skeleton crew. So, if you have contacts with the chambers or the people who do the mono lighting, they should be recruited to do the filming. Thank you. >> Thank you, Nancy. I I guess we did clear
we did clear up the scenario like you mentioned the girls basketball. I'd love to see that covered. RCTV it is in the grant agreement um now that they're going to offer the services to parent volunteers to be able to cover this to and then
training and and whatever else because yeah, I'd love to see every event covered. There's tons of parent volunteers. They need to know that there is a um a way for this to be covered now and we're going to have like you know a one-day training come to our office. We're not coming to you like and we'll
show you how to work whatever and we'll walk you through it and it is on them but they do have to obviously follow you know the the breach kind of scenarios. They got to know like you got to stop the thing right at the end like those kind of things. So um there's an
adjustment period obviously um but they are now going to be offering that to to volunteers and I think we hashed out the you know reaching out through lison to make sure we get at least these eight or nine um connections uh done at the
beginning of the year. Anybody else in the room? Anybody online? Jackie, >> no one online. All right. Um, >> Kathy. Yes. >> Well, it's only Where do we go from
here? We're running out of the 31st is coming. >> We're going to vote. >> Yes. So, we're going to we're going to vote now from that to authorize what the changes that we have. Oh, >> okay. >> In theory agreed to. And as long as your lawyer is good, then you're going to sign your end and we're done.
So, um, no, I I just want to thank you all for, you know, getting to where we are today. I feel more confident than ever that things are going to be covered and the communication just has to stay
there. It cannot stop. Overwhelm everybody or their feet is just full of stuff that RCTV is doing and you will never have an issue. I know what Burbank's doing all the time. I know what the food pantry is doing all the time. Um, I feel confident I'll know what RCTV
is doing all the time beyond recording this event right now. Um, but thank you, Angela. I wish you the best. Um, and we'll see how it goes. Hopefully, we see you in four years. Anybody else before we vote?
>> All right, Karen, do I have a motion? Move to approve grants agreement with writing community television RCTV beginning on 1126 and expiring on 6:30 2029. >> Second. >> Seconded by Melissa. Any discussion?
Seeing none. All those in favor? 5. >> Congratulations. Thank you all for whatever you do. >> Sorry. Uh can we have a friendly amendment to authorize Matt to sign that agreement?
Karen, don't you say so move? >> Yes. Do we have to vote on that now? Every second. >> Yes. Okay. Uh, any discussion? >> We need a second. Second by second. >> Yes. All those in favor.
>> Congratulations again. >> Thank you. >> I don't even know where we are. >> Burbank. Are you sure? >> Burbank. Uh, we'll just take one minute while Melissa's >> on my right.
>> Um, it's great. They didn't catch I'm not buying a Volvo. They have terrible repair. But I was like, "Okay, we'll try the electric on sale." And we were um somebody darted out in front of us. The pavement was wet and we were going like 30 in Burlington. And I was
like, "Oh, okay. We're hitting. It's just a question of how hard it's going to be." And like it stopped. and it just went boom and there was no I was like I can't believe that woman survived. She she darted out in front of us. So I was like the brakes weren't on this thing.
We didn't have any time and we were already going at like 30 miles whatever you can do in a double line road in Burlington. >> You know Peter has an electric motorcycle >> really fast. >> Yeah. >> And um so we charge that.
>> Nice. Nice. >> Does he have a charger then already? I love char. motorcycle. >> There you go. >> Yeah, it's just an adapt. If it's level two, it's just stay adaptable. Yeah. Yeah. >> Cool. >> And I'm like, yeah, >> go to Sweden and get it. That's the
mistake I made was during co >> I think but the move is manag We're back. >> All righty, everybody. We are back. Um, we're unmuted, Matt. Yes,
>> we're green again. Um, so, uh, we have been asked to take the ACE committee out of order. So, could somebody make that motion? >> So, moved. Second. >> Seconded by Melissa. All those in favor?
5 Z. Um David, if you have something, otherwise we're all good. >> Thank you. I appreciate that. And I'll be super quick. Uh David Monahan, Maple Ridge Road, the board's designate to the ad hoc commemoration establishment committee. I came before you on December
2nd, told you about our progress. All of our members appreciated the good feedback we had from the board at that time. And um as I said then we would really appreciate an extension of our sunset. I believe it's due um this in January next month. and we would love to
be able to um do the activities that I spoke to you about at the library, get a program for an award set up, um think about some artwork in town, and um you know, we would appreciate the the time to wrap up our work and um set things up
so that this program will live on even when this committee does sunset. So, um I appreciate your um considering our respectful requests. Thank you, David. Board members, any questions?
>> All good. Thank you, David. I see no reason to not do this. So, we have December 31st, 2026, and that is um fine with you. That's what we have for the day. >> Yeah, that that would be great and much appreciated.
>> Can we get January of 27 just so that we can get through this the next MLK day? That wraps it up for us. Nice and neat. >> Good point. >> Good point. >> What What date in January 31st is >> Yeah. >> Thank you for pointing that out, Taylor.
>> Everyone good with that? >> All right. Karen, I have a motion with that change. >> Move that the board extend the ad hoc commemoration establishment committee sunset date to January 31st, 2026. >> Second 27 27 >> 27.
>> Second. Seconded by Melissa. Any discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor? My chair. Thank you. >> Thank you so much. >> Best of luck coming in. >> I appreciate it. And thanks for my son, George, because now I can get home and read him before he goes to sleep.
>> Good night. >> Bye. Thank you. >> All right. So, back to the regular agenda. um discuss Burbank Kisa Arena memor
memorandum of understanding uh page 50 in the packet and um Nancy has to leave so I'm offering public comment to her first before we >> I two minutes address >> Nancy doctor uh P Street uh precinct one
meeting member um in your package tonight in this um contract there is a clause about leasing for parking and I believe that should be omitted and that should not be part of this contract. I can't uh tell you how many open forums
you had on recal um I think it was double digits of the three I went to and the meetings uh town meeting uh updates and presentations never once was it shared with taxpayers that not only would they be on the hook for the debt
but that we would be paying Burbank annually in for what forever um for retail. This contract specifically um implies, at least to me, that if you do not sign this, it's holding up recal.
And it's kind of an interesting pun holding it up because that's actually how I feel this is that somehow or other. Um this came out of nowhere. It's never been discussed. As a taxpayer, it's probably one of two options. Either
it's incompetency or it's corruption. I don't know which. But I just spent this meeting listening to you talk about communication, transparency. The last meeting of town meeting last month was all about transparency when it comes to
taxpayer money. This is on top now of the $300,000 for the fieldhouse, the $200,000 for the police department funds that have literally um come into question. Tax fund. you're going to come
to us in April town meeting calling, you know, for an override, how dire things are, and yet you're giving taxpayer money to Burbank without any transparency to the taxpayers who voted for this project. This should not be in
this contract. I don't know. Um, if the Burbank uh board of directors want to be held accountable for holding up recal, fine. Let them let them take the heat for this. But this should not be in this contract. And if this was something that
was discussed, I want to know who is in the room and why it was not presented to the taxpayers or town meeting in the numerous open forums you have had. So this this is a comment I'm making. hopefully you'll take into consideration as you
discuss this contract because it's gonna you it's going to have a bearing next year. So if you vote for this intact, you do so at your own peril. >> Thank you, Nancy. All right. So page 50
of the packet is where this starts. Um, Matt, did you want to go over the >> Um, I I'll just say so this is still, you know, being negotiated. Ever is still on the call. A lot of the the changes I haven't seen until recently
because Every is working with the Burbank attorney um to to button those up. So, I mean, I I think to put it on the agenda and to get feedback from the board on what what's there and what's seen uh is is fine, but it's still we have a ways to go on it, you know, so
it's not like a finished product. Um, but I mean, Chris suggested that it go on the agenda just to, you know, begin discussions and have a preview um of what's what it is and and there it is. It's gone back and forth several times. Um, you know, we everybody knows the
concept. We wanted some parking down there. Um, it's gotten somewhat complicated here and there, but we've worked things out. Um, I don't know if I if you want to say anything about your discussions with the lawyer first because I think you have the freshest information, but
>> I don't really have a a lot Oh, hearing myself twice. Um, I don't really have a lot to add. I think like Matt said, this is still an active negotiation. One of the biggest disconnects that there seems to be uh is is primarily around the term
uh by which Burbank may use the RCTV, I'm sorry, the recal parking lot. Um we need to make sure that that agreement is terminable at will. And so we've had a few conversations with Burbank about
that, but I'd say that's sort of the most active area of negotiation at this time. >> Anybody have any questions on that? >> Well, I have questions. Do you want to go first? >> Okay. Um,
I I have a a big picture question. I'm trying to understand. And we have the Burbank Ice Arena agreement. And I'm looking at the version that was signed in 2013, which we made no changes to. So I don't have the most current one, but
that's what I'm looking at. And um so I'm comparing that. So like for instance, in this so I'm looking at section three. I'm just making the same chart. It is the it is the rent section. So this document doesn't show clearly in red all the changes that have been made.
So that's going to be a little confusing as people look at this, especially >> also, can we make sure that all the select board members have the most current copy of the ICE Arena agreement? >> Um, we could just do that afterwards. Um,
>> so um yeah, so there's a substantial All right. So there's one one question was there's two documents before us tonight and I was trying to understand that. One's titled master license and the other one's titled addendum something. Can can you explain why why we have to
do it that way? >> The the the master license agreement used to be called the memorandum of understanding. Is that correct? But the attorney for Burbank wanted to make that name change. So we did that. Um so so
there are two documents they cover specifically different areas and there may be some different jurisdiction in terms of who signs what. Um, the the legal reason for having it in two documents is Could you explain that?
>> Right. So, we currently have a lease agreement with them and part of the negotiations here is that we are seeking permission to utilize some of the Burbank property for parking associated with recal. In order to do that, we
needed to amend the lease agreement to give us that express right because the lease agreement right now does not give us access to that property. So that triggers a requirement to amend the lease. With that came a requirement to
amend the insurance provisions as well um because of our additional level of access. the vote in 2013 that authorized uh the select board to execute a lease
agreement for the Burbank site. Uh the town meeting vote expressly articulated how the funds um should be handled specifically the rent allocation kind of how that is all calculated and also said that the funds shall come to the town.
Um and so amendments that deal with um the way funds are managed needs to go in the actual lease document. Now the now called the master license agreement that is an agreement that can be a little bit more flexible than the lease
agreement. Matt has authorization if the select board delegate, which we believe they have, um to give temporary access to the recal property. And so those types of uh terms and
conditions can go into theou license agreement versus needing to live in the more uh rigid lease agreement. So, that's the very lawyerly way of kind of describing why we have two documents before you tonight.
>> Okay. Um, and this is going to get a little tricky because um section three in the um packet is is >> which page? >> Uh I don't know what page is. Page 50. Page 50.
>> Um I have it open as PDF. So, it's page 50. So that section three um >> the third the third part is the most important in the original document. It says third simply income then rema remaining shall
be paid to the town as rent amounts due to the town shall be paid annually on or before March 15th. This revision gets rid of like the most basic comp part of this that we are in a lease agreement and and they need to pay us rent and and
puts in all this other stuff that you know I think we should discuss and have conversations about. But what I'm not seeing is the plain English part that says in the original lease income then remaining after first and second shall be paid to the town as
rent. Hold on. We're putting it up. >> All right. I think that would be helpful. >> Okay. >> I see what you're saying, Karen. We can definitely clarify that. I think that you know it is covered by the rent to be paid by the tenant shall be calculated but we can tweak that and and make it
clearer um that the remaining funds remit to the town of which a percentage of those shall go into the unified sports stabilization fund subject to town meeting approval
>> and so we can definitely we can >> I would I'd put back the basic clear English language This is a this is a lease agreement and rent is expected to be paid. Um >> yeah, we can make that clearer. I think it would go into the third section and
it would also clarify that to the extent there's a remainder it shall remit to the town and then a percentage of those those funds will directly go into the stabilization account subject to town meeting approval >> because really all of that last
paragraph should have been read. I'm not sure why. You know, >> I agree with you because I didn't even know what you were talking about. >> Oh, I think I think what happened >> and above that too, number two is a change too, but it's not red. So, we just um >> Yeah, it definitely h like I had no idea what Taran was even talking.
>> Yeah. So, what we can do So, the issue is that the way in which Burbank's Yes, we can provide that to this board. Yes, there's just different documents that have been floating around. Yes, we can provide all of that. >> Okay. So then for board members, the
other change um because I'm looking at the original lease is that the contingency reserve used to be $300,000 >> and can ask what page you're on or what section. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So that so it's
second. Yes. Sorry. So there's no change to the first. I don't think >> I just say that. I don't think there's any change to first. Gross income received by the tenant from its rink operations shall be first used to pay operating costs and expenses for the rink on the premises. Okay, then second.
Okay, so then there's a change here. Um not >> 300 to 500. >> Yeah, that's it. That's pretty much it. I'm just making sure. >> Yeah, >> it says why because of CPI and cost. >> So the CPI is in the original thing.
So, I did have conversations as a liaison with the um our designate because I don't think the board was understanding that that was the starting price and that they had the ability to
use that CPI-U calculation cuz I came up with a number and it was higher and I understand we saw there's a lot of old equipment there, you know, so that seemed like it was okay. So, but my my the things I'd like us to talk about is
this jump to $500,000. Um because what we don't get from them, and this is about transparency, they do not provide us with a capital plan. like it would be good for this board to understand
why $300,000 is no longer sufficient, you know, based on we saw plenty of older equipment that they need a capital plan and and you know, they could start providing us with a capital plan like okay, so that's another one of my points. So
they really need to have a capital plan and they need talk about transparency and accountability cuz what absent of anything else and I haven't seen any financial reports that were due in November yet. So I have no idea if we're getting a payment again for the second year in a row. So I don't
even know but and and we know they did a big roof and that was just under 300 >> on on the financial report since you brought that up. I did ask for those and I talked to them today. We should have them early next week. The accountant was a little delayed putting them together and they were off to the printer. So,
I'm expecting Monday or Tuesday to have those for you. >> Well, you know, I've had conversations with Sharon and she said the nature of accounting firms and getting them audited things take longer now. So, I'd be open to adjusting these dates because they never get to us by November. I
shouldn't have to chase you down and you shouldn't have to chase them down usually, but you know, so that might be option we want to do. Y >> and then but I don't think there's going to be a capital plan in those audited financial statements. It's just going to show expenses and stuff. So, we won't know
like what they're planning and and and the effect on the town and on rent that we might be receiving is that I think they may have well they've been rebuilding back towards $300,000. I don't know where they're at now. If they
are now going to rebuild till to 500 exclusively, then it could be like two or three more years than we ever see any revenue for this. Um so that's that's concerning. We need every little bit of revenue we can get. We didn't get any um
for the year. Their calendar year fiscal year ends in July like this one does. So 23 24 we didn't get any revenue. I was really hoping 20 425 we'd get some revenue, but we won't know because we haven't that payment's due in March. So, it's not due yet. They're not behind.
Those financial statements are supposed to be in our hands in November. So, we know. So, Sharon can plan because it's budgeting season. That all that all makes a lot of sense to me. All right. So, um so that that section and then where's my little Hang on. I was just
making some notes. Um all right. Um, so the Reading Ice Arena Author Authority is also a 501c just like RCTV. Um,
if we're going to talk I don't I'm still confused about why we would be why they would be telling us what to do with a unified program, but we can talk about it as a board. But what it would be great is to see Burbank resuming their
fundraising. Um, you know, since um Nelson Burbank passed, the operations of the board have changed and and and and this is they do a lot of great programming, but we also need rent and so I would like to see them do some
fundraising. Um, and that again that can be we've talked about sponsorships of advertising. There's plenty of local businesses that'd like to see themselves. It doesn't have to be complicated. Wouldn't wouldn't bother bringing up for RCTV. I'm not going to tell them how they do their job. they do whatever they want, but I'd like to see
the the fundraising component apply to all 501c's with a a a tight relationship with the town and and this is 4 and a half acres and we own the building and we own everything in the building that's attached to the building like normal
real estate. So um it's a big deal and you know so it's our job to understand that it's being operated and maintained and that's their responsibility and that's in the lease and so we had a great tour earlier this year and you know I know they take it seriously but I
also saw a lot of really old equipment and um I pulled down a form from the um um attorney general of state of Massachusetts that I forwarded to you Matt um and Sharon and that can be forwarded to you It shares um
Oh crap, what was I going to say? It looked it was interesting. Um it shares salary data, but there was other interesting things in there. It's just a a standard form that that again that is from the 2023 to 2024 data, so
it's old. Um Oh, I'd love to see the lease. Can we just change the language in this lease to or maybe even so it still says the
the board of select men like you know and I don't want to open this up to more but so can we not have um addendums that conflict with the first one in terms of language is that why we're sticking with board of selectment >> you have opinion on that
>> yeah correct I mean we could do a total change to change all Wherever it says board of selectment, just say select board. We can add that in the lease amendment if you want. We were just trying to keep it consistent without touching. >> That makes sense. Um, it's a it's the
lease didn't change when we signed it in 2023. It looks like it's typewritten. It's >> Yeah, it's goes back to 2013. It's 20 years 22 years old. Actual document. All right. Um the the All right. So, here's the only
other thing I'd like to see and and nobody's here tonight, so maybe they could come the next time. Um you know, in addition to our capital plan in terms of understanding whether, you know, they can pay their bills, what money they need to run the operations, how things are going, I've asked in the past to see
the utilization rate. um and they haven't been very forthcoming with it. But we can ask again because if they it's an easy answer like yeah we're booked up 80% of the time that's an industry norm 85% of the time show us
show us but then we know what they're dealing with like they can't sell more ICE to raise more money to fund their capital plans and and and provide rent to the town if they tell us they're booked to 85 to 90 5% whatever the metric is that I'll so we'll help it'll
help us understand that. So, it's really all I had on this stuff. Thank you. >> Okay. Anybody else? >> Cameron had some stuff. >> Oh, I just had a quick I if we could just get um this updated so we know
exactly what was changed. That would be super helpful. >> Yeah, >> we can definitely do that. I think the reason that it's not showing is that this is like a completely new document. So we can create a separate document that compares this versus the the
existing lease agreement and I can circulate that. >> Can um do we have to sign both of these documents simultaneously or can we sign the master license agreement and then keep tweaking the lease agreement?
Um, no. I mean, I think you could sign the master license agreement first. We would just want it to be subject to um amendment of the lease agreement in a way that authorizes the actions in the
master license agreement. Um, but we could definitely work through that if that's the intention and will of the board. I'm just curious because I don't I don't know if it's holding up recal or anything like that. So, I don't want to have that be an issue. If we have to get
the master license agreement signed in order to move something through, then I just want to have that option. Um, >> so my understanding is that the the requirement for recal is we need additional is or it's not so much recal
as pickle ball, right, Matt? is that we need the additional parking and so that really lives in the lease agreement amendment. Um, so we'll we need that to be executed, but Matt and Jane, please correct me if I'm wrong on that. >> That's correct. We don't have anything
to add to that. >> Okay. Um, how deep do we want to go during these discussions? spend an hour on the other one, >> but we need >> I think the the point of this is to see
what changes are currently in effect um and see if there's anything that we want to tweak or, you know, discuss. I think it has to be within the parameters of this. >> Okay. um what's currently presented
maybe you can tab off a little bit more but I would have loved to tell RCTV 85 different things that they can do how they can change salaries do all that none of that is under our purview at all >> and it never will be
>> okay so as far as this goes um I guess some of my questions why is the memorandum of I'm sorry master license agreement why is it one year at a So um master license agreements need to be terminable at will and we tend to use
one-year terms to the extent that we want to use alternative terms we can talk about a longer period. >> Okay. Um so at the same time Burbank can cancel that at any time and take away our parking
>> on the memorandum. So, >> okay, >> and this is where this still negotiations. Um, the last draft that I have circulated does not give them the authority to terminate our use of their lot for parking purposes associated with
pickle ball and listed events. >> Okay. >> Um, it's unclear to me whether that's something they're going to be amendable to. We are still waiting to hear back from their council on this. >> Okay. So, it is in the infancy, I'd say,
of the negotiation process. >> Um, a lot of Karen's comments I do agree with. Um, I think I'm I'm struggling with the um unified sports stabilization fund and what that would um commit us
to. And if they're not giving us rent payments every year, then does that mean nothing goes towards and this is just me talking out loud. So, um, does that mean nothing goes towards it? It stays the same as it is. I think so.
>> The way that I I rate it is yes, you are correct. Nothing would anything above and beyond would not go to the percentage 50% of zero is still zero. >> Right. I think to one of the points that other Karen had made is I think having a
number in there um incentivizes them to do what Karen had mentioned about doing fundraising and sponsors knowing that um I'm going to propose 50% for unified sports flat out not 25 to 50. um using
that aspect in mind that knowing that Burbank in the spirit of what they've always wanted to do um incentivizes them to be able to build up that account above and beyond because you know what like ice time and
fundraisers and sponsorships. They're going to be more inclined to do anything and everything to be able to fund unified sports at a higher rate. if it was like 5% nothing is changing. There's no reason for them to I don't want to say care because obviously they care
about um a lot of things. Um so I'm just the incentive when you have a bigger number that the the drive is to actually make contributations to that. You know what I mean? And not $10, not a thousand
bucks, 50 100,000 250 whatever they can come up with. Just pump that number. That gives more money to unified sports and more money back to the town on the other end of that. That's how I kind of see how I would be running things if I
if I was doing it that you know this is incentive before there was no incentive for anything. I would have kept all the money. >> Well, I I I completely hear your point and I you know there is validity to it. Um I think in I think the rent
as Karen has said repeatedly over the last however long you know was in lie of taxes and what is it that us as a town provide Burbank in lie of taxes so do we provide any services to them that's part of that payment or do you know what I
mean like what will we be doing with their tax money will we be putting it into the general fund anyway and then to >> it has to go yeah it has to go to the general and then it would go to free cash every year is the way it has to be treated. But so it could any purpose I think it used to be plugged into the
budget when it was more dependable >> but now we don't even plug it in. So, as far as creating, you know, what if what if the town wants to dissolve this the stabilization fund and and then how are we tied up with that as far as that
goes? And and I think that this doesn't seem to me to be a really good funding source for unified sports because if it's either feast or famine some years and so they do have an incentive, but at the same time, their costs are going up. They can only
charge so much for hockey. Do you know what I mean? So, it's a very weird balance of how this stuff is. >> Yeah. But to your point, what is what is the alternative? Where are we going to get the money to do this? Because town meeting wanted a solution. This is a semisolution to that problem. Where are we going to get the money from?
>> Um, I understand that town meeting said that. I I'm completely for unified sports, but I think that there are other ways in order to fund it that would be much more consistent than this. And it's my opinion that the schools are running it. And I'm I don't know who runs what.
I don't know what RC offers. I don't know what anybody offers. I'm still investigating all that, but I think the school doesn't seem very committed to it if they're only going to give $10,000 a year. And and if they were really behind it, they'd find the money as well. And so I think that that this program could
certainly thrive as long as it's funded consistently and through I don't know what another source could be, but I also don't want to have us tied into this. I'd much rather have Town Meeting vote to use our free cash to do it. That if we're dumping the money, if they know
we've dumped 100 grand in to free cash and it came from Burbank, I'd like Town Meeting to say we're going to take 50 grand from there and fund this and and do it that way as opposed to us creating a fund that I'm not sure how it would even work. And if if Do you know what I mean?
>> I I understand the problem. You have to you have to take this from a business aspect. Like I don't want to say what are you doing for me but like this has to be a give and take between Burbank and the town.
The the town can't just get everything from Burbank and Burbank gets zero in return. >> I don't >> like there has to be for me otherwise I'd just tell you get your own parking do something else elsewhere. I understand it's not a good look for them, but there has to be a the town is
getting something out of this and Burbank is and if they want this and it solved an overarching issue that we have, I don't see that being problematic. But I I agree that something consistent
makes more sense. Like nobody's come up with anything like recal is talking about all their programming, all the ARA money running out everywhere. town forest needs money. Uh trails needs money. All these where is the money coming from that there's there's so many
people with their hand out. This is a solution to a problem that we have and then we can deal with all the other 18 different ones that we have going on. >> But is this really a big big problem or is this a want? Like is this a need or is this a want? I think that as we sit up here as um
like I have mentioned ad nauseium at this point, we only care about ADA accessibility and these kind of things when it is convenient. When it comes down to it with the MBTA, the new Strut app, parking, all of that, we did nothing. Nobody does anything. When it's
time to put your money where your mouth is, we never do anything. And I'm always up here touting about it and nothing ever happens. Nothing. So, uh, the only catch to that is when the ARPA money came that we did, uh, the art committee
did give money to unified sports as well as other things that is, you know, running uh, running out. I'm not unified sports specifically. Um, you know, the recck committee had money and they did stuff with the YMCA. Um, but it was negligible in the grand scheme of things the amount of money that we got. So
there is a a big demand for it. Yes. I think that the amount of money that we have contributed in the past has been um uh semi-pointless. We've done nothing. Literally nothing. And if the ARPA money didn't come in, who knows what we'd be
doing. Um so I think it's time that we actually stand behind um the unified sports program and other kids that don't have the same advantage that many of us have already had. You know what I mean? I see these videos all the time from all the games that they're
playing, the basketball, going out to the Wooox game, all of that stuff. Like, anybody sees any of this stuff and it's just like, let's put it to an end. Like, it we need a a stable funding source. I agree the consistency. I agree with you.
But there are no alternatives. And if Burbank wants something to be able for us to get the parking for pickle ball and all this other scenario and it's not costing us money per se, we are still receiving
300 grand from Burbank. So we'll throw that number out and if you did it in half, 150 goes to Unified Sports, 150 goes back to the town. We're still getting money in this scenario. it might not be at the ratio that some other people might approve of because they
don't have kids um with disabilities or something else. So, they're not taken advantage of. I'm not saying you car just so we're aware. I I'm just saying some people might feel that it's it's frowned upon. But I I think that it's time to put our money where our mouth is. It's we've always just said this
stuff and nobody's ever done anything other than our money. Like, it's true. Go back to the tape. I've made this speech like four different times already that we've never done anything. It's always we don't have to. We have this exception. We can do it this way. We can do it.
>> Well, who's responsible for doing something? So, in this instance, I would think it would be placed with the school department because that's the population that they're serving. So, >> it's not only that is older adults that >> that's what I'm trying to say. So, I think the home it's wrapped in general.
>> Yeah. where it can go from kindergarten to 100 years old and there's, you know, students that graduated from high school that that are in this window where they're still on disabilities, but there's no place for them to go. So, I completely agree with the whole concept of it. I just don't think that this is
the right place for it. Um, >> because I think that we can go bigger, but we're in a point of time where you say something like that and people are going to frown upon it. >> I don't think it prevents us from going bigger. I mean, I think it's a good start, you know, because we did have the instructional motion from town meeting.
Everybody knows we're in a budget crunch and when Burbank presented this, we say, "Okay, here's some funding source for it." And it seemed fair and it and it solves our parking pro problem as well. So, that's not to say we're not going to look for other grants, other funding sources. We can go back to the school
department. So, I don't want you to think it's exclusive and then we're not going to do anything more. We do want to get more, but it's it's a good start, I think, you know, to get down that road. So, >> Jane, you had something. >> I just had a point clarification. Um,
just to make sure I read the master license agreement correctly. Um, or whichever document has the parking in it. I saw it as a bilateral agreement. They get to use the uh recal parking and we get to use Burbank parking. Did I
misunderstand that? >> No, that's true. >> Because they are just to be honest, they are getting something and and your point is well taken. It's a negotiation. So, this is something extra, >> but they're giving they're giving up existing parking in meaning that they
have to get the recal parking. Otherwise, they would just leave the grant agreement alone and just carry on. Yeah. >> No, I mean, it's a parking sharing agreement. It's >> But they only they only want that parking because we're taking the parking away from them. Otherwise they they have plenty of park. >> Are we taking parking away from Burbank?
>> Like what parking are we taking? >> No, we're taking >> we're building parking. >> Well, >> we're not on the lake. >> No, we're well it's woods right now. We're building parking, right? We did recal was designed with a big parking lot, right? So, but fair enough with pickle ball there. I get it. We have to
we can share some more. So, that's that's why we're doing this. That's my understanding. Correct me if I'm wrong. Um, yeah. The only here's a here's another question. Could um could the amendment to the lease
agreement be cleaner, the section three? Does the >> because this is all subject to town meeting anyway? >> So, can the the whole thing about you said you were going to agree to take it to town meeting for them and see if town meeting would do it. Yes. Can that go in the one-year contract that gets renewed
annually? Because things might change and the schools might get funding from the state and they might pick it up and rather than having to go back into the lease and having to deal with that, it would be much easier to deal a one-year license agreement that we're going to be talking about every year anyway. So, I'm
just it's more of a I don't know if you the same I mean >> the question is whether the the stabilization fund component of the lease agreement amendment can lifted to
the MOU or to the license agreement. >> Yeah, it would be it's going to be a one-time ask for town meeting. We're not going to do that annually. Like it's it's a little bit weird here putting in asking for town meeting in this ongoing 10-year lease that has one more renewal
on it and then but this other flexible document you're creating has the ability to be amended >> in terms of percentages Chris is talking different percentages that are here. So if it's a one-year minimal agreement and town meeting even buys into this that
this is the right way to fund this and yeah so that's why I would ask >> so the only way to create the stabilization fund is through town meeting approval so that's why it's conditioned um if town meeting decides to
dissolve the stabilization fund which is an action it can do then it it can do so this agreement wouldn't preclude it from doing that so at any moment, town meeting could change its mind in regards to the stabilization fund. Can also change the purpose of the stabilization
fund at any time with the two-thirds vote and appropriate those funds for that purpose. If there's, you know, a huge flood in the school and we need those funds for that for that purpose, you can you can do that at town meeting stabilization funds. While the intention is always to reserve for a specific
purpose, you're not locked into that provided you get the requisite vote of town meeting. >> Okay. Well, that thanks for explaining that. So, what if town meeting doesn't approve the stabilization fund? >> Then the funds go to the general fund >> and would they have So, you just brought
this up. Is it is it a one-time vote or would they be able to bring it up for vote again? >> Okay. So, the uh the fund is created at one time and then the dedication of the revenue stream is also voted and generally those are voted together at
one time. But at any time in the future, town meeting can revisit that decision and dissolve the stabilization fund uh change the purpose of the stabilization fund. That's something that is within town meetings perview. As
long as it's on the warrant can happen at any meeting, but there isn't a required annual vote to like affirm the stabilization fund. Once it's created, it's created until town meeting takes a an action to to change it. Does that make sense?
>> Yeah. Thank you very much. >> And I sorry, while we're on the stabilization fund, the only thing we should we should note is that if you are going to dedicate a revenue stream to a stabilization fund, you need to dedicate at least 25% of that revenue stream to
the stabilization fund. You can go up to 100%, but you can't go less than 25%. And so council for um council for Burbank added that 25%. But if you want to put 50% in there, you can. It's just
if town meeting ends up going 30%. There's nothing that we wouldn't be in violation of this agreement. >> Okay. >> I have one more question about stabilization funds if I may. >> Yes. >> Um I my little my limited research on grants for unified sports. Um there are
grants out there like the Special Olympics is a source of them and there's some other um sources. Can the proceeds of grants go into a stabilization fund? How does that work? So I don't know the answer to that question. That's an interesting one. I
would never put a grant in a stabilization fund for many reasons. Grants can be expended without town meeting appropriation under 4453A. So it's not funds that you would traditionally place into like a locked
box stabilization fund that requires a significant mode of town meeting. I can do that research. It's just it would be very atypical to transfer >> a separate grant account when we get granted. She handles that you know through her accounting so it wouldn't have to go through
>> that makes sense like yeah it's good. you know how have to >> and grant funds are usually they're reserved for their specific purpose. So you can't expend them but for that that purpose. >> Okay. Yeah. >> All right. Thank you. >> So Abra you had mentioned that the
Burbank attorney asked for the 25%. It was never 50% because that's what you know was made public a couple months back that it was you know 50% of the money. They read they went back on that and went to 25 or
>> No, no, no. So, I put in there, you know, up to 50% because we didn't know exactly where we were going to end. And so, then Burbank's attorney added in the 25%. To the extent you want to put a strong number or, you know, one number, we can do that. It's always going to have to be conditioned on town meeting
approval though. The select board doesn't have the ability to agree to a specific number. So you can say that you know shall create a unified sports stabilization fund and dedicate 50% of all rent uh revenues to that fund. But if town
meeting comes back and votes 35% that's what the number is. >> And if they elect not to create a stabilization fund then that's what it is. It doesn't matter what we do. >> I'm sorry you went in and out. I'm sorry. And if town meeting says we don't
want to create a stabilization fund for this purpose at this time then it also goes nowhere. Okay. >> Correct. Yes. >> That's why I wonder if like >> right the select board can add it to the warrant and present it at town meeting. Uh but it's not the select board's
decision whether or not the fund is created and whether or not proceeds you know from the rent rent rent revenue is added to that fund. >> This is helpful. Um, I guess my other question is, so I I
know uh a comment was made about transparency and communication and how things ended up the way that they are. Um, and I just want to go on the record saying that I never once spoke to IRA, communicated any of these numbers, the
500,000 change, the 25 to 50% change, absolutely none of that. I didn't speak to Matt. I had no uh hand in any of this. And hopefully that is the same for the remainder of the board because I know that uh we took a vote originally
um for various people to end up um being involved in negotiating this lease which now is turning into this whole cumbersome scenario uh where we don't have the person. >> We never did take a vote on this. We we about having a leazison to about having
a point person to manage the lease. We absolutely voted on that. >> We sure did. >> No, Karen was here. It's >> Melissa. You weren't here because I remember being Thank you. >> So, my my point of that is I'm seeing
all numbers and changes in here and people making accusations that we may or may not change something. So, I'm letting everybody know I had no hand in any of this. Literally zero. And I said I was on record saying I can just do all of this anyway. That's what I said when
the votes went 2 two two, that kind of thing. Um, so I could have done anything. Still, I believe that. Um, other people might disagree, but that's fine. But even that, I still did nothing. And I'm putting that on the record. Um, so I hope that the remaining
four of us are also in that position because nobody was delegated to make any of these changes that are in here. >> Can I just say yeah that that didn't that didn't happen. I've been working on this mostly with Ibria and Ira going back and forth with the attorneys a little bit with the board at first, but
when the attorneys got involved, you know, we sort of turned it over to them to work on this language. Like I said, it still be negotiated. I Tonight wasn't a night we even planned for a select board meeting. I wasn't planning on bringing tonight. I think it's a good idea to give a pre preview and get that
sort of feedback and and I like doing that, but I just want you there was no I didn't really talk to anybody about it besides and board members from Burbank. So that I can confirm that.
>> Um I just wanted to add um I appreciate the update because I'd like I you know it's good for all of us to understand what's going on. I know this is not even close to being final, but the only thing I did want to add to this >> um is something that Karen mentioned, and that is, you know, I have friends in
this town that have um children that are part of the unified sports, the very limited that we have here in town. And there are very robust programs happening in other towns. >> Exactly. But is not doing that, and they need to
do it for their kids. And so if this is a way to create those programs that residents of our town have to go to for their kids, we need to do that. >> Absolutely. And I'm talking to people to try and figure it out. This is I'm just the beginning of this. So I just want to
make sure it's >> stable. So I just think >> I totally agree with you. There are many things that we need to spend money on and you know groups that need various things but this is one group that I think that has kind of been put on the
back burner for a long time. completely agree with. >> So, I really would love to see wording that gives them a funding source in some capacity, >> but I don't want this to be the only funding source because if we can find a bigger and better one,
>> it may not be. It could be other >> change this so that if and when we find something different, we can use this money for something different. I mean, I think that's what I'm trying to do, >> you know what I like that has been here for 20 years and I don't want it to be stuck in this perpetuity of just kind of
going in when we could use it for something else. It >> No, I mean just you're you're raising good points, Mr. Chairman, if I may. Um, with the stabilization fund, it really gives town meeting a lot of control, right? It's it's kind of a perfect sustainable
solution and that's why it is it's stable. it creates the stability that you're looking for because town meeting votes to appoint to to um appropriate money into the fund every year and town meeting will have to vote and you can correct me if I'm wrong was a two-thirds vote to appropriate money out of that
fund right and so town meeting has to vote again to appropriate money out of that fund and then town meeting has to approve the budget that funds unified sports so there's a lot of control that town meeting has to fund this if a grant
is found to help um fund unified sports that year. Town doesn't have to appropriate money. The town doesn't have to ask for money for stabilization that year and the money can grow. And so it it sits there and it and it it gets used when it needs to be used. And if there's
other funding sources that come that then it's funed. If if um unified sports becomes part of the every year operational budget can fund it that way in the future, then no more money has to be put into stabilization annually. It
can just continue to grow and you can use it to buy equipment or one-time funds. So, it gives a lot of control to town meeting. Um it's really a great resource and because unified sports um is it's part of the messaging that we're
an inclusive community and this is a stable makes s I believe it's a stable makes sense way to support that program without um a lot of strings and it gives town meeting a lot of power over what happens with those funds.
>> Okay. So now I'm confused. >> Sorry. No, no, because I don't know why I'm under the the like why am I thinking that we vote one and done? Like are you saying that every year they vote to put money into the stabilization fund or is it automatic
because it's here that automatically if town meeting votes the first time to put 30% every year out of Burbank's profits that we get into it? >> You have to vote to to spend the money. >> Thank you everyone. >> Yes. So you create the fund one time,
you vote to dedicate one time, but every time you want to expend funds from a stabilization fund, you need to vote it out. Okay? Stabilization funds generally you don't vote out every year. You can, but you don't. There was a change last
year. It used to be or two years ago now. It used to be that it required a twothirds vote of town meeting to appropriate out of a stabilization fund. Now it's only a majority vote for special purpose stabilization funds. This would constitute a special purpose stabilization fund. So it would require
a majority vote. To the extent you want to dissolve the fund or change the purpose of the fund at any point in the future, that would require a twothirds vote. Okay? So they vote once they open the fund. We let's say they say 50% is going to go there. Let's say it's 25%
the first year being conservative. the next year somebody can make a motion and say this year I want to put 50% in the stabilization fund. So it's always up to town meeting every year to decide if they want to change the percentage if they want. >> Correct. >> Correct. But if they don't change it
then the original percentage carries through. So when you dedicate a revenue stream the intention really is it's going to stay for many years. That's the the thought process behind that piece of legislation. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Thanks. Thank you, Jay.
>> Um, so I guess a follow-up question. So I I know things weren't redlined, so I didn't I missed this stuff as well, and I know we're going to clear this up in the future. So who made the change from 300,000 to 500,000? >> That came from Burbank.
>> Okay. So um did the 300,000 number exist uh for the past 22 years? Was it set at 300,000 22 years ago when this was created? >> Yes. In the you can look at the 2013
lease agreement section three says that the contingency reserve shall not exceed 300,000 at any given moment without permission from the board of selectmen. Um but the cap shall increase to reflect uh the consumer price index. Um, so it's
just changing that 300,000 to 500,000. >> Yeah. Because to me, like we're dealing with a a figure that was done 22 years ago. That's why like there has to be a reason why we go from 300 to 500. And the answer is it was done 22 years ago.
Like they were operating under a $300,000 scenario. >> Data. People want data. >> That is data. 22 years. >> I mean, it seems like data to me. You made me think of a good question on a different topic in here. Can I ask? >> Of course. >> Thank you. Um,
>> if should we I'm looking at the insurance limits. I never see anybody doing liabilility for 1 million and 2 million anymore. Do you do you think we could ask their attorney whether we I don't know if it's still standard like one and three for liability, but that hasn't been updated 20 30 years either.
>> That's a good point. >> That's a good I'm going to defer to I'm going to defer to Matt and Jane on that one because um when I got the documents, these were the limited changes that we were that our office was asked to make.
We're happy to make those requests. Um but I don't know if there was additional conversation that went on. >> I mean, I'm sure it didn't because you guys went in there with like how do we work out the parking situation? But I've been asking as a select board member for five years to say or since 2023 when it
came up for renewal to say can we look at this it's really old like can we just go through this and we haven't been able to do that. So, I'm kind of like >> the insurance limits in this document um exceed our current requirements for our
typical insurance requirements that are dictated by Maya. And that's just in the aggregate. Typically, it's like 2 million in aggregate. Um and so this is 3 million in aggregate for bodily injury. >> Where does it say that? >> Um page 64 of the packet section five insurance
please. >> Oh, so maybe it has changed because I think in the original >> Oh, no. I no no I'm looking at the wrong thing. Sorry. I'm looking at RCTV. >> Well, you're our insurance guru. So, >> yeah. Um, we do >> get sued. >> No, I was looking at it. Am I No, that
was the right one. Looks the same language. It's literally the same language because it's our standard boilerplate insurance, but it's the 300 $3 million aggregate is higher than our typical $2 million aggregate. We change it for some things. Um for instance, we spoke recently about increasing the
accute on our um recal and our construction projects that were requiring the general contractors to carry. >> Okay. What is that? >> So I think the confusion is that that page of the PDF, page 64, that's in the master license agreement. So we require
that because if they're going to be parking on our property, we want that level of insurance. Um, but the insurance levels in the actual lease agreement are lower. >> Okay, that's what I'm asking about. >> That's what I'm reading. >> Because it's not a difficult change and
if it's out of date, I would think they would be something that they might care about, too. >> So, we can definitely make that request and fair enough. Thank you. >> Listen, >> well, if we're requesting it in the new document, won't they have to change it
anyway? That might be a moot point >> if they have to carry a higher coverage level so that they can you know utilize ours our >> on the occasional time that's our standard play then they're going to have
to raise their >> so >> all right so I had uh proposed um I want to see about being getting rid of the language of 25 up to 50 I would
like to see the language be a flat 50%. And get the board's uh input on that. And then this way here when this comes to a final contract, we aren't negotiating it then. So that's where I'm at. Hold on. >> So I just have a quick question and not
that I have anything against saying 50, but um if Ria said something that made me pause if if we if this was to be put in here and change the current wording and it's brought to town meeting and it
is um not voted on to approve, then it's over. But if we have a range or could town meeting change it on the floor. So town meeting can vote whatever it wants. The way that this is set up is
that compliance is conditioned on town meeting approval. So if you put in 50% and town meeting votes 35% now that's the amount that is going to the stabilization fund and the provisions and applicable. >> Okay. >> That was my only question. Thank you.
I'm fine with Tom meeting changing the number whatever they feel like. For me to be comfortable, I would like to see 50%. And I think that that kind of number offers an incentive, like I said, to raise even more money um than they have previously done.
It's it's motivation to me. That's that that's a pretty big motivator. And if 50% of zero is zero, then it remains zero. But I think that, you know, I think they're going to be highly more motivated to do something where they know that the money is specifically
going for this as opposed to pet projects or whatever else things that we decide, you know, are more important than unified support than Tom >> paying Jane salary. >> Sorry, but you I know >> it could be anything. I' I'd like to see
road trips fire trucks. You know, >> we got to buy a new fire truck. I'm just >> But now now they're more incentivized on the 50% portion which means the other 50% is also coming back to the town. >> And what did we get for rent last year? >> It doesn't they fixed the roof, Karen?
>> No, that was two years ago. >> But they fixed the roof and had to build back up the reserves. Correct. >> What did we get for rent last year? >> I don't know what they got for rent last year. >> Zero. >> I what I >> don't get too excited about. All I'm saying is we're gonna have to we're gonna have to look for other funding
sources because they are building up their reserves again. You're right. >> One thing with that is if I don't hear a peak from the Burbank Ice Arena about ice being melted and not working and things being closed for hockey season for three weeks and if I literally hear
nothing from anybody on the Burbank Ice Arena ever again, they are doing their job. As far as I'm concerned, like I said, I already took care of the communication aspect. Uh Ed's posting all the time over there on I assume it's him on Facebook notifying public. It
might seem pointless, but some other organizations don't actually do that. And I think that it's, you know, for us, like I said, transparency public. They posted on their Facebook about some part that they had in stock that they fixed. Um so they are doing upkeep and
maintenance. They they're not going to want the building to fall down and it's not up to me to decide whether or not they you know decide to have something go wrong during hockey season. There's no way they are going to allow >> guess who they're going to call when the rink is closed. So it is it is our
purview to make sure things are operationally sound. >> Somehow they've managed to go this long without a single hiccup ever over there. Unless you know something that I don't. >> Some wood or something. I know he's saying stuff like that. I know. >> You have to go. You have to go on
history. Listen, we just dealt with another organization, a staple here in town for the last 20, 30 years. Same thing with Burbank. We heard nothing until we heard everything. Maybe it's the case. Same thing with Burbank, but I
haven't heard a damn different thing with them at all. And all I see consistently is one guy over there working his mind off day in and day out. And somehow it's a problem. Not for me it isn't. I I think that as long as
things are being run over there in the way that it is and I'm not hearing complaints. I haven't heard a single thing. It's fine by me. Same goes for any other board committee. We hear things all the time about DPW and plowing and snow. We make all those
complaints tonight ex etc. Um but we never hear about Sharon screwing up something. I haven't heard anything. um or you know, knock on wood for that too. Um I haven't heard any of that. So like we have to hold people to the same
standard. What whose standard that is is that's up for debate. But um the rank is working. We haven't had to expend a single penny to fix anything over there. Nothing. And they've been operating for 20some years. And they'll continue to
operate until they don't. Like I don't I I don't see the apples to oranges comparison on this at all. Someday maybe we will, but ain't today. So, um I left it off where I wanted to see
50 time meeting can change it however they like. Um that's kind of where I'm at. It's um if anybody else has any objection to that, feel free. >> Well, you we're just getting input tonight, right? >> Correct. on what
>> I guess I'd like I don't know what these programs cost. Um, one program the select board did allocate opera money. I think it was about $100,000 >> and that went for I don't I haven't seen anything. Does anybody planning for these things? I mean I kind of like to do things in an orderly fashion. >> So they did all the swimming and the Y.
>> He come up with a budget. The school department I'm assuming is coming up with a budget and what are the kind of sports they want to offer? What's it going to cost to run? And then then you can also we can share that with the board. here's how much money you need to bring in so that we can have some rent and we can contribute to a stabilization
fund. So, you see how that all fits together. >> So, I don't want to um weigh in on that at the moment, but you know, obviously you're you're ready, so that's fine. >> I can give you some information about how they'd like to expand the program. >> Sure. >> Um so, they want to pro provide additional staffing at the high school
level. Um the interest in the current program including fall and spring basketball and winter strength and conditioning continues to grow and it's important that they staff the program appropriate appropriately to ensure a safe and successful experience for all students. Um they had over 40 students
participate in the most recent basketball game. Um and that puts us as one of the largest unified programs in the region. Um they want to build consistency with the program at the middle school level. Um they recently launched middle school botchi winter strength and conditioning and spring
basketball which was extremely wellreceived by the community and it's important to build on these successes and provide more opportunities for student students at this age level. It's critical social building time. Um student staff and families have been advocating uh for more opportunities.
They also want to expand the program to the elementary level. There are currently no offerings for unified um unified offerings at the elementary level despite interest and need. So building the program at the youngest level would create a strong foundation for a vibrant and sustainable program
going forward. Um and further they want to build leadership for the program across the district. Um while many staff support the program, the leadership around the program falls predominantly on one amazing staff member. And it's important that that we build up a
structure such as a unified a district unified council that ensures a coherent and well structured model across the community. So that is where they plan to um grow the program. That's in order one two three four. Um so more at the high school then through middle school then
move to elementary. Um so that's the plan that's been laid out by the district. And so is this you you just pay for it like any other program or and it has some revenues but not enough to pay for all everything they need. >> They have some revenues it's funded through the school department. Um I
tried to nail down a figure on that. Um you said 10,000. I thought it was closer to 20,000. Um but I will get a figure for sure. >> I heard it in a budget thing last year. >> I spoke to Dr. Mashowski earlier this year. So I'm not sure. So let's nail it
down. we will hear it directly here for the conversation tonight. So, um but we can get that for you. And then they have a lot of um they have private fundraiser uh donors who are doing a lot of lifting um privately to >> I was reading that's one of the ways
they do it. Boosters and grants from Special Olympics and other and then >> Exactly. We don't charge the student My understanding is we do not charge student athletes to participate in this program. nor do we charge um typically developing students to participate in
the program as well. So this is a free program and I would advocate that we keep it free to participants because those families usually have um high bills that they have to pay all the time anyway. So um it's it's it would be
prohibitive for some families many families to participate with what they have going on. So it's really just tremendous program um with the pragmatist it offers. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> So, usually when we ask these kind of questions, it's always we'll find out about it and get back to you. Instead,
this time around, you already have a plan in place that they're going to want to be able to utilize with this, which is very rare in my time here on the board when we ask these questions and it's always we'll come back and give you an answer. >> I asked a question in October, so I just
pulled it up while you're asking. I to me I think the number goes up from 50 at this point almost to 100% after everything you just said but like you know 50 is my starting point let town meeting do 100%. >> Yeah we got to pay we got to pay her salary. Come on.
>> I don't know why she's Jane salary. >> We'll do what we can do. I know. >> Moving on. >> Yeah. All right. >> Second. >> Okay. >> No vote. >> What else? >> We're just discussing >> what else? Uh what else do we have? Matt's scenario page.
>> Okay. >> 67 in the packet. Discussing mode procedure for town manager evaluation including the selection of direct reports. The current motion that's also in the packet says move to solicit feedback from fill in the blank must be
at least five direct reports three of whom have to be department heads and then move to authorize town council to create a composite evaluation. So every's office is going to be um handling the evaluations this time anonymously. Um we have to select the um
five people. Three have to be department heads. >> Melissa, excuse me, Mr. Chair, I am late to the meeting because I was working. Will there be public comment after the items? This is Angela Mendes speaking. Are you
accepting public comment? I was not aware that there was anybody online. Angela, we asked earlier. >> I'm sorry. I worked till 9, so I I came late to the meeting, but my hand has been raised. >> I did not see you.
>> Sorry. >> Um, we've already moved on. Um, so if you have any public feedback on the town manager evaluation, I would love to hear it. Otherwise, we've moved on to that. Um, so from the board, do we Melissa,
you glad your hand up? >> Um, I'm sorry. You said five. Last time we did seven. Are we just going to stick with five or are we gonna do >> two of them are required by So in the contract it says that the superintendent and the library director are like automatic beyond that >> and then it's five beyond that and three
of them have to be. >> Yeah, that's the way the contract reads anyway. >> Okay. My mistake. >> So can you clarify that again, Matt? So we are >> Yeah. So you So two of them are automatic. It'll be Tom Millichesky and Amy. So that they'll participate. >> So that is current. So five beyond
>> beyond. Yes. So beyond that five and three of them have to be department heads and they all have to be direct reports. So I included a list from last year because I thought it might be helpful. >> Um so >> so we have to pick five three department heads and it can't be Dr. Militki or Amy
because they're automatically >> it could be DPW it can be um fire. I would say any any department head plus I keep Laura and Sean and Jackie as a direct report as well. They would qualify. Um so any of those people
>> So Melissa, you had a suggestion or >> just a question? >> No, I was just clarifying the five versus the seven that I saw last time. >> I have a suggestion. Uh I'd like to keep it the same and I'm open to number seven. A lot going on at
community services with Chris leaving. I know someone just appointed interim, but with the recal project and a lot of us were at that COA wreck meeting and what's going on there. So, I'm I'm okay
with keeping it the same and just I'm open to suggestions because I don't really have one for number the number seven spot slot >> and number seven. So, that would that's Jenna. you're talking about. So, she's not a direct report. So, la in last year it was still added, but I think she felt
from talking to her that she didn't have a lot of information because she wasn't a direct report. So, replacing her with somebody else, I think she would welcome. >> That's what told me. >> Oh, I think >> I wonder if we could do maybe >> is a fire chief director for it.
>> Yeah. and he's new, but he's Yeah, I don't think we had Chief Burns last year because he was retiring. Maybe. >> No, we had I know Chief Burns was included on one of these. Maybe it was the search. >> Oh, you know who it Mr. um >> comedian. We can have Kevin. >> Whoever you want, I'm open to have and
I've already sent them an email say be prepared. Somebody's going to get these people get >> throw some names. Let's go. >> Kevin um >> a new fire chief. I'm blanking out Chris
>> facilities Joe Huggin Huggin a day. Um what else? Who am I missing? We didn't cover already. Jane we already on there on the on the >> Well, should we just mix it up then? Plug in some of those names that didn't >> I mean or what? >> Mix the whole thing up or just the one
spot. >> I was mind putting Joe on there. Joe Hoggins. >> I'm fine with Joe as well for number seven. and keeping everyone else the same. >> Um, I'd like to I'd like to cast a wider net. How do you feel?
>> Where do you mix it up a little? >> Um, >> I want to keep Sharon. >> I want to keep Jane. >> Do we want to switch police for fire? You know, I wasn't here last year, so I don't >> I don't want to say Rick is too new because he's been here forever, too. But
at the same time in his position he is new. >> That's you can say whether how Matt helped him during his transition into his new role. >> I like to keep chief clock. >> I think you give a chief I think you're giving the people that you aren't asking to do this a break. That's all.
>> One less thing on their list. >> Let's give it to Jane then. Trying to help. >> Trying to help. Jane's busy. >> Jane's busy. I'm okay with Joe Huggin. I'm okay with uh Kevin. I >> Oh, you want to put in All right, let's swap out.
>> They're all busy. Miss Laura for Kevin. How about that? Can we do that? >> Miss Laura. >> Miss Gem for Kevin. >> You want to just do that? >> What about Jenna? >> So, how about how about I propose this? >> Switch town clerk. How about we swap
>> Jane for fire chief, Laura with Kevin, Jenna with Joe Huggin. >> Yeah, I'm fine with that. >> Yeah. Okay, great. >> Karen, you're the only one left. >> I'm too new to, you know. >> So moved.
>> Great. >> Okay, let's do it. >> Wait, wait a minute. So, fire chief. So, >> yes. So, Rick Nelson, Kevin, um, and >> what's name? >> Kevin
O. >> So, we're giving, uh, we're we're removing Jenna, >> Tom Clark, >> and >> Jane. >> And Jane. and we're replacing with Rick Nelson,
Kevin Fill, and Joe Hog, >> who's the head of facilities. >> All right, we're done minutes. Let's go. >> Well, no, we have to >> I got to do a motion. >> Oh, okay. Do >> Hold on. Public comment, Angela, for the evaluation. Or anybody else online?
>> Your hand is still up. Anybody else online, Jackie? >> Nobody else online. Just Angela has her hand raised. >> Angela, if you still want to talk two minutes on the evaluation. >> I think she dropped off.
>> She still >> All right, moving on. Anybody in the room? Seeing none, Karen, can I have a motion? Move to solicit feedback from superintendent of schools Tom Melasheski, library director Amy Lannon,
CFO Town Accountant Sharon Angstrom, fire chief Rick Nelson, IT department Kevin Ferillo, Joe Huggin, >> facilities >> facilities, >> um David Clark,
>> police chief David Clark That's it. >> That's the end of my motion. >> Second. >> Seconded by Karen Herrick. Any discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor? 5 Z. Next motion for that.
>> Move to authorize town council to create a composite evaluation. Second. >> Any discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor? 5. So, will be in touch regarding all of that.
Next 10 minutes, I think. >> Uh, yep. Next minutes. >> All right, I'm good. >> I had no changes. Anybody else? >> We have a awesome >> a unanimous sweep. Uh,
>> sorry. Let's go. >> Move to approve the meeting minutes of December 2nd, 2025 as presented. >> Second. >> Second by Karen Eric. Any discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor? 5. Move to approve the meeting minutes of December 3rd, 2025 as presented.
>> Second. >> Seconded by Karen Heric. Any discussion? See none. All those in favor? 5 Z. Next. >> Motion to >> second. >> Seconded by Melissa. All those in favor? 5. >> Happy holidays everyone.