I'll call the meeting to order. And um I do apologize for the late start. Our executive session ran later than we had anticipated. Um and sometimes that does happen, but we'll start the meeting now. Um, the
Ridgewood Board of Education has been meeting in executive session pursuant to NJSA 10 col4-12. The minutes of this meeting will be released when the need for confidentiality no longer exists. Please join me in a uh Oh, do you want to do a
roll call? Um, yeah. >> Here. >> Here. Please join me in a flag salute and pledge of >> allegiance to the flag of Americ pursuant to the requirements of the open
public meetings act. Advanced notice has been given to the star ledger, the record and the clerk of the village of Ridgewood. In addition, notices were posted in the office of the board secretary and in all school buildings.
Uh um I will open for public comment. Um please um if you have a comment, come to the microphone. Um, give us your name and your municipality and we would ask that your comments be restricted to no
more than four minutes and we thank you. >> Hi. >> Sorry. Sorry about the wait. >> It's okay. >> Okay. >> Hi. Good evening. Uh, my name is Corey Abramson. Hi, Dr. >> Um, my husband, Hail Abramson, is here with me today. Our daughter, Ryan, is part of the incoming kindergarten class
at Treval Elementary School. Uh, since moving to Rididgewood, we were always excited to see what Ridgwood Public Schools had to offer our children when the time came. After attending Trell's kindergarten orientation, we became quite alarmed with the studentto staff ratio of the three incoming classes.
While it's great that the third teacher was recently hired to accommodate the increase in students, we do not feel it's enough. To my knowledge, the current class sizes are 21 to 22 students each with one full-time teacher and one shared par profofessional that will float around to all three classes.
21 to 22 kids for one teacher is a lot to manage, especially at the beginning of the year. This is a new school, new teacher, and new classmates for all these children. Some of the students may be coming to school for the very first time. It's a huge transition for them.
And as we all know, 5-year-olds have a lot of energy, nerves, and important needs with a very low threshold for paying attention. Sitting still all day long is very hard for them. How will the teachers be able to handle and regulate the kids who are struggling to sit still
while simultaneously provide meaningful instruction to the remaining students? It just doesn't seem feasible and instead sounds like a recipe for a mediocre education. This is also a safety issue. How can one adult properly care for that many young students alone? A student may need help
in the bathroom. Kids get hurt and each time this happens, the rest of the class is left with less supervision and guidance. What is the district's target class size? How is it determined that a full-time aid is not needed in these classes?
I know enrollment is constantly monitored, but at what point is a fourth class added or an aid hired for each class? Every student along with its teachers would benefit from a full-time aid. They can help students with this huge transition to public school. Assist
with self-regulation, foster independence and social skills, support classroom management, provide additional instruction for those who are confused, all while the primary teacher can keep the majority focused and on task. Let's keep in mind that some of
these kids are still mastering letter lettering sounds while others are already reading. I made the effort to research the student staff ratios in other surrounding towns and Rididgewood just doesn't seem to be on par. For instance, both the Sycamac and Kulage elementary
schools in Whiteoff had kindergarten classes of 16 students with one full-time teacher and one full-time aid per class this past school year. How is it that Rididgewood cannot meet these same standards as WOFF? I do not believe for a second that Rididgewood can't step
up and provide a full-time aid per kindergarten class in its public schools. Please, I urge the board of education to re-evaluate what it thinks is acceptable for our young students entering such a crucial and fundamental year in their education. Thank you for your time.
you. >> No. No. Is there any any No. Oh, okay. I'm just going to check to see if there's any on um remote. We're open for public comment. Not seeing any. I'll close public
comment. Um Dr. Schwarz. Um >> yeah, you have your report, but I don't know if you'd like to also address that. Yeah, I'd be happy to address. Thank you for coming, Mrs. Abramson. Thanks for sharing your concerns. Um, I can't speak to the class sizes at Trell right now at this moment, but we're happy to take
another look for you as a courtesy and review what the class sizes are. And if you have any specific information you want us to look at, you referenced Whiteoff Schools, we'd be happy to look at that as well. I will say we are under pretty significant budgetary constraints. So, I want to manage expectations. But that said, you know, we do have standards generally speaking
at the uh kindergarten level. this the the it's not a hard requirement but the general requirement we try to stay below 22 students we do recognize that that is on the high side for kindergarten we do have to have an upper bound so uh but nevertheless like I said we'd be happy to take a look there are some extenduating circumstances which do
warrant uh another teacher and I did hear what you said also about even just considering additional classroom aid Yeah. So, so for So, first of all, I'm sorry. With the way that this meeting is structured, we we we the way that we have to maintain a fair standard for public comment, we can't have it be a
dialogue here. No, that's okay. So, so but if you want to come to the coffee, we certainly have more dialogue, but I'm inviting you to have more conversation with us uh after this meeting as well. So, we'll go ahead and take a look. But but just with respect to that, like I said, it's a we have a like a a soft cap at 22. There's no hard and fast rule,
but that is our general efficiency standard. It's not a it's not a given that another student would result in another teacher. Um and we do it is hard to add teachers late in the year as well. We do try to manage uh enrollments uh thoughtfully in terms of the fact that we won't like we will close
sections at 22, meaning so like we're unless there's a dire circumstance, we do our best to not go above 22. So, uh, but again, like I said, if you want to follow up with us, uh, Dr. Fenwick is our assistant superintendent and she supervises the elementary schools. Um, so she would be a good point of contact
as well. She and I will put our heads together with my assistant, Lucy Papaich, who keeps track of all the enrollments at all the schools and we'll give it another look as a courtesy for you. Thank you. >> Okay, Dr. Shores, do you have um a uh a report? >> I wanted to share with Yes, I do. Thank
you. So, I wanted to share with everyone um I hope everyone's having a fantastic summer. Um I am uh we had on the agenda here that we were going to be doing the state of the schools address uh for at this particular meeting. We had planned for doing it in June. That's where we did it the year before. This spring uh
with um with a very challenging budget season and many changes related to the to budget uh constraints. Um we were a little delayed. We had I wanted to deliver at least within a month. But as we were talking uh as a board, it became clear that we were concerned that we
might not not have the same attendance uh and attention to the meeting at the time that we give the state of the schools address if it's if it's in July. So we have decided to move that. We do have an extra meeting at in September. That's the September 14th meeting. Uh we don't have anything currently on the agenda for that meeting. So that would
be a great place we think to do the state of the schools address as an introduction for the new school year. So, we'll go over the results of the community survey, the student surveys, we'll have some staff survey information, and then, of course, an analysis of how the schools are performing from a variety of lenses and angles. So, please tune in for September
14th. In the meantime, we are busy. We the schools are a buzz with activity. We have professional development. We have curriculum writing. We have cleaning. We have construction. Um, we we have a lot of the budget work is continuing. We are uh we're we're we're we're um making very strong progress with uh
transitioning our before and after school program uh which is which we're sharing more information about this week. Uh again, I've received a bunch of questions. Just want to clarify to everybody. We are keeping the structure more or less exact pretty pretty close to exactly the same. Um it's just going to be that the school is going to be
operating it uh instead of a private vendor. So, we're very much looking forward to have welcoming everybody back in September. And in the meantime, wish everybody a peaceful summer. If you need anything, please feel free to reach out. Um, we are we some of you who have been paying attention know that we are down a central office administrator um where
I'm discussing potential uh my recommendation for uh minor reorganization within the district. At this time while we're while we're finalizing that uh the main shift is that uh Mrs. Jamie Murphy who was the assistant superintendent in charge of secondary education and human resources.
Uh her I am now supervising secondary education as a as a part of my many responsibilities and uh Dr. Fenwick is helping me providing joint leadership over human resources at this time. So we will have some clarity moving forward but for the most part that is how we're continuing to operate which which
results in in little change as far as the public is concerned for the time being. So thank you. I did read today that the um state uh testing results uh won't be distributed until December. So um
>> no surprises there. >> Yeah. Disappointing um in some respect um that we gear up in the spring to do those tests and then uh because of the scoring and the way they're scoring and the analysis that needs to get done,
it's just going to take them longer. um next year they promise we'll have them in in June but you know don't hold your breath on that one I think um nothing against the state except everything seems to be delayed uh the um so
how would how does that impact at all um the state of the school analysis of >> we we we have because the state takes so long to get us meaningful data and to get our comp data we really have very little ability our state of the schools address is on a significant data lag
anyway when it comes to the state assessments. So we typically report a year late anyway. So we wouldn't even be reporting on this last year. We'd be reporting on the prior year which we've already done though because as soon as we get the results we're required to report it. This is just a follow-up rollup. So there won't be any changes to
the state of the schools address as a function of this delay. Um but it will impact our ability to report on last year's scores because typically we report on them in October and now we're not going to be reporting on them till January. you know, we'll be reporting on them right as we're gearing up for the next round of tests. Yeah. Now,
hopefully, you know, the the first time administering assessment, they have to do all kinds of norming and and and um uh and and and validation of the data and making sure that it's scaled correctly and uh so it's it's it's a lot of work in rolling out a new testing
regime. Um, so next year presumably it won't be so much work, but you know, it's hard to pull off such a massive uh effort of doing that kind of testing and not turning around the results quickly, except that now it's all computer-based and especially if this is an adaptive computer-based test. One would think
that they'd be able to turn it around fairly quickly. one would think >> and that was one of my questions the different format being an adaptive test. Do you do you think that is causing the delay because we it's harder to compare
compare student achievement if I'm taking a test with different questions than you are or it's adapting to how hard it is. I I'm just wondering if if there's a flaw here or not. It would be foolish for me to try to give a an
answer to that question because uh you know my experience with adaptive test is similar to what Dr. Schwarz just said. You know you get your results fairly quickly uh if not instantly. Um we did see stories about other states using AI tools to vet the writing and then some
problems arising with those AI tools. So that could be a part of this. I think we just have to wait and see. Unfortunately, >> if for anybody who remembers back to the days when park first rolled out, we had a significant delay in that data as well. Again, anytime you have a new and
and and part just turned into NJSLA, we just the the that one license expired, but it was the same test. >> So again, anytime that you're going to do a a big assessment, you have to go through a process of normalizing the data. We call these standardized assessments, but the reality is that
that they're all normed compared to how forever however all the students do. So that scaling of the scoring involves it's it's kind of like grading on a curve. And so they have to make sure that the curve's fair. They also have to make sure all the questions are valid. They have to discard questions if they're getting uh inconsistent results
from students or if there's they're showing any evidence of potential bias in the interpretations. There's a lot that goes into it. So I'm not I'm not I'm not um coming I wouldn't come down on the state for the fact that the first administration is going to take a while. I think it's a reflection of the fact that they take it seriously. My issue is
more that once they've got it figured out every other year, why does it have to take so long? >> Just quick question out of curiosity. Is the plan to keep the state of the schools in September moving forward or is it probably going to go back to June? Is
>> so so in I've I've been doing this for a long time before I came to Rididgewood and I've done it in both time frames. Um as hard as it is to pull it off in the spring, generally speaking, it's been a pretty good time. I've never actually done it in September, so that might be a good time, especially considering the amount of survey data that we have and how much we want to use that data
meaningfully. But I will say I do think that like this last year, some of our survey data, especially our staff data, is really skewed heavily by like which buildings were impacted by budget cuts. The surveys came out right and we're in the middle of the worst of the most uncertain of the budget times. And that definitely is reflected in the data. So
it makes it hard to interpret like is this how people felt a couple weeks prior to learning about some budget difficulties. So, I think we have to do some reconsideration about just overall our timing of of those surveys and when it's reported as well. And if we move the surveys, we might want to move the
state of the school's address as well. >> There's something to be said about wrapping up the year with a a state of the school and then starting new. So, um having it in September is your baseline, I guess, as you move forward. So, um,
yeah, we'll see how this how this goes this year and then, um, I think we'll have a chat about it as the year progresses. Perhaps we move up the surveys not at such a I don't see the
budget situation improving for next year. Um, so maybe we want to look at um doing our survey mid year. Yeah. >> Before all of that. And not to skew it, but um you know these when you look at
um health insurance that's right now we're not in the state plan, but that impacts other health insurance um when you're even not in the state plan. So the state plan is looking at an increase of 34 35%
next year on their premium. Um, and even if you know we're not in the state plan, so if we get a lower premium, yay. But that premium is still high. What was it? 22 to 28% our premium this year.
>> A a after we got after >> after we came out of the the state health plan. So um you know it there's a a huge impact on the budget uh because of that. Yeah. and other other increasing costs as we know gas and a
lean and um energy costs and all that is is taking an impact. Yeah. And even though we went up above cap um this year um it it's you know hopefully things will change but right now u I'm not doom
and gloom but I it does sound like I'm a little doom and gloom it right now. >> It's called being a realist. >> Okay. So, we'll go to board committee reports. Um, Mary, uh, would you like to do finance? >> Yes. So, um, we had a pretty robust
finance agenda, but I'm going to just highlight the things that, um, most significant, I think, for this agenda. So, um, on this agenda, we have, um, we are in year four of, uh, the five-year uh, agreement with Ponttonian, and we
are, um, renewing our agreement with Ponian. um they introduced the what they call the AMP um meals which are quote clean meals with uh you know clean ingredients as those are defined. Um but
primarily um the terms of the contract financially are that Pontonian is uh continuing the guarantee to the district of $210,000. Um but they do have to raise prices slightly on the student meals uh to
accommodate for the incredible increase in inflation. Right. So um it ends up being a 3.3% increase or literally 25 cents per meal. So uh sounds almost worse than it is but it is still an increase and it still will be felt by
the kids but um they have maintained the guarantee. So um we that's on the agenda for tonight. Uh, also on the agenda for tonight, speaking of health care premiums, is the renewal of our insurance broker for healthcare, Alamo.
Um, speaking for myself, I've been very pleased with Alamo and their performance. Their customer service, as I understand it, has been really good. We've got, you know, the staff is happy with it. And certainly they worked pretty hard to get us at least a somewhat better insurance rate than we would have had if we had stayed with the
state. And my god, thank God we're not in the state, right? So, uh, that's up for renewal tonight. Um, we also have, uh, the Manelo contract, which was something, and I know we'll probably touch base on that when we get to facilities as well, but, um, the Manel
contract, >> you can cover it. Finally, >> I'm going to try to to cover all of it. Um, there was some confusion about the terms of that contract uh, when we tried to discuss it at the last meeting. Um, the base cost of the contract remains
the same. Um, and there are a list of several uh additional um things that uh Manila is going to be doing for us, including lining the fields, making sure that the playgrounds and those public areas are clean, particularly after
weekend recreational activities. Um, so that's staying the same. What they what the business office has worked really hard and has successfully accomplished is a negotiating some certainty and better rates with regard to snow removal. So the first thing is that um
if we get up to 41 inches of snow, we will know next year, which we will hope that we do not, but if we were to have in excess of 41 in of snow per last year's contract, we were paying, you know, $1,250 per inch, and that got very
expensive very quickly. Uh this year, we actually have from 41 in to 61 in. Um the most we will pay uh is an additional $65,000. 30 for the first 10 and then 35 for the next. So we have a cap there. And if it
snows more than five feet in a year, it's free for anything over the five feet is is for free. In addition, Manel is going to take over um the sidewalk cleaning um all the schools so that our custodians are not going to be doing
that. That's a huge um as I understand it, that's going to be a big relief for our custodial our custodians. We don't have to worry about them getting here. We don't have to worry about their injuries. You know, uh we we may then have a relief on maintaining some of our equipment. Um most important is if there
is no precipitation, no freezing rain, no sleet, no hail, no snow, we do not pay for snow removal services. That don't happen. I know that was a big question last time, but uh if there's no snow, we don't get paid. They don't get
paid because they don't do anything. Um also in this contract is a provision for hallway services. The hallway services are um they're not capped. There is it's it I believe the resolution says not to exceed um I got to put my glasses on to
give you the exact number. I want to say it was like a hundred,000. >> Thank you. $110,000, not to exceed $110,000. That's not a cap in the extent that if the costs were to be more than $110,000, we wouldn't have to pay it. But what it what it is is we budgeted
$110,000 for Hallway, which was not something we had done last year. However, Hallow is solely at the discretion of the uh Rididgewood Public Schools facilities committees. So it's not an automatic thing and it really
depends on what the needs are at each building and then we'll be charged the rate up to 110 and then if we go over 110 again if we have you know another snowageddon then that has to come back to the board. But what the business office did was they successfully kind of
negotiated the expectations are clear we're budgeted we won't have that surprise that we had last year in terms of over $200,000 in excess snow removal. Um and we have some additional services from Manel as well. So that is the Melo
contract that is up. Um the other thing I wanted to mention tonight that's on this um agenda is uh as everyone knows is the district is taking on the responsibility and conducting the before and afterare
programs. Um I know on July 2nd uh someone was hired to direct that. Um the rates are on the agenda tonight. Um there is a 5% increase from last year's from what Alphabest had, but I I believe
that that was what would have been expected if Alphabest had done it as well. So we're staying consistent. Am I right about that? Okay, that's what I thought. I just wanted to be clear. Um and so those rates are um on the agenda tonight. Those were the main things that I wanted to mention. Did I miss
anything, >> Mr. Matthews? Yeah, please. >> Can I ask some questions or should I wait until these items are discussed at the uh finance agenda? Okay. So, Manelo, uh, Mr. Matthews, you
just said that the contract is max 1.127. What we have on the resolution is 1017150. >> Yeah, it's a mistake on that. Yeah, it's a it's a for some reason the corre the wrong number was carried the the the new number from the facilities
from the finance committee was not carried over correctly. So that's that's a verbal change. >> Okay. Okay. So we are saying that we are commit last year's commitment minimum commitment to them was $860,000 or or
that was our contracted commitment. I don't know minimum or maximum but our commitment to Manila was $860,000 and now we are committing127,000 so $267,000 increase $267,000
if I divided that by 860,000 that's 31% increase can you break down this 267,000 because I heard 30,000 commitment for up to 10 in of snow over 41. So I'm looking at new
Rididgewood's average snow average snow in Ridgewood is 20 to 30 in 20 to 25 in extreme weathers is 30 in. Last year we had more but even if I I say our
Bridgewood extreme or average snow is about 30 35 in we are committing for a minimum 41 in of snow right so we are there's no you you have a scenario that if there's no snow or no sleet we don't pay that won't happen even if there's a
1 in we have to pay up to 41 in >> no no that's not the case and that's what I'm trying that's why I'm shaking my head no so viciferously over here okay here's here's What it is is I'm just trying to find it because I want to read it. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. I'm reading from the
finance committee minutes. >> No, from the clause because minutes were not clear last time also. Right. So, do we have uh >> the actual contractual you have? I don't have the actual contract, >> but I'm reading what was taken from it.
>> Okay. >> So, landscaping. >> Rich, could you just talk into your microphone? Sorry about that. Thank you. >> So, the landscaping contract, which is the uh cleanup, the maintenance, lawn care, trimming, pruning, etc., etc.,
irrigation, plant care, that's $588,000, 72352. >> Mr. M, if you just point the microphone towards your mouth. Thanks so much. >> So, that's 58872352. [clears throat] Then you have the um management fee of $82,000 42328.
And based on snowfall, the max we could pay, if it's zero to two, it's a whole sliding scale here in a contract. The most we could pay is $240,000 in snow. >> That's over 61 in. We're we're we're still we don't pay more than 61 in.
>> Yeah, that's I just want Can I interrupt you for a second? Because this is what Sarab is saying and I want to make it very clear. If we get one inch of snow up to two inches of snow, we pay $15,000. That's it. If we get between two and another three inches of snow up
to five inch, then we add $25,000. So it's a sliding scale between 6 to 10 in 35,000 11 to 20 55,000 21 to 30 another 20 31 to 40 25 41 in
125. So that's the that's the total. >> How much do we pay? How much did we pay last year? What was our minimum up to 41,000? What was last year and what is now? How is that different from last? Like what's that? Yeah,
>> I'm just trying to figure out the difference of $267,000 because you said over 41 41 to 51. >> Last year beyond 41 in we were charged $12,000 per inch, right?
>> So we had 53 inches. We paid $337,500 for the beyond 41 in hallway services for 2526. >> One second. One second. So we had we had 51 beyond 41 is 10 in. If we were paying
12,500 that's >> no 500 >> per inch. >> Yeah. So that's >> the old one I >> That's 125,000. I read the All right. Look, I'm going to show you. I don't know how to do this because this is the finance committee
minutes that you had access to, right? So, yes, but so that's what we need to talk about, right? So, right here, what I just read, and I apologize, I read the 2526 numbers. Okay. And after 41 in of snow,
we paid $12,500 per inch, which is where we got into this past year, which is what cost us so much money. The new contract, and I apologize, is up to 2 in, we pay 15.
Between 2 and 5, an additional 25, 6 to 10, an additional 35. 11 to 20, an additional 55. 21 to 30, an additional 20. 31 to 40, an additional 25. 41 to 50 in an additional $35,000 and
then 51 to 60 an additional 30 which is what I said >> over 61 in no charge >> right so if I if I can summarize >> but it's not only plowing is it not also removing snow from the sidewalks
>> yeah that's part >> that's yeah so that's different than >> that's right that's additional because last year our custodians were removing ing snow from the sidewalks and this year if we have snow we don't have to. >> I I I get that part. So I'm just trying
to break down the >> I just wanted to make clear right but so I just want to break down. So the last year we had up to 41 in >> 41 in right there was a contract 15. >> Yeah. Yeah. That's I hate hate.
>> So just just after 41 in >> after 41 last year it became 12,500 per >> per inch. Right. So now, so last year's contract versus this year's contract, we had a rate up to 41 in after 41 in we
were paying for every inch 12,500. >> Mhm. >> Now we are paying at least for 3 in above that. So we are paying 30,000 even for 1 in after 41,000 in. So if we have 42, we'll pay that 30 instead of 1250.
But we are getting a cush like it's an insurance that okay we are paying for 3 in inches of snow and we'll get up to 10 in. So 41 to 51 we are paying for 3 in as per last year's rate which is fine >> that's that's a risk we are taking of who is taking the risk them versus us.
If it's 10 in then we pay 125. If >> and they are calculating based on New Jerseyy's historical averages 20 to 30 in 41 is already a lot above 40 they are hedging their bets that it won't be 10 in and we are trying to get a fixed cost
so that way we don't have budget impacts. >> Correct. >> So we are paying 30,000 they are instead of 12,000. I get that >> 35. >> So >> yeah 35. So we don't we won't have the overtime of our custodians. >> It's only if it's above 41 in. I'm just talking about the one one line item. I'm
just talking about one line item right now. Let's not let's not merge multiple things. Right. So that's 65,000. >> What is the other 200,000? Because the contract difference is 267,000. So what is the other $200,000 that we are paying them more?
>> Well, in addition >> from last year to this year. So 110 of that is the snow hallway services that if we opt to use them we are budgeting for another $110,000 for snowway service
>> language in that how do we say whether >> it says total it says what now this says capp capped is the wrong word it is not capp >> yeah so what is the what is the contractual language there if we are saying if we >> I just just want to be clear you're
authorizing an up to amount. So when you read the contract itself, there are certain parts of it that are all-encompassing, but all the snow removal is contingent upon the amount of snow that we receive. So we're not this is we're not negotiating an estimated
amount of snow in a guaranteed payment. >> Yeah, that's what we are. >> No, we're not. >> We're not. >> We are saying that if it's up to 41 for every inch, we are going to pay you this much. No, it's a it's it's a it's a rate depending on what the snowfall is per snow storm because it because the when
the storm comes in heavier like if we get a like a 30 inch snowstorm it it's that much heavier to remove. It's harder to remove. So it's a it has to do with the rate of fall per snowstorm. Mr. Matthews, are you with me on this? >> Yeah. >> I thought it's total snow during the
season. >> Mr. Matthews? >> Yeah, that's the total snowfall. Yeah, it's Yes, it's a total snowfall. >> Total snowfall for the season. So, we are agreeing. I get that and I'm I'm >> So, is this other part the sidewalks?
106,000 for the sidewalks. >> Okay. So, you've got the plowing. >> Yes. I I need to see that language. >> Okay. It's here in in facilities. >> So, you got it's it's a contract that we gave to um >> And then you have the >> Yeah, we have an actual contract. This
>> And then you have the hallway. Yes. Yeah, there's a contract that we got from the attorneys. >> Okay. So, where can I look at the this difference of $200,000 on this? >> Well, that wouldn't be that wouldn't be in that contract. That contract for 2627. >> See a difference.
>> Okay. Do you have the the facilities minutes? Because you broke it out in the facilities. I >> think it's broken out the same. This is this is this is it right here. This is the actual This is the minutes right here that gives you last year this year. >> These are >> That's exactly the same thing on
finance. These are the minutes what I'm showing. >> Yep. >> Okay. You look at that >> because we also we are making a change of 30 >> 33 30 31% contract change. So, we need to be able to explain it to the public also. Right.
>> It's it's a change off the actual not off you're going by the base contract price. We're giving a price to you based on last year's actual 1.2 >> this year's budget of 1.1. >> That was because of snow was budgeted at
per inch. Now we are budgeting at per 10 inch. So I get that $60,000 but we still have a $200,000 gap, right? >> Other than snow. >> Okay. So 110 of it is the fall away. >> So if you add the 60 to the 110, you're
at 180. So, how are we agreeing for 110 calculator? Let's say >> last year's actual hallway services cost was 5450. >> You got to give me back. I need my contract back because I I can't. >> So, last year the actual was 54,000
>> and with this year we are committing 110,000 to them >> not to exceed. It doesn't necessarily mean we're going to do it. >> So, what's the what's the criteria? How are they how are they going to calculate? So, as I said, well, no, the the calculation is it's based on what the rate is for Holloway at the time,
right? So, it's what the market rate. That's what you told me, Rich. It's the market rate for Holloway at the time. The guard rail is that Manel does not have the right to come in and say, "We're going to just clean everything up and haul away every time." Hallway is something that is determined and
specifically approved and requested by our facilities team. >> Okay. But last, if it was last year it was 54,000 at at the market rate, why are we changing that to 110,000 at the market rate?
>> 110,000 is what we are is not to exceed. It doesn't mean we're paying 110,000. We might only pay 10,000. We might only pay 5,000. We may pay nothing. >> How much had we budgeted last year? >> None. >> None. That's the point. >> Okay. So what is the exact language of
the contract which will >> you want me to >> for the hallway where can I >> yeah so even with that it will be 110 and60.
So out of 1127 86 267. So we have 110 and 65. So I still have 92,000 more. Where is that 92,000 going?
>> I'm not sure of your math. I be honest. I'm not sure. I got I need my contract. >> Okay. I'm going on the resolution. So our resolution says increase in vendor contract for Manilo landscaping industries for grounds
management from costs not to exceed 860,000 to 1.127,000. Right? That's a difference of 267,000. The difference in the in the not to exceed for snow removal is 65,000. We
are committing to 65,000 [clears throat] more for snow removal. We are committing to 110,000 for Holloway. That's still leaves 92,000 difference from last year's not to exceed versus this year's not to exceed. So what's that 92,000 for?
>> Here's a I don't know if this helps you, S, but here is an updated cost comparison which is attached to the agreement, right? So this is part and parcel of the contract. >> Can I can I clear this up though? I think >> Yeah. >> Okay. So you've got one, two, three, four. You've got five factors in here to
make up the one 1,127,468. Good. Okay, >> that's 588723 um 588,72 and 72352. That's for the grounds. Is there a
difference from last year to this year in that >> the base is the same landscaping contract. So >> we only need to look at what's changing. So that's >> but I'm just trying to show you what the things are. >> Right. That's >> the next is their management which is
the 82,42328. >> That stays same. >> Okay. >> Okay. Then you have the the plowing if we need it and we've we have that at 240,000.
>> Yep. >> Then you have the >> uh sidewalks at 110,000. >> Was it there last year? >> I mean 106 I'm sorry. >> No, sidewalks were not. >> Okay. At the last meeting we were told
that we are getting the sidewalks for free. >> So >> I don't know that I uh I did hear that said at this point but I don't I was in a hearing. >> Okay. So what were the things that we were getting in addition for free as part of this contract? There were some things discussed right
the lining of athletic fields the drying of the infield turf fields blowing the leaves in the brief and tennis courts cleaning removing garbage from all sports fields including Kennelorth. Removing debris from all school properties including branches, bottles and similar materials collecting board
approved disposal items from school location that are place have a pickup. Those are all now at zero costs. >> Well, are included in that, right? >> Okay. So, we are in Manila's contract, we are adding 20 ines of snow as part of the fixed price up to 61. Over 61 will
be free. We are adding um 106,000 for sidewalks which was earlier being done by our custodials. So, that is going to them. And we are adding 110,000 for hallway which we had not budgeted until last. Right. >> So, those are the three changes.
Correct. Yeah, as far as that's my understanding. Yes. And and just can I see that one second? Because what >> the sidewalk is also based on a tiered structure or >> what is that structure? >> Um 100. >> Well, we wouldn't have the sidewalks if
there's no snow or sle or ice. So ice >> it should be here, right? If it's only 5 in versus 30 in over here. Okay, >> this is those are my >> and that has the same same structure of
31 41 61 in or what happened? >> Yes. 02 in is $25,000 >> within the minutes. >> No, this is right other snow removal services which is that's the sidewalks and that gives you the sliding scale
there. The other thing I wanted to point out was that that's 110 in this contract or 106, excuse me. But I think we paid what was it? That's what I was looking for. Rich, was it am I correct? It was 279 in overtime.
>> Yeah. >> For it was 279 in overtime to ACB employees for snow removal this year. >> So we are eliminating that the risk of that. >> Okay. So one one question that is still outstanding is what Dr. Schwarz just
mentioned about and by reading this document I see it's per storm or the whole winter for uh sidewalks. So >> whole winter. >> So 0 to 2 in is the whole winter for sidewalk.
>> Yes. The whole winter. >> Okay. So, I just pulled up the original bid agreement and the base services are identical. >> So, they haven't changed their rates for us on any of the base services that were bid last year at all. >> Right. >> They recount they they we renegotiated
the cost of snow removal up to certain rates. You were right. My brain remembered it wrong. It has to do with how much snow in total. >> Okay. >> And the upper upper end it we the original bid their charges at those the high end of that were very high. I'm
gonna pull I'm gonna pull them up right now. So, we renegotiated those so that way the upper upper boundaries of snow are not as crippling for us. So, that was so and then but then there are additional services in the new agreement that were not in the original agreement
for also for also for the sidewalk and snow removal >> and for the hallway. Yeah, >> for the hallway we are saying that it's going to be the same at at cost. So, who determines that cost? And if it's a lot of snow, then the cost can be
>> Well, well, we we ended up in a we ended up in a tough spot this last year because we just hadn't had the foresight to realize that if we had a storm that was so significant that we'd have to haul away. And I actually got a call that morning from the school administration saying, "Mark, we can't
open school. There's nowhere to park cars." So, we had to call them on the spot with no negotiated rate and say, "You got to move this snow and you got to move it now." But it's still same cost per like it will be at as per the current market cost.
So what >> for for which we for the hallway >> that's that's what they they wouldn't my understanding and Rich you were you did the negotiating but my understanding is that they wouldn't give up that we have the $110,000
expectation worst case scenario but it may go over that right but but I won't call it a cap but that they wouldn't they wouldn't break it down to say every hallway is 5,000 10,000 1200 whatever it And I think it's because they it says
due to unpredictability. I think it depends on how much where it is and then where they how far they have to take it and where they put it. >> Right? But if we are giving them okay we have a budget of 110,000 then they may they know that okay I have up to 110,000
to use it without us telling us any idea what >> it says specifically it has to be previously approved by the school facilities team. >> It says explicitly in the cont. They will tell you the cost at that time. >> But wouldn't that be part of the approval? >> Yeah. Yes.
>> What what what it says is capped at $110,000. Final decision to use the service must be approved by the Rididgewood public schools facilities team. No payments will be made if this process is not followed. And they know that they can't go over $110,000 without additional approval. So it's meant so so
it there there is it doesn't not seem to be a specific rate for hall away. That's going to be something that >> right and from last year if you are we are saying last year was an extreme weather where we had more than 41 inches of snow at that time our haul was only $54,000
and now we are already signaling to them that hey we have 110,000 this year >> what was our do you have our hallway number Mr. Matthews that are committed members 54,000. >> No, >> wait. >> I I I think that's a little Hold on a second.
>> We should have some number from them by hour, by by volume, something, right? A ballpark or or they need to because if you call at 7 a.m. again that hey, we need you to haul it away. How are we determining what at what price at that time when you when you read?
>> So I I I have the hallway in another category, but I have extraordinary snow removing hallways at 216, but I don't have the actual whole breakdown of the 216, >> but we had >> Yeah. So, so the thing is hallway is so
variable that a lot of people don't even don't put a number to it. And so at the last meeting we said we're going to save like $170,000 whatever it was. We had to put a number to the hallway so that we could like say okay what we can expect the
cost. We had some false certainty. So that's why we came to 110,000 because we needed to be able to come back to the board and say like okay there is a number that we can expect for hallway but we control how hallway is being performed by the by the by the vendor.
>> Okay. So I'm sold on that. My last question on on Manila was and thank you for all the answers. Um Miss McCalli, I had a question from you last time that as a facilities committee, are you happy with their work on BF fields so far? >> So the answer is yes and I also
discussed it with um Keith Cook. I specifically asked him a question about that um about how he felt about it and he felt it was much improved. There's clearly more to be done and at field committee meetings I've gotten positive results. So yes.
>> So BF field is good to play. >> It's better than it was. >> Okay. Perfect. And they are they are doing a good job on BF. >> Yeah. They've been working on it. Yeah. >> Yeah. It looks significantly better. >> Yeah. I I've gotten actually more other fields as well. I've heard positive things about Manel's um work
that they've done. >> Perfect. So that's great. So that answers all of my question for Manela. And then my next question is um the uh Promptanian Promptonian right so
Promptonian you mentioned that we are doing an increase of 3.3%. And that would be 25 cents. So if I use 25 cents as 3.3% then per meal is 750. So why are we calculating cash receipts
based on 517? >> Oh, I see what he said. >> Because if I do 517 per meal, which we are committing to them, then 25 cents on 517 is 5%, not 3.3%.
>> So I cannot answer that question to be honest with you. The way that this is you always educate sir. I looked at it differently. Right. I looked at I literally both Muhammad and I looked at the entire price list. Right. Right. And
it was literally 25 cents in addition. Right. And then I did take um Pmptonian's word for it that that ended up being about a 3.3% increase in the cost to the student. Um and I'm you know now that I'm talking to I can't find the um Tonyian documents I
was looking for. So it's either if we are seeing that that there's a 3.3% increase then per meal should be 750 and we should be paying them that 40 cents 40.91 cents at 750 per meal not at 517
per meal or we should say that it's a 5% increase. >> Okay, hold on. >> Rich, can you help me out here? >> I'm trying to get to it. Yeah, I just pulled up the email from Pumptonian, right?
>> Just looking at the attachment, it's not all uniform. Some things stay the same, some some things increase. Like it's not true. >> Every item 25 cents. Some are 45, some are 10 cent sort of >> it was an average of 25% that 25 cents.
That's that's fair. >> Yes. >> So um thank you Eli. >> Yeah, but that's what we are saying, right? So the average is 25 cents then 750 is the increase on each item 3.3%.
>> No because there were some items that weren't increased. I remember looking at the the prices >> sorry everything was not increased. >> Okay that is my one question and the other question is we in the >> M I'm sorry Mr. Could you just say that one more time? I just want to make sure
I documented that correctly. >> Me? >> Yeah. Yeah. The Yeah. So the pmptonian I was still looking at the manel contract you started. I apologize. >> Psonian we are saying that pmptonian will be paid491 per meal. >> That's the management fee. That's that's the management fee.
>> That's the management. Yeah. Per meal. >> Mhm. >> To calculate number of meals we will take total cash receipt. >> Yeah. >> And divide that by 517. >> Mhm. >> To get number of meals. >> Okay. So we are establishing that each
meal is $5.17 the basis of the calculation >> each set of I think it's I think it's intended to be represent each set of purchases because not all kids will buy the full lunch >> right but >> that's the to we are saying total number of meals divi total collection divided
by total number of meals approximately 517 that's what we are saying >> but when we are establishing the increase for this Here we just said that it's a 25 cents increase per meal average and that comes out to be 3.3%.
So they are asking for 3.3% increase in the meal costs to students and they are saying that would be 25 cents. But if I take 25 cents as 3.3% my my base price for per meal is 750
not 517. So if if it's a 25% increase on 750, that's a 5% increase. So which is fine. Are we okay in increasing 5% on students for meal? >> It wasn't it wasn't across all the
meals. >> What I'm having trouble with is >> have that >> you to me and and correct me or help me is that you seem to be comparing two different things. We have if you have a meal that was $5 is now $5.25.
You know, the student sees approximately a 3.3% increase or around 25 cents give or take. That's one that's one set of data. The other thing is that we are also increasing or at the same time we're increasing their
per meal management fee from 3983 per meal to491 per meal. And this is where Rich you need to help me. The way that that management fee is
calculated is by taking the total cash receipts and dividing it by $57 to arrive at an equivalent meal count. So that's we are increasing >> and then that meal right I'm reading right from here >> but that may that's probably we had the
same number last year most likely 517 >> well I I thought that >> it's not number is that number is just trying to establish number of meals or average price per meal >> and that's how they get paid the management fee >> however we come with an average price
per meal that should be the same formula for both ends for a and for promptonia No, I I think that that's the point. I think the point is is that they're trying not to pass all of it on to the students and they are still this was my understanding and they're still
guaranteeing us the $210,000 in profit. So they're taking a bit of a hit because one of the things they say in the email is that the food increases are from four to 6%. Right? So which is more than what
they're increasing the cost to the ultimate consumer. I don't have a problem with 5% if rest of the [clears throat] board members are okay with 5% increase to the students for um meal. I don't think the inflation is 5%. But if we want to increase the lunch
prices by 5% I'm okay with that with everybody else. But we can't claim that it's a 3.3% increase if it's a 5% increase. That's my point. >> Yeah. And I understand your point. I just think that you're calculating it differently than Ptonian. And candidly, I accepted Pmptonian's calculations. I
didn't do what you just did, which is why I'm learning from you. But no, but either way, >> I'm just using the I'm just using the same sentence that you gave me that it's an average 25% increase. >> 25 cents, not percent.
>> 25 cent increase, which is approximately 3.3%. >> Which is exactly which is what Ponttonian said it was. >> Yes. So if I use that number then average meal price is 750 and if average meal price is 750 then they are
overcalculating the number of meals to get their 40 cents per meal. I don't understand to the 750. >> They are inflating the number of >> I mean I'm about to do them. I'm looking at the price list right now. Is is your point that are you are you questioning
the validity of 5.17 as a denominator? >> That's I'm questioning 5.17 as denominator to get their management fee of 40 cents 90 40 91. >> So last year the fee was 392 this year is 4091
>> right? So that should also be 750 when we are if we are paying them 40 cents per meal then that should also be 750. And then my next question on that is we are listing the student price list as attachment J as public. Why are we not
disclosing faculty lunch price list? >> What was the question? >> Is there a difference in faculty price list and student price list? Not sure. Not sure. >> So what why is why is faculty
>> a different price for teachers? >> Right. So why is that not a public document? >> Why is that that not included in the >> I got to be honest with you. I've never seen it. So um >> that here right so adoption of recommended student price list and faculty price list.
>> Right. And I'm I so I don't know I don't I mean I'm what I'm telling you is that >> it says faculty faculty is included on the list. says faculty lunch faculty featured favorite >> where >> it's on the list. It's on the price list. >> I'm looking at the price list. >> It's only the teach the meal was a
different price for teachers. I think that the cookies and the snacks were the same. It's just the basic meal. If you guess the meal, there was like a teacher differential. >> If you go to if you go to if you go to
middle school, it has a faculty number. It's the lunch meal, right? >> But the little individual things I think were the same. >> It doesn't look like there's one listed for high school. I don't I I can't confirm that there that there is a different rate >> for the high school. >> Looks like Well, yeah. So, you're right.
So, what we have a faculty featured favorite. It's $6.75 this year as opposed to 650. So, it is on this >> I mean, >> and it's, you know, >> I mean, again, we can pull I mean, >> and it's actually a little bit more expensive than the student loans. So, do we do we just want to modify the
resolution where it says student price list is included in attachment J to say student and faculty price list is included in attachment J? >> Yeah, I mean, yeah, I mean faculty prices are included in the price list. I >> I I can't answer that question right here right now. So, I can't tell you if that's what we should do. I think this
is the Pontonian price list. I would infer that the high school cost would be the same then for the adults. >> But it says it right here. Faculty featured favorite. >> That's under middle school. >> Oh, so it's not in the Okay. So, I can't answer that question right now. I mean, these these are very hard
questions to answer right here at the table. >> Okay. >> I'm just going by the what's >> I'm not I'm not challenging the questions, but I mean, these are >> and I'm not asking questions that are not on the agenda, right? This is this is what I'm just going on the agenda and
what's being said here. Yeah. >> I'm not bringing it questions from out of >> Yeah. No, I'm just tell I'm just saying I can't give you an answer to this right now. I can't I can't give you an empirical answer to this right now. >> Those were my questions on this finance agenda.
Um and actually I have one more question. Um so we are saying that there is a we are authorizing an transfer of funds between capital projects. >> Okay. So that wasn't part of finance, right? Right. >> That is part of finance.
>> Did you? But you didn't report on >> might as well. >> So go ahead. >> Yeah. So I just uh when we were approving this year's budget, was Willard boiler repair a line item there in capital projects?
Willard >> we didn't do >> repair was in the 25 2425 budget >> that in committee was decided not to let it uh not to move forward to get Willard boiler repair
>> but that money was still attached to boiler project and now we're detaching it. >> Right. >> Right. >> And why is that listed as two separate line items as 193 and 48? because the 193 is the cost uh for the um
>> for the work and the for the additional 48 is the architect's fee, >> but they're both going in the same account, >> right? So, they're just separating out so that we're aware of the fact that the actual contractor's work is an additional 193 and then there's an
additional 48 and change that goes to the architect for the work on the tennis courts. Okay. And just for the sake of the public since I didn't raise it in the finance thing, what you're referring to is the fact that there's a transfer of funds from the Willard Boiler project which was decided not to be done as Rich
said and the tennis courts are coming in at $693,000. We had budgeted $500,000. So we had we have the 100 additional $193,000 is being transferred from the Willard Boiler project which is no longer being
done to the tennis courts. And there was also money in there to cover the $48,000 which is the cost of the architect's fee which is based on the total cost of the project. So that's what that is. And I apologize I I did not mention that in my
report. >> You good? >> I'm good. And I'm um on finance um I see that this time we have listed the special ed contracts as a as a detailed item. So thank you for that. Is that it >> on finance? Yes.
>> Okay. All right. Um, so, uh, I'm going to just report out on facilities and and some of what was discussed, finance was also discussed in facilities. So, I won't go through that again. But on the current projects, Glenn's school, the
abatement of the furnace room uh was supposed to start on is has it started July 14th. Um and the final walkthrough and punch list um on the windows at Glenn um was completed.
HVAC um is done at Glenn and now and I'm not sure if it has been done yet, but now we were waiting on PSEG to shut down the electrical service at Glenn and recalibrate it to up for the upgrade of
the electric project at Glenn. Um and it may or may not require the firewatch similar to what we did at Ridge School. um when we had to shut down our system to recalibrate for the new HVAC system.
It might not. They didn't think it would take as long as it took at Glenn, but I'm not sure uh what actually happened. You have an update on that or >> have they done that yet? >> No, not yet. >> Not yet. Okay. >> Yes. >> Yep.
>> At at Ridge School, uh the HVAC is done. the windows uh the final phase uh with the punch list um is almost completed. A rich furnace room, the abatement has been completed and they're starting to
fill that um if you will that's at what the crawl space below the steel floor. Uh and they are um filling that now. Uh at GW, the
bid was received for the boys basement bathroom renovation and we're going out to bid for the girls room. Um the elevators at GW and RHS, we're looking to complete the work by the start of schools. The tennis courts at Ridgewood
High School are, I think, on target to com be completed by >> August 21st. >> By August 21st. If you've been over to the high school, uh, all of the, if you will, tarmac, I don't know, um, has already been laid. They have to let that
cure for 30 days and then they put on the top coat, if you will, with the paint and the >> Yeah. So, they are moving along. It just there's this period that the uh the
under part of it the the tarmac I don't know if it's some whatever it is has to cure first before they can do the final part of it. Um and then we did discuss the vendor contracts with Manila. Um the hard floor uh
um contract to redo hard floors as needed. uh fire extinguisher and fire suppression services, land tech um and which and all these were also discussed by finance.
I think those were the highlights of the uh >> the only question I had was I know we talked about the elevator projects and the one at GW was on target and moving but RHS had not at the time of our meeting
>> started started and stopped and I'm trying to schedule a meeting with them this week and every high school >> the high school elevator when we met in facilities it hadn't started yet so now you're moving along now not not moving along good enough right now. Gotcha. >> So, at least we started
>> it started and stopped. >> They didn't come yesterday and they're here today. So, we >> got to get them. >> So, we got to keep on top of it so that it's done. Okay. I was curious about that. Thank you. >> And then um a policy, we had no curriculum meeting. You did get a little
memo about work that is happening. It is on the agenda and policy committee. U Mary Lou did you or Sarah >> and policy we we're going to be having the second reading of um new and
established policies that we discussed at our last meeting. They're here now. In addition, we are meeting this week and in future dates in a longer session in policy to go over and continue the updates and review that was requested by
you um Miss Broen that we look at policies and things. We also found out that there was a sort of a standard review in 2009. So although a policy may be dated 2009, it may not have really been updated at
that time. So there are things and with new laws and things such as ebikes and things like that policy, certain things have to be updated. So we're on top of that. >> That's great. >> That is uh we did that as a board and it
was horrible. [laughter] It was long meetings discussing. >> Well, we went from an all day meeting to twohour meetings. We we did get some insight to if you do it all day, it may be too mind-blowing. So, we're going to break it down. >> Yeah.
>> And bring candy. Bring sugar so we can keep going. >> Great. Okay. Uh now we'll go to consent items, regular and routine. Um, attend I move attendance at conferences. >> Any any um questions on that?
>> Okay. >> Okay. Mr. Donnie, >> yes. >> Miss Handy, >> yes. >> Callie, >> yes. >> Mr. McMoo >> and Miss Broen. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> But I did um have a question on it. I I
I'm voting yes because um I I'm sure. I I really want some thought behind um you have 15 me staff members going to uh conquer math training. Um and I I see that it's different grades um that
they're So I just want to understand that a little bit. Some will be out seven days uh during the course of the year for it. Um and then we of course incor substitute costs and um then we've
got seven uh staff members going out again during the course of the year. Some are I think five of them are going out for two days, two are going out for one day on literacy. So just walk us through sort of the rationale for that. Um
just uh because we didn't have a a curriculum meeting so >> absolutely. Yes. So, as you know, you know, we have been talking a great deal about making a commitment to in-house professional development for a number of reasons. Number one, obviously, you know, for money, money's sake. Uh, but number two, also we want to leverage the
strengths of our people, you know, both our our leaders and our and our teachers. Um, however, there are certain things that we need to do with our experts out there in the community. And so, for our newer teachers, uh, Conquer Math is a vital resource for standards
driven training. And so any of the teachers you see on here who are going to the seven days of training, this is primarily the elementary people. Uh these are new hires or people who are newly assigned to certain roles. So we have some grade one teachers at Willard who are going to be entering their third
year of teaching. Uh we were unable to send these newer teachers over the first couple of years because we've been sending everybody else because it is so expensive. And it's also, you know, you're you're losing time with your teachers in the building. So we don't want to have substitutes across the board. Uh we have in grade four at Ridge
a a couple of teachers going because they haven't taught math in several years. They were departmentalized. So they had one math teacher for grade four. Now that we've removed that departmentalized structure, we need to make sure that those teachers are fully equipped to teach the current math
standards to their students. We have a grade five partnership at Orchard where we have an a recently hired, I think she's entering year two, uh departmentalized math teacher. And so she and her partner, her special education partner are being sent because they're they're a co-eing pair. We want
to make sure that they have the most recent training and all the grade level standards as well. So that's just, you know, some of the examples of, you know, the reasons why we're sending people um that sort of training, 7 days at 6 to 7 hours at a clip, 42 hours by a grade level, almost impossible to replicate,
you know, in in district uh given the amount of time and preparation it would take. and also the fact that it would pull these teachers away from other assignments uh PD like K5 bookworms which is a massive initiative. So we would be cutting into their other mandated training that we're delivering you know over the next uh year or so. Uh
with respect to the seven teachers who are going to the NJA that is for Orton Gillingham uh training and so these teachers have a 30hour requirement that they need to meet to maintain their certificates. So we want
to make sure that our experts have that u that current certification so we can keep delivering that that um instruction at the highest possible level across our schools. >> Great. So um oh
>> just more effective bring schools rather than send out the same place. >> It would be lovely. Unfortunately, uh Nancy Schultz who runs Conquer Math doesn't travel and she's sort of sort of
the the expert. Uh and with respect to the NJA, that's something that needs to be delivered in that particular venue by a you know certified person. Yes. So we can >> correct. Yes. Yes. Yeah. So what will be
helpful going forward on on this um because we are so budget conscious >> um if in the FYI you could uh supply um even even with a curriculum meeting if we can supply you know a couple of
sentences on on why >> detailed rationale for for that sort of thing absolutely >> would be helpful I'm I'm sorry you're not so sorry as we review and approve these um opportunities. We're adding more
detail to our approval process. So there's comment section that you know I think was used when people felt it was needed to be used. I think at this point we just it's a responsible thing to just include that information. And also realistically
um it's unlikely going forward that we're going to be able to keep sending teachers in these numbers even for the year one teachers. we're going to have to just start looking at alternatives and part of that will be as we start to think about a new math program on the horizon which is still sever several years out right uh in our curriculum and
instruction planning process. Um but we have to start pivoting and just thinking about how we're going to do things a little bit differently going forward. Well, you know, I mean, I I know um as teachers have retired, you know, some of their comments have always been that the investment in professional development
and you know, you know, was a positive of their experience. So, we don't want to lose it, right? >> Then we know we've got budget crunches, so we have to use it judiciously. One of the things I actually emailed our staff about today was our our PD planning for
the year. And one of the uh opportunities that presents itself is the state's highly effective teacher evaluation model, which affords us the opportunity to observe those highly effective teachers in a different way. And one of the things that we can do is actually have them lead professional
development sessions, which is something that our teachers want anyway. So they want to learn from their peers as well. So, it's really a beautiful situation where we can have, you know, some of our most experienced, most successful teachers training their peers on best practices. So, that's something we're going to try to leverage over the course
of this year as kind of the first go. >> Great. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Administration. Um, we we do have the policies uh that we are approving uh for on a second reading.
um and our our fall sports schedule and um our virtual remote instruction plan, which is always so interesting because we are in these conversations about technology. But yet, if if we have
another health uh we are closing schools because of a health concern, we are dependent upon our technology. um as we were for the year or so um yes I know during the pandemic.
So just uh again always interesting to uh we we come back to and I know that a lot of the emphasis on technology or cell phones, smartwatches and all that but it does eat into the uh use of iPads
and and computers. That's just said. Um, would somebody like to move administration? >> I'll move administration. >> Awesome. >> Chedden and seconded. >> Any questions or anything on that? No.
Go ahead. >> Mr. Donnie. >> Yes. >> Miss Handy. >> Miss Lii. >> Yes. >> Mr. Lakmood. Then Miss Broen. >> Yes. >> Or affirmative. >> Okay. Curriculum instruction. We've got field trips and professional development
plan. Um, I move curriculum instruction. Would someone like to second? >> I'll second it. Any questions? >> I I actually have a question. I don't think the prof I remember looking at the and I apologize if I missed it, but last
year the professional development plan was a part of the FYI and I didn't see it this year. Did I miss it? >> Oh. I don't remember, >> but we >> I didn't hear what you said. I can't
hear you. >> Usually I remember having I remember last year seeing a document about the professional development plan. >> You should you should have access to it. Let me >> Yeah, but yeah, I didn't uh see it on the FYI. Oh, no. It's there. It's there. >> I I I
>> No, no, my mistake. My mistake. >> I think I saw it, but I don't >> Yeah, you couldn't access it. It was blocked accidentally. >> Is that what the problem >> by sharing? Maybe I picked up I had to ask >> to have it released. It wasn't open. >> Yeah. Yeah, I got it. Okay. Apologies.
No questions. >> Okay. Roll call. Mr. Donnie. >> Yes. >> Miss Handy. >> Yes. >> Miss McCalli? >> Yes. >> Mr. McMood. Miss Broen. >> Yes. Four >> affirm. Um, human resources. Um
I I um would someone like to move human resources? That's a long one. >> I'll move human resources. Would you like to someone like to second that? Okay.
>> Can it um I am going to abstain from uh 8H page 13. This was on the June 15th agenda and um is now back on this agenda
because of an adjustment to the hourly rate. This is the um classroom moving classroom and um I'm just going to abstain. I wasn't I wasn't here for the June meeting. I had I have some concerns. I know it's contractual, but I
had some concerns and just going forward like some careful consideration of of this line. Again, this is in the context of every dollar counts, right, in in a very tight budget. So, that's that was
that is my rationale. So, um, knowing that I'm going to abstain from that, um, I will I'll go ahead and vote with that extension. Uh, is are there any other questions or concerns about >> I I wanted to mention that I know that
during the budget cut discussions with the public, um, a a number of teachers were heavily supported and there was disappointment among students about a teachers not being able to come back. And I note here there is a teacher that
was heavily commented upon that has been asked back you know for the upcoming year and it's nice that those things were kept in mind when staff was hired and the other thing I had asked about with the um gifted and
talented that's not a new teacher but it's having a lead teacher as we had discussed in a prior meeting that we wanted to do that and so it's on a new appointment. So it's the same strong group of teachers that we had last year
and now we're recognizing that leadership and I think that's good to keep teachers and reward them for leadership and to do this. So I think that's something I just wanted to comment that I noticed in this
um and there's other different stepping up of teachers and given other positions and I just think noting that our staff when we hear when they retire all the the things that they do it's good to see
that we do recognize staff and give them additional leadership opportunities and I think that's what makes Ridgewood What's special is to keep the staff, reward them for taking other classes or going back to grad school or doing those
things. And that ultimately enhances our students and what makes Ridgewood special. And I know with upcoming budget cuts, maybe graduate work and those things might have to be trimmed, hopefully not eliminated, but that is
something that is good to see that we do recognize that because nobody wants to be in a position where there's no hope of ever getting ahead because then you see it's a a dead end. But when people love a district and they love being here, it's nice that they have those
opportunities. So, it's good to see because I recognize as I'm sure everybody many people do the teachers and given and um and Barbara Stevens I know she was there with my children at the infant toddler center. So, there's a lot of good news I think for teachers
and things like that here as an aside. >> Great. Well, it's you know it we're grateful to the teachers who step up and take the one 1.2 to physicians to fill a um a leave of absence or a temporary
leave uh and and fill those classes. >> In a similar note, the student assistant for the before and after care is exciting too because that's in the same way you're giving students a chance to step up and be a part of the district and help younger students. So, that's
exciting. >> Okay. So, I think we're ready to go ahead and vote on um Human resources. >> Human resources. >> Mr. Donnie. >> Yes. >> Miss Andy. >> Yes. >> Miss McCall. >> Yes.
>> Mr. McMood. Mr. Broen. Yes. Abstain on ah. >> Yes. With a uh abstension. >> On ah. Right. >> Okay. Just scrolling through here. All right. We're going to come to finance eventually. Yes. [laughter]
finance on page 21. >> I will move finance. >> Did you want to? >> So on uh >> we need a second. >> Oh, you you just >> I moved it. But >> we need a second. >> I will second finance.
I just uh for clarification um on uh five on Pmptonian uh there is a change in that guarantee on the enrollment. Right. >> Dr. While we're on that topic, I'm actually going to pull the resolution. I
was just doing the looking back at past contracts, Mr. Donniey's concerned, and he is correct. that number has not changed over time with despite the fact that the average cost has gone up which really in fact obscures what the impact is of the rate. So I'm actually going to pull the resolution. We're going to meet
with Pmptonian and talk about how they're representing their recommended resolutions here because they're effectively increasing their bottom line by increasing their charge and by technically inflating what the number of what the number of lunches are by not
increasing the denominator. So that was a good catch. Um and then in the meantime there our share hasn't changed over the last several years either. So we're effectively so we're effectively being you know the the district is bearing all of the cost of inflation as
a result of this. They're protecting their bottom lines and for all I know they're they're making more money and and again I'm not casting shade on Ponttonian that they're very responsive to us. They care very much about food service. not this isn't there's no by no means a mark against them but specifically the way this is being
represented to us I'm finding problematic so we're going to we're going to speak with them and we'll reevaluate the cost in light of what Mr. Donnie just caught >> for that matter I just realized too that we we've been we've been making an effort as a side an aside if you don't mind uh we're making an effort to be
more detailed with our agendas so that way they're more clear and Mr. Donnie made a point. I'm only talking about things that are on the agenda, but in fairness, you don't get you don't get access to the committee agendas, right, until they come out in the FYI. So, I would like the board I'd love for the board to consider their comfort level
with us releasing those minutes as soon as they're done. So, that way board members have a chance to evaluate that because I don't want, you know, m, for example, Mr. Donnie, if you if you're so inclined to check all these numbers, that's a great thing and I'd rather you have the time to do it and have us not have to do it at the table
here. The other thing Dr. Shores I think we have brought up in the past is in the past we for every item on the agenda we had a backup document which was background information. Yeah. With actual contracts. >> Yeah. You don't you don't have the
contract on here. >> I didn't see which contract are you missing? >> No, we didn't get I didn't see background information for this. >> No. So in the past we have but for this particular one we did not. >> Yeah. So we randomly some contracts we
get some cont like ideally all of these contracts that are listed here we should have actual copies of the contract that's how we used to get when we used to get our >> are those contracts embedded in the in the uh in the finance >> they're not finance either >> no no because that's what when when savv
was asking for the manel the actual manel contract >> it pieces of it were put into the agenda but the actual contract I don't have access >> no the contract is there I was able to No. >> Yeah, it was not in the final unless >> I'm But that that's listed as a contract
addendum. >> And the reason it's listed, right? My my Well, all right. So, we're talking about >> it's a contract addendum is because the original bid >> whatever is listed if we are listing that should you we used to have a background document with line by line every item
>> of these days we don't. So, I asked the questions here. >> I appreciate that >> because I' I've asked that to be included. I'm still not getting them. So, now I'm asking those questions here. I'm sorry. I'm I'm I'm see I'm uh >> We did get them things happen. >> Yeah. I've not been going one forward.
I'm not sure why that is. Mr. Matthews, can you make a note of that, please? Let's make sure that all these contracts make make their way into this uh >> into into the background documents. you know, there's um so as we're talking about, you know, the structure um because there's so many links
sometimes in the minutes of the different um committees, do you want it embedded in the committee? Um >> wherever they are, we should have access. >> Do you want it in the FYI?
And so underneath >> they should be in the answer >> simply put they should be in both the commi because the committee should be the ones who are the first reviewers and often they are I'm not I might have to go back and double I'm not sure where I missed this because the contracts are often there I know because I review them and they when we go on the agendas and
then in addition to being on those it should be placed into the f I mean unless we all agreed that we were going to condense the packet and and the place you were going to go was the was the committee agendas If we agreed to that, that'd be different. But that's not what we've that's not how that's we haven't
made that we haven't crossed that road. We haven't crossed that bridge. So, what I would recommend is for the time being that we just put it in both places and then in the meantime, if we find if if we want to I know it's going to be a little it's it's plenty of work
administratively, but that you need to have access to them. If we can come up with a more streamlined way of doing it, great. We'll come up with that. But in the meantime, you're right. You should have access voting on them. You should have access to each agenda. >> All of these special contract, any contract that we are ready to voting on,
we should have >> and every contract as soon as it's on this agenda. We have a meeting is a public contract. So I'm sorry that it's not there. So let's make sure that that's there. >> Yeah. >> You want the contracts for each of the special education >> any contract we are voting on.
Otherwise, we would >> I don't remember we did we used to have all of the contracts. >> We we used to have we just big contracts, but I'm not sure we >> just redacted the names. >> Yeah, but
>> my two cents. It's hard sometimes to all the links don't always work or whatever. I, you know, we all have to do our due diligence, but it would probably be helpful if with it. Yes, it should be attached to the to the agenda, the committee agendas so that when we get
them ahead of time, we can look at them before the meeting, but it would be helpful for a separate folder background information, which I do remember we used to get and just throw them all in there and then they'll you just scroll. Okay, >> that would I think that's probably in
every single Aiden Lou contract in every single very specific parent contract if does it doesn't necessarily still needs to be available when brought into question. But that's not that's not what I'm >> No, I wasn't talking about that. I was
talking about vendors, >> the nonconidential contracts, all of these public contracts, these should all there's no doubt about that. You should have access to all of them. Yeah, I think with all the different documents, it's hard to >> Okay, so we're we're going to um table
the Pmptonian contract. >> Well, I'm I'm I'm just going to I'll with I will withdraw the recommendation so that rests on my shoulders and then I'll take it up with Pmptonian. We'll we'll come back >> and and we'll we'll see it in August. >> Yep. Then >> so we'll say officially, Mr. Matthews, if you can please uh if you can please
make a record that uh that I am removing my recommendation in finance number five, the renewal agreement for Pmptonian Food Service. I'm withdrawing that recommendation with the intention to red to discuss the contract further
with Pmptonian with a a hope to bring a a an updated agreement for the August meeting. >> And I have one one more question on finance before we vote. It's already moved right >> it has been moved. >> Yeah. So the question is on finance
number 17 um before and after care we have listed teacher discount as TBD. So what happens if we approve this contract with TBD um do we come back with an updated
resolution or um do we register them at the last year's discount price? What does DBD mean? Or will we vote again at next meeting? We'll vote for their pricing >> before and after. So these are these are the rates. Yeah.
>> What's the teacher discount? There's no answer to that. >> Oh yeah. To be determined. Yeah. >> Can we put for now to pass the resolution? Can we put same as last year and if there's a revised recommendation? >> Yes, I would agree with that. Yes, thank you. >> Right. So,
>> that's a good solution. >> Whatever was the discount was so teacher discount instead of >> 2526. >> Right. So, I would I'm proposing to change teacher discount from TBD to same as same discount rate as 2526.
Not the dollar amount, the discount rate as 2526. >> Uh I I'll I'll make the change because I can do that. unilaterally. You need a motion. So, uh, Mr. Mr. Matthews, I would also like to please read into the record that I am amending my
recommendation number 17 under finance where it says tuition discounts and it says teacher discount. TBD should be replaced with the statement uh
uh discount to be the same percentage as the 2526 school year. Thank you for that recommendation. Thank you for that suggestion, Mr. Don.
>> Thank you. Okay, I I'm going to Is there any other finance question? I'm going to just read into the record the um don uh the um donations.
Sorry, I've lost it. Um okay, the uh Oops, >> page 21. Yep. Um, acceptance of the of these uh following restricted donations. Travel Home and School Association, $810. A
gift in kind of a field trip to the Turtle Back Zoo. Nicole Patton, $250. A gift in kind of a twin bed frame and box springing for the steps program. Forest Pinklestein
1,100 1,00 Oh, something's wrong with that number, right? >> Yeah, [laughter] >> I'm thinking it's probably a typo here. So, it's a gift in kind of of headbands
for field day at Trell Elementary School. Let's correct that number. Yeah, I don't think it was 11,000. um at Ridgewood High School student activity fund $4,36 to be used to pay for the chaperrons at
uh to the trip uh for the trip to Sweden. Doha Sim SIM $200 to be used for the STEPS art program and New Jersey Association of Pupil Services Administrators
$1,000 um towards scholar to towards the Dr. Theodore Cosle Scholarship. So we thank our donors donors. We'll just make sure that is corrected that number. Um
Mr. Matthews here. Great. Um, so we can go ahead and uh vote then knowing that we are excluding Do I restate? Do I restate the superintendent's removing the recommendation from Pmptonian
>> uh and to bring uh Ptonian to update their their contract terms and conditions. Um also superintendent's amending number 17 uh tuition discounts for parents TBD should be restated as same as
same as >> same rate as >> same percent as 2526 school year. >> Yes. >> Right. >> Thank you. >> All right. Take a roll call. Sadani. >> Um,
sorry. So on finance, I am a yes except finance number six and finance number 16. Mr. Handy.
>> Yes. Mi >> yes mood. Miss Krogan >> yesation. Um Mr. Donnie. So with regard to number six and 16, are you abstaining or are you saying no? >> It's a no
>> because six is >> the approval of the broker of record. >> Yeah, it's postdated. It's uh like at this point my vote doesn't really matter because if I if at this point if the board votes no, we don't have a broker, it should have come to us two months
before July 1 and so but I'm still voting no. >> I just wanted to know what you were voting. >> Yeah. So voting no that because that's already started July 1 for the broker. >> Okay. and um 16 I'm voting no because I
originally voted no for the vendor selection on this project. >> Ah okay. Thank you. >> Okay. So you have four affirmative. You have one no on number six and number 16. >> Correct. Motion pass.
>> Affirmative. Yeah. >> Three affirmative on those. >> Yes. >> On those. >> Okay. Resolutions and motions not included in consent agenda. Do you want to go one by one or uh >> one by one? >> Okay. Uh a approval of capital project
submissions to the New Jersey Department of Education. Just for clarity, um we are of course it's required to put in uh any capital projects, but just note that at facilities we did uh the new canopy
at Willard School is an HSA funded improvement um and is not a capital on ours, but we need to put it into the state. and the second on the leadline replacement at
the ed center and GW and Willard School. Um, this is being submitted because we are also applying for a grant to pay for this work. Um, and in order to do that,
we need to submit it to the state. Is that that I'm right on that right? >> That's correct. >> Okay. Just want to make sure that >> we only have three buildings with lead lines or are we only submitting three? >> I'm sorry. >> Out out of 11, do we only have three
buildings with lead lines? >> Um, I can't answer that question. Those are the three that they've identified, but I don't know. I don't know of any others. >> Mr. Matthews, can you provide clarification on that? >> These are the ones that are identified in the grant source. As far as I know,
these are the ones that were problematic. And if we don't get grant, how much is the expense to replace it? Should we not just replace it ourselves if even if we don't get grant? >> So the le line for the ed center is reimbursement because it was already done with with the village.
>> The ed center was done when they were doing the the work out front this spring >> and that would grant would reimburse us for that cost. >> A little more than $2,000. How much? >> A little more than $2,000. Was in the $2,000 range. >> Right. So for the other are we waiting
for the grant or are we going and doing it >> wait wait waiting for the grant? >> Should we be waiting for the grant? How much is the how much does it cost to replace these letter lines? >> I don't have I don't have it I don't have a quot.
>> We must have numbers to submit grant application. >> Um take that's okay. Uh, we don't need it now. That was just a question. >> My understanding of this, Mr. Matthews can get more information is that these were the lines that were identified as
the highest potential of having lead. My understanding is that they're not I don't know why they're saying lead line. My I don't not the impression that the entire line is lead. It's the it's >> the supply. Yeah. Right. So, so the uh so the reason why the ed center was cheaper and was done already is because
the ground happened to be open for a different issue. The other schools there's going to be a significant cost to access it. We've we're we're we're comp we're our grant writer is confident that we're going to get the grant. Okay. >> Thank you. >> Okay. So, uh let us uh vote on A. I move
a uh approval capital project submission to the New Jersey Department of Education. >> I second a. >> Roll call. Donnie. >> No. Sandy. Yes, >> Miss McCalli. >> Yes, >> Miss McMood. Miss Broen.
>> Yes. >> Three affirmative, one no. >> B. Approval submission of the request to establish three additional classrooms for special education program. And this is at Glenn School um and um and
necessary for the state to give us approval uh for um the new use. But it's not actually I mean it's a new use in some respect but it's still a classroom for kids. But these were the um infant toddler development center. >> They were had previously been approved
under the daycare uh certification and now they'll be approved under special education uh department of ed. >> Okay. So two two are reach for the reach program and one is for the rise program or the red program
>> red sorry one's for red and and two are for reach I move B would someone like to second that >> I >> okay call Mr. Yes. >> Missy, >> yes. >> Mr. McCalli,
>> yes. >> Mmood, Miss Broen, >> yes. >> Or affirmative. >> C. Approval submission of the application for a change of use of an education space at the steps program. This is using additional space for um we
actually have more students, right? So, needing that space um with their aids. Yes, we have six additional students that are coming from the high school. So, that's almost doubling our population and uh each student uh with
adult support staff um starts to put a strain on the uh original uh square footage that we had. >> So, does it change the uh lease terms and the pricing monthly lease agreement? >> The uh amount of square footage, yes,
would make an increase over time. Yes, we're you're still working on the um lease, but this this is just applying because if we if we do this, we need a state approval to approve that
additional space, right? But there I I believe at our uh facilities, I think you you also discussed it finance um you are still working on the lease, right? And negotiating that with the land. Am I correct on that? Yes, even
today I sent another email to them because the 20% cam charge that call HOA fees. We don't occupy 20% of the space in the building. So right now we occupy about uh the lease the leasable area is like
16,000 square feet and we occupy a little more than 3,000 square feet. So we're paying they're asking us to pay 20% of something that we occupy less than 20% of the building space. So, I'm asking them to give me better clarification on how you got to the 20%.
And um that that was I sent you the email this morning, made this afternoon that I sent to u to the owner. >> So, originally >> to us to the landlord >> to the landlord and I copied you in um Mary about >> I guess ago see it.
So originally when we got the state's permission we attached uh the lease document to the state in the approval process and we were told that um when we
signed this building initially we were we had a certain pricing for uh long-term lease and then we were told that the state came back and state asked that you have to have a 6 months uh
clause to terminate and to add that termination clause the lease price were was increased by 33% at that time for us. So state did review the lease terms as part of the approval. So how are we
asking the the state to approve additional space without providing the lease terms to them? What's what changed from that time to now? I don't I don't know what the change was, but I do know that we this is the first part of the process. So, I know
that first we uh send in the establishment of a program and I think then they come back to look at terms. So, if they're uh you know, if if we haven't met that criteria at that time, they'll come and they'll discuss that
with us and uh as they did in the past. But this is uh once we've exceeded the space for really one class, this is a second class similar to uh asking for the establishment at Glen School.
>> But but so we started with two classrooms, we added a third one as a change in the lease terms, right? >> We started with one room but we only established one classroom. >> Steps. steps.
>> Yes, >> we started with two rooms at steps. >> We we started with two physical rooms, but when we uh when we asked the the county and the state to come and review, we were uh asking for permission to establish a new program, a single
program. >> I get that. We had two two rooms at that time. >> Correct. >> We added the third room which was in the size it was almost combined the size of the first two rooms. So a larger room. We added a third room later on in the
lease, right? So currently we have three rooms in the lease. >> We have two rooms in the lease currently. >> That third room we only used when you had an open house or something, but we didn't it wasn't we didn't really
>> the room up for discussion at this time, right? >> Sort of like a storage and they had >> No, we added we increased the rental last year for adding for that room. No. >> No. >> What's the current rental on that? >> Current rent is $45,000 a year for just
that existing space of 2,000 square ft. >> No, no. What is that current >> current rent? What is what how much are we paying on the rent? >> What is it? >> The monthly rent is 3,89 for Yeah. >> The new the new rent for August is going to be 45,000 for that existing 2,000
square foot space. That's that's a yearly rent. Month is 30. >> Yeah. So 3750 includes the third room. 3750 was not the original rent. Original rent was in 22 2300 range for two rooms.
>> I don't understand it to be that. So if >> we want to review again, I thought that's what we were in discussion with some time. Year one price is $70,000. It's $45,000 for the 2,000 square feet and it's 25,000
for the additional space. That's that's in the budget. That that's that's in the budget for that we're counting the existing and the new space >> for this year. >> August 1st for next year. New the new lease agreement.
>> Okay, >> sounds good. Thank you. >> Okay. Um that was moved and seconded, right? The uh steps program. >> I I don't have the motion on that one. >> Okay. Uh submission of the application
for the change of use of an educational space at the steps program. I move that. That's number that's letter C. Yep. >> Second. >> Roll call. Mr. Donnie abstain. >> Miss Handy. >> Yes. Miss McCalli,
>> yes. >> Smut moved. Miss Broen, >> yes. >> Reaff affirmative, one abstension. >> Okay. Uh D is the award of contract bid number 08-27, the hardwood floor refinishing services
as needed. Um so you're explain again um Mr. Matthews why we're going out at this point because the state changed right that we could no longer >> just use use co-op so we have to go out
there and bid bid all these services so this is one of the service that would normally use as a co-op can't do that anymore so we had bided once didn't get any offers and went back out again so went back out again we got three companies in line with who we normally
use and group We rejected the one from Matusek and we're awarding the contract to um Gillespie Group. >> Okay. With a with a not to exceed $30,000. That's >> right. >> Uh though we don't at this point have
$30,000 worth of hardwood flooring to do this summer. Right. >> Correct. Or is that is my is that correct? Am I >> correct? No, we're going to come close. >> Correct. that we're not going to be able to do all the floors. All the floors. Yes.
>> Right. So, at the at a cost not to exceed $30,000, we will do some of the work we need to do, but not all of it. >> That's correct. >> That's what I thought you said. >> So, if I look at these rates, it says these are per square feet, most of
these, right? Um and 104 is your per square ft total number here except last three line is per linear feet but that's lining or baseboard thresholds. Um so it's about 300 square
ft. So about a room less than a 20 by 20 room. So we are just looking for one room for $30,000. >> Yeah. These are the gyms, the fours in the school. >> I don't I don't that that would have to
come from >> demolition and disposal of existing floor systems. This is really to refinish the floor. >> This is summer cleaning that we would do in all the gyms. >> Yeah. This to refinish. This isn't taking out often gyms, hardwood floors and stuff like
that. Yes. So these costs aren't something that we're necessarily incurring. >> So we are doing this if No, but so if we are which one we are saying if there's a third 20 by 20 room that's 400 square ft
where we need to remove the old hardwood floor and put a new hardwood floor and sand it and finish it. That would cost us $30,000. >> Right. I don't think the intention is to replace a floor, isn't it? To >> No, this is just refinishing the
hardwood floors. >> So, I think they're priceless. >> That's what they're priceless. Yes. >> This isn't necessarily what we're doing. So, we're really looking >> at subcategory five and six mostly, right? Or and maybe some seven and eight, but sanding, ceiling, and
finishing heavy duty. >> Yes. >> Right. And then game it to the extent that you need gameline painting after that, which I'm sure you do in a gym. >> Okay. Right. I mean, I think the the rest of it is should we need to do that, but I'm not aware of any plans to >> No. >> Okay.
>> This is not for classrooms, but for the >> gyms. Gyms. >> Gyms. >> That's where the hardware floors are. >> Yeah. And to be clear, even like with demolition and disposal, theoretically, they could be going over a section and realize that it's failing and that they need to they need to replace a section. So, >> okay. >> So, this is that's why it has to all be
itemized out. >> Sounds good. >> Okay. So, um I move um D. Would someone like to second it? >> Okay. Roll call. Mr. Donnie, >> yes. Miss Handy, >> yes. >> Mi, >> yes.
>> Mr. McMood. M. Broen. >> Yes. >> For affirmative. >> E. Uh, renewal of a contract bid number 06-26 for athletic field cleanup services as needed. Um, this is uh the original
contract was approved last year in the fall. Uh, luckily I do not believe we needed to use them, >> right? >> So, let's knock on wood to continue uh that. Um, anyways, it's it's with the
same company, Lantech. Um, so I move E. Does anybody like to second that? Okay, roll call. Mr. Donnie, >> no. >> Miss Handy, >> yes. >> Miss Malli, >> yes. >> Miss McMood. M. Broen. >> Yes.
>> Reaff affirmative. >> F. Award of contract bid number 07-27. Fire extinguisher and fire suppression services. Um, and again, you went out to bid costs not
to exceed $50,000 uh dollars on this. This is uh the these are the kitchen um this these are the kitchen >> this is fire extinguisher suppression for kitchen throughout the district. >> Okay.
>> Various various locations. >> There was quite a difference in the bid that we are accepting and the second bidder. >> Yeah. It's crazy. >> Control. It was pretty significant. >> Okay. Um I think we're okay for a roll call. Uh it you didn't move it.
>> Did you just move it? >> Yes, I moved it. And didn't you just >> Oh, I'll second. Oh, sorry. >> Paul Mani, >> yes. >> Miss Handy, Mr. McCalli, >> yes. >> Mmood. M. Broen. >> Yes. >> For affirmative.
>> Okay. We have a resolution um that Michelle, do you have that resolution for me or did you give it to me? Oh, to my right. Yes. [laughter]
>> Okay. Um whereas an allegation of conduct potentially constituting harassment, intimidation or bullying, HIV was reported concerning an incident um 304722
RHS 02206 on or about February 18th, 2026. And whereas the matter was investigated in accordance with applicable law uh board policy and administrative procedures. And whereas following the
investigation, the superintendent of schools reviewed the investigation investigative findings and determined that the alleged conduct did not meet the statutory and/or policy definition of harassment, intimidation, or
bullying. And whereas the superintendent therefore determined that the alleged HIB incident was not substantiated and whereas the board has reviewed the matter and has considered the information presented to it in accordance with applicable I'm having a
trouble with that word sorry law and board policy. Now therefore, be it resolved that the board of education hereby affirms the superintendent's determination that the alleged incident of harassment, intimidation, or bullying
reported on or about February 18th, 2026 was not substantiated as HIB. And be it further resolved that the board authorizes the superintendent and appropriate district administrators to
take any further action necessary to implement this resolution and ensure compliance with all legal and regulatory requirements. Um may I'd like to move
that. Would someone like to second it? >> Sorry. I guess that's a second. questions. Mr. Donnie, >> abstain. >> Miss Handy, >> yes. >> Mali, >> yes.
>> Smuck move. Mr. Boen, >> yes. >> Okay. Resolution passes. Three. >> Okay. Approval of bills. Um the uh we do
have to um do a doctrine of necessity again with the approval of the bills. >> And I also want to make sure Mr. Matthews will just uh make a change to the record here. It currently says that the recommendation of the superintendent we need to make that at your recommendation as I am I have to abstain
from this resolution or rec I have to recuse myself from this resolution. That's proper proper way to say it. So, let me read the um the uh the uh the doctrine of necessity.
Um this is required by law to read it out loud and then we have it in our minutes and it's also sent to the county um superintendent. Whereas school ethics act NJSA 18A12-21
uh was enacted by the New Jersey state legislature to ensure and preserve public confidence in school board members and school administrators and to provide specific ethical standards to guide their conduct. And whereas throughout the state, questions have
arisen regarding how a board should invoke the doctrine of necessity when a quorum of a board of education cannot be reached to due to disqualifying conflicts of interest. of board members or a matter required to be voted upon.
And whereas the school ethics commission provided guidance in public advisory opinion AO3-9 on April 1st, 1998. And whereas the opinion set forth that when it is necessary for a board to
invoke the doctrine of necessity, the board should state publicly that it is doing so. the reason that um such action is necessary and the specific nature of the conflicts of interest. And whereas the commission by resolution dated
February 25th, 2003 further clarified this standard and required a board of education invoking the doctrine of necessity to adopt a resolution setting forth that they are invoking the doctrine the reason for doing so and the specific nature of the
conflicts of interest. And whereas the commission further directed boards of education that invoked the doctrine to read the resolution at a regularly scheduled public meeting post it where the board posts regular public notices for a period of 30 days after passage
and provide a copy of the executed resolution to the commissioner to the commission sir. And whereas the board wishes to invoke the doctrine of necessity for the purpose of voting on approval of bills for payments related
to legal services rendered by the law firm of Cleary Jacobe Alfairi Jacobs LLC in relation to pending school ethic commission matters. And whereas the board attorney has reviewed the state
regulations and the advisory decision of the commission and determined that existing conflicts pro prohibit four members of the board from voting on these matters and whereas these board member conflicts are as followed. Sheila
Broen. Miss Broen is a party to matters pending before the school ethics commission and therefore would be prohibited from participating in all issues related to these those matters including but not limited to approval of legal fees for services rened related to
these matters. Muhammad Mahmud Mr. Mahmood is a party to matters pending before the school ethics commission and therefore would be prohibited from participating in all issues related to those matters including but not limited to approval of legal fees for services
rendered related to those services. Sir Rob Donnie Mr. Donnie is a party to matters pending before the school ethics commission and therefore would be prohibited from participating in an in all issues related to those matters
including but not limited to approval of legal fees for services rendered related to those matters. Mary McCalli. Ms. Macaui is party to matters pending before the school ethics commission and therefore would be prohibited from
participating in all issues related to those matters including but not limited to approval of legal services legal fees for services rendered related to those matters. Now, therefore, be it resolved by the Ridgewood Board of Education,
County of Bergen, State of New Jersey, as follows, that the aforementioned members are prohibited from participating in any discussion and vote on matters related to currently pending school ethics commission matters,
including but not limited to payment for legal services related to the defense of those claims because of the conflicts outlined above. that the board therefore invokes the doctrine of necessity in order to allow the full board to vote
only on the approval of bills and claims related to the following payment for legal services related to school ethics commission docket number C33-25 Maline versus Broen
and uh that this resolution shall be read at a regularly scheduled meeting of the board and be posted on the board's website and that a copy of this resolution shall be forwarded to school ethics commission. Now therefore be it
further resolved that the action taken pursuant to this invocation shall be deemed valid notwithstanding the a the for the aforementioned conflicts and the waiver of said conflicts shall not extend beyond the scope addressed within
this resolution. Um, so that is um, bill number 122079 that we're talking about. Um, Muhamad's not here to move those bills. Um, so
not sure. Um, >> I've reviewed the bills list. So if anyone was comfortable moving them, then >> I mean I looked at I didn't look at all the details, but I did look at the bill list. So I would move bills and then um
would I will ask Muhammad to assert that he had reviewed all those bills. I believe he did last Friday as far as he told me he had. Would someone like to second that? >> I'll second it.
>> Okay. I am I am abstaining from bill number 122079. 1 122079. That's the um legal bill. >> But >> even with the necessity, I've been informed that I should abstain.
>> So now we can go ahead and vote. >> Mr. Donnie, >> yes. >> Miss Handy, >> yes. >> Miss McCall, >> yes. >> Mr. McMoo, Miss Broen, >> yes. With that abstension, >> yes. standing on bill number 122079.
>> Yes. Okay. Um board member announcements. Quiet. >> No. No. Okay. I have none either. Uh discussion items.
Okay. All right. Acceptance of minutes. Um I can move uh May 18th and June 8th and July 2nd uh special and executive session. I need to abstain from I wasn't at the June
15th. So I can move uh the others if someone would like to second that. >> I'll second it. >> Great. I know Mary, you need to abstain from July 2nd, right? >> June 15th.
>> So, so someone needs to second that. >> Can someone second June 15th? >> I'll second it. >> So, all in favor then of the different >> bas. You have Sheila and my abstensions, right? >> Yeah. You're you're July 2nd,
>> correct? >> Sheila's July 15th. >> Yeah. >> June June 15th. Uh oh. June 15th. >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. >> 49. >> Um other business.
>> No. Okay. Comments from the public. They're open for public comment. Okay. Seeing no hands raised, um I'll close public comment. I'm going to make a motion to go into executive session to discuss um uh matters of personnel. Uh
and let me just read that. I hereby move that the board uh go into executive session pursuant to NJSA 10 col4-12 to discuss matters uh pertaining to personnel. The minutes of this close session will be released when the need
for cons confidentiality no longer exists. We will not come back into public session uh to take any action. So, um, I'm closing the public meeting. Okay. May I have a motion to go into
executive session? >> I'll second it. >> All in favor? >> I. >> And we are um adjourning the meeting. >> I I have it. >> And the public meeting now. Okay. Thank you everyone. We were We are back August
24th for our next board of education meeting.