The adequate notice of this regular meeting as required by the open public meetings act was provided by the posting, mailing delivery and filing of this notice on January 9, 2025. This notice was on that date posted on the bulletin board in the township
office, sent to the courier news, echo sentinel, and tap into Warren and filed with the township clerk of the township of Warren. All in accordance with the requirements of the open public meetings act. Please rise for the pledge of allegiance. >> I allegiance to the flag of the United
States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Mr. Hayden. >> Right. I'll now call the role. Mrs. Dalton >> here.
>> Mrs. Granholm. Miss Keller >> here. >> Mr. Mfetta. Mr. Otto. Mr. Tor >> here. >> Mr. Valentino. Mr. Weinstein >> here. >> And Mrs. on >> here. >> We have a quorum.
>> Thank you, Mr. Hegel. Um, Miss Keller, >> whereas the Open Public Meetings Act NJSA 104-11 permits the board of education to meet in close session to discuss certain matters. Now, therefore, be it resolved, the board of education adjourns to close session to discuss protection of public safety and property
andor investigations of possible violations or violations of law. Action will be taken upon return to public session. The length of the meeting is anticipated to be approximately 30 minutes and be it further resolved the minutes of this closed session be made public when the need for confidentiality no longer exists. Do I have a second?
>> Second. >> All in favor? >> I. >> Opposed? Abstain. The board is now in executive session. Oh, right. >> Do I have a motion to return to public session? >> Motion. Second. >> All in favor?
>> I >> opposed. Abstain. The board is now back in regular session. Miss Keller >> resolved that the board of education approves the public session minutes of the September 29th, 2025 board meeting. >> Do I have a second?
>> Second. >> Mr. Hegel. >> All right. We're going to call the role on the minutes. Mrs. Dalton? >> Yes. >> Miss Keller? >> Yes. >> Mr. Tor? >> Yes. >> Mr. Weinstein. >> Yes. >> And Mrs. Zan.
>> Zan. Um, sorry. Abstain. >> Abstain. >> Abstain. I wasn't here last. >> Okay. That's right. You were not. >> I don't have a column for that. I'll have to add one. All right. >> Sorry. >> Motion passes. >> Thank you. Dr. Mingle. Correspondence and
information. >> Thank you, Mrs. Zan. We have the board received one piece of correspondence. It was an email from a staff member thanking the board for its support with esports. And in the HIV investigation realm, there were five investigations since our last meeting. One at the middle school,
one at Central, and one at Mount Horb, which were all confirmed, and two at ALT, which were not confirmed. And that's all in that section. >> Thank you, Dr. Mingle. Good evening and welcome to the October meeting of the board of education. Happy Halloween, everybody. Looking forward to seeing all the costumes. I hope everyone's enjoying
the change in seasons, uh, trunk or treat, bright lights, and all of the other fall traditions in Warren. I want to recognize Dr. Mingle who represented Warren at the 55th annual school law forum which took place in connection with this year's New Jersey School
Boards Association workshop in Atlantic City. Dr. Mingle was the presenter panelist on two discussions. One on the US Supreme Court's decision in Machmood v. Taylor and its impact on New Jersey public schools and the other on the role
of the board attorney balancing ethical duties and client expectations. It's always a proud moment when members of our administration uh are assist in the training of others. So, thank you, Dr. Mingle. Um, thank you to Wineer Realy
for its donation of $2,000 for the creation of the district strategic plan video, which appears on tonight's agenda as item B6 for approval and which Dr. Mingle will uh talk more about in a moment. Um, I want to recognize the
retirement of Vivian Plesid at the end of this academic year. Miss Plesid has served the Warren community for 23 years and Brenda Sasso also at the end of this academic year. Miss Sasso has served the Warren community since 1999.
We are profoundly grateful for these teachers presence in our learning community over the years and wish them well in their retirement. And I would like to offer a special welcome to Constantine Bellman who is with us this evening. He is here earning his
communications badge as he seeks recognition as an Eagle Scout. Uh Constantine's a former student here at the middle school. So welcome. And uh Dr. Mingle, superintendent's remarks. >> Thank you, Mrs. Zan. So uh I also want
to highlight representatives of the district who were able to present at a uh state conference recently. So a team from central school presented a paper at the autism New Jersey conference about uh work they do with uh students here. It was the title of the paper was
collabor collaborative approaches to autism programming in elementary schools and that included principal Allison Tuja, school counselor Oasis, learning disabilities teacher consultant Erica Bell, and our behavior specialist Nikki Keller. Uh I also Mrs. Zan mentioned
that we had a donation from Judy Wineer and Wineer Realy that was to support an updated um strategic plan video, but we like to highlight what happens inside of our schools, which is not something that the average community member can see on a regular basis. And so they brought a
it when you see the video, you'll think a huge professional film crew is really one person um who did a I would like to say a wonderful job in capturing the essence of what it looks like in our schools on a day-to-day basis. And we'd like to debut that video now for you, which will be up on our website
tomorrow. Welcome to the Warren Township Schools. Here we focus on the whole child, nurturing academic growth, social and emotional well-being, and a sense of belonging. Our new 2025 2030 strategic plan built
on our strong foundation, and it has three key priorities: student learning, student and staff well-being, and planning for growth. Our first goal is to elevate academic rigor and engagement at War Middle School. New
courses like info schools, communication lab, and voice and vision challenge students to think critically and communicate effectively. Updates in computer science, innovation and design, and multilingual learning prepare them with both strong academics and real
world skills. We're also committed to personalizing learning and providing comprehensive support for all students. Through a multi-teer system of support, every learner gets what they need. Whether that's targeted intervention, enrichment, or social emotional learning
in inclusive classrooms. >> Our second goal is to strengthen well-being. Recently, we launched a due breakfast program, ensuring every child starts their day ready to learn. We're also creating supportive spaces where students and staff feel safe and included and expanding access to mental
health and wellness resources. With enrollment increasing, we are working carefully to maintain small class sizes, high quality program from preschool through middle school. We're planning facilities and resources that meet the needs of every learner today and tomorrow. As you look to the next
five years, our strategic plan will guide us in making sure every child is talently, supported, and cared for the whole person. Behind every confident, capable child is a community lending and support. Thank you for being a part of our journey of
the war and consciousness. And that's all for my report. >> Thank you Dr. Mingle. So we are going to move on to presentations. We have two presentations. The first is the annual assessment report. Mr. Kimick.
Okay. Well, thank you for the opportunity to present tonight. Uh just as a reminder as we're getting this set up, uh this is our required state reporting of our state results. So, this is something that annually we do for the district. uh the results within this report um and the information of around
individual score reports have already been shared with families uh staff that spend time looking at all these results. We've talked about this in committee work but this is an opportunity uh for a public presentation just about our results as a whole. So this really the presentation tonight will address just our state assessment results from our
spring administration. So that was our math assessment, our ELA assessment, our science assessment, and then there was something called a DLM, which I'll just mention tonight as well. These are the topics that I'll address tonight. So when we think about just our administration uh and the results overview, uh I'll just touch upon each
one of the topics that are on the screen here for you. And uh if you have questions at the end, I'll be happy to entertain any questions that the board may have. really important to recognize that uh we have uh really an unusual kind of testing environment that takes place in the spring. We have essentially
for certain grade levels seven days of assessment that take place. So it is a it's a long process for the students. It's unlike anything that we do uh within schools as a whole across the year. So this kind of testing environment is very unique when we go through state assessments. Uh so it's a
different kind of of experience for the students. So that can factor into the way that uh students respond to the assessment and and the kind of um I think engagement that they have with the assessment itself. We have a very small cohort of students uh that is below uh
the threshold for reporting. So we don't report out on students that take something called a dynamic learning maps assessment. That's an alternative assessment usually associated with the student who has an individual education program that requires some type of of alternate assessment environment. But that that cohort is so small that I have
to let you know that we do that but I don't let you know the results and and and how the students performed on that because it would identify the students. Uh when we think about ELA and math assessment, these are the areas that are addressed within the ELA and math assessment. Uh very important to recognize that in the version of the
NJSLA that was administered last year, and I remind every year of this, there's about six versions of the assessment at every grade level that are administered. So each student in a room may be taking an assessment that is different than a person sitting on either side of them. And it's important to recognize that
those assessments also do not measure all of the standards on a grade level. So they're samplings of standards. So when we talk about the results that we have, recognize that not every student received the same assessment. Not every student was assessed on all of the standards. So you know when you think
about passing rates and things like that, all of that can kind of factor into interpretations around passing rates as well. When we think about our performance levels, uh just pointing out here to you, there's five levels. As a reminder, level one is not yet meeting grade level expectations. You can see
that's a 50 point um span that that or range within that level. And then level two and three, you'll notice are partially meeting and approaching grade level expectations. Uh that's a smaller span. That's a 25 point span each one of those. And when you notice again just
some of the results I share with you, I I would just encourage you to look at levels two and three as well to see the percentage of students that are within those levels. And then we have our highest levels of four and five. And generally anything over four or above is considered to be passing. I mentioned
some of this to you before. Uh important on this slide I think to recognize is that our ELA passing rates in 2025 were unchanged from 2024. Uh so we had 68% passing rate in 2024. We had a 68%
passing rate overall in 2025 as well. Our math results for the past uh two years, we have been on an upward trend of about 3% increase each year. Uh remember our math program has been in place longer than our ELA programming has been. ELA last year was a was the
first year of a new program that we put in place. Many times we'll see an implementation dip in a first year. uh we did not experience a dip which I see as something that's very positive. Usually when we talk about new materials, new strategies, new structures, that's something that
students have to acclimate to, staff has to acclimate to. So sometimes those transition can take a couple of years. And then in science, we had a 5% increase both at grade five and at grade eight, which I see is also very positive. So uh those are those are just trends I I would ask you to take note of
as we go through this. I mentioned level three. We have 18% of our students in math that are performing at a level three. That 25% or 25 point band, those students are very close to meeting expectations. Many of those students on
the high end of level three would suggest that again our passing rates with a if you think about just margins of error could be a little bit higher depending on interpretation of those results. Uh same thing with the LA. we have about 20% of our students who are performing at a level three on these
diagnostics or on these assessments. Uh so that band again is a very narrow band and and you know that's that's an encouraging trend for some of our students. Science results are a little bit different. They're four-point results instead of a fivepoint scale. Um so level two in science is nearing
proficiency. We have a large percentage of our student that are nearing proficiency in science. So we're hoping that those trends continue in a positive way over the next few years. um our math results. You can see here there's a lot of information on this table. Um I do point out a couple things
for you here. Whoa. Sorry about that, Tier. I think I just um did something. Thank you, Tan. Don't push that button again, Bill. All right. So, our math results here, as I pointed out to you before, if you
notice level three, you could see we have a range in level three in terms of the percentage of students that are are landing at that area. Um, depending on the grade level um math, important to recognize, and I I point this out to everybody every year in grade 8, that's where we have a large percentage of our
students take algebra and geometry. Over about 45% of our students in grade 8 are taking high school math. So that means that the remaining 55% of the students are kind of again uh represented in that grade eight number which is why some of
those percentages at level one and level two and level three increase at that point because we almost have to look at grade 8 as grade 8 math algebra and geometry and it doesn't break out this way because the state doesn't um ask us to do it in that way on this report.
Notice again our our level ones and you can see the state averages as well in each one of these columns. Uh when we think about level one, our percentages of level one performing students are very low compared to state averages, which which is something to me is um
important to note here. And then you can see over on the far right column, you can see our passing rates at grade three compared to the state averages as well. So like at grade three we have almost 79% of our students who are passing in math this past year and that that range
changes somewhat but you can see we perform very well compared to the state. Looking at our trend over two years you can see this column on the right actually shows our percentage passing rate at each grade level compared to the state. You can see the difference in our
performance compared to the state. You can compare that back to last year. So that gives us a sense of how certain cohorts are performing as well, but also gives us a sense of our course trends. There are some dips that you'll notice here, like in grade seven, we had a drop of seven percentage points on a on a
course score. Um, it's important to recognize that we we note those things in terms of are we seeing patterns that are forming over multiple years at a grade level. We generally are not seeing that kind of pattern that's forming over multiple years as we go through that. If
that was something that that was the case, then we would have very specific goals kind of related to addressing that for our students. But overall, you know, our performance relative to the state, uh tends to be very strong as well. This is just subgroup information. U you
could see here like for the first two, male and female, we break it down this way. We're required to report the information out this way. Um you know, in this case, our male students perform a little better than our female students do in mathematics. We can see again how different subgroups um are broken down
in terms of overall performance. Uh important to recognize there are individual students who will fall into more than one subgroup, you know, when we look at that. So clearly every student is going to be a male or female. So they're they're going to fall into at least two categories when we do this. Uh
looking at another set of subgroup data, you could see how our students do who are economically disadvantaged. We can see how students who have IEPs versus no IEPs do and we can see again students who have 504s or are multilingual learners as well. Uh the subgroup data
is very important I think when we when we do our analysis because it does drive some of the goals that that we that we look at in terms of actions that we want to take and in terms of just uh some of the district goals relative to just performance for certain groups of students.
When we think about ELA I I just set this up in the same way for you. Uh you can see again just the different trend data in each level of performance. You can see our overall passing rates relative to just state averages. The next slide again you could see how
we did at each grade level compared to their performance as a course last year as well. Um you know you'll notice here we had you know a drop in seventh grade but we had a big increase in eighth grade last year in ELA. So again, some of those patterns will start to emerge
uh depending on the cohort and where the cohort's position was uh relative to the standards at the beginning of the year. Uh but but again, if you look at where we are relative to the rest of the state, our language arts performance again is is something that is a positive.
Again, same type of subgroup data. And in this case, the female students did a little bit better than the male students, which um is not something that I want to say is um not surprising, but it is something that's a pattern that you generally see
relative to math and language arts. So, it's something that we're we're very sensitive to in terms of work that we do with the students that way. Uh you can see how each of the subgroups do and then you could see how we do in terms of just some of the classifications of programming that we have for students.
Very quickly, science scores I mentioned to you science is is addressing uh these areas in terms of the assessment. Uh those are just different standards areas and then science is broken down in a four-point scale. For some reason, the state decided to do four versus five
just to make it extra confusing for everybody. Um but we have it set up this way where we have level two is near proficiency, level four is advanced proficient. Remember, only students in grade five and grade eight take these assessments. Uh you can see again relative to state performance, our
students do uh very well compared to just the state as a whole. Um and again, I pointed out to you that level two um percentages there. That's those are students that, you know, we want to see those students moving over into the level three and the level four
categories. But we've seen good growth, I think, over the past couple of years. uh that 5% increase in in each grade level is very positive as well. And then you can see the same type of information here just how we do relative to the state over over the two-year period.
Right? So just some takeaways and actions as a district that that I just want the board to be aware of. Uh we do, as I mentioned, have a new program implementation that took place last year for our K5 language arts materials. That was a that was a fairly large onboarding
of of new materials that are very very closely aligned across buildings. Uh we did a lot of professional development that took place last year that's continuing this year. Uh we're very encouraged by the work that's taking place. I think the fact that we didn't have a dip is a testament to the teachers, testament to the
administrators are working closely on this. Um you know that's something I see as a positive and we're hoping that that that positive growth will continue as we go through the year. One thing we did notice is that on our I Ready reading assessments, that's a good indicator of
how students do on NJSLA, the I Ready reading and suggested that our students were going to perform better on NJSLA. NJSLA doesn't just measure reading, it measures reading and writing. So, you know, our takeaway from that again and
looking at our results is that we have to actually provide some exposures and experiences relative to the type of ondemand writing that students have to do on these types of assessments. It's a really challenging task. You remember when you were there, right? I mean, it's it's a type of task that uh is unlike
what students typically do in their writing experiences across the year. So setting that up for students with different experiences across the year as a benchmark to provide that exposure, provide that kind of opportunity for students and be able to unpack that a little bit for students I think could be helpful in terms of just the way that
they approach that assessment. And that's an important technical kind of writing. So it is the type of thing that um we do want students to get good at and and have more experience around that. Um in mathematics, as I mentioned to you, we've had a very steady increase in terms of our performance over a three-year period. So we're very
encouraged by that. You saw again in grade seven that we had a little bit of a blip in grade seven. We had a very new team in grade seven last year. Remember, we we've had that's our newest math team. So, one of the things that we're doing this year is providing them an opportunity to go out of district for
some really intensive work with a math specialist and math consulting group that we've used for all of our other grade levels for a number of years called Conquer Math. And that facility provides them the opportunity to really unpack the standards in a different way than some of the I Ready training that
we've done for them. So that's a very specialized training that we're providing for them. Grade seven math is is is that year that we begin to kind of separate students into just tiers of math instruction. So it's important I think that we're very fluid in terms of how we do that and providing teachers
the support necessary for that. Dr. Mingle mentioned in the video that that you showed before me about the multi-tered system of supports. That is a strategic plan goal that we have this year to really look at and evaluate the way that we provide intervention supports for our students and the way
that we use staff within our buildings. So that's going to be some ongoing work that takes place there in terms of how we do things like ASAP for students and how we do things like provide co-eing experience and just ways that we can do a better job of actually meeting the diverse needs within within the school.
So we're excited about the work that's taking place there. Part of that is also this idea of universal accommodations and supports. There's something called universal design for learning that is kind of foundation of that work. But anything that would be a tier one level is a classroombased kind of intervention
that can take place. And we're really good at this the younger we go. You know, like kindergarten, first grade teachers do this supernaturally just because it's the nature of of of that level. But again, providing supports for everybody to recognize the really good work that's already taken place in the
district and then also identify ways that we can actually meet student needs in a different way. We're doing some work around IEPs and the way that we develop individualized education plans. So, we make sure that we're providing lots of access to uh least restrictive settings and access to grade level
standards and curriculum. So, all that is tied into some of our strategic planning. And then we have these areas that that I think we've worked very hard to develop our capacity to look at student performance data, to look at all sorts of different sets of data, to be able to make decisions and monitor students very carefully over the year.
Uh that's something I think that we do a very good job of in this district and that's continuing. And then we have these extended day programs that we're able to support this year. Right. In closing, the last thing I have to mention to you is the state is um
changing the assessment platforms that we're using. We're not using Pearson anymore going into this year. We're using something called Cambium, which is a an assessment platform that's used in 22 or 23 other states. uh what they're suggesting is is that this is going to
be more of an adaptive assessment that will provide um changes in the way that uh questions are generated based on student responses in the same way that I ready kind of works that way as well. Uh this assessment we have to field test. So you're going to hear potentially next
week that we have field tests that are taking place on Monday and Wednesday in the district. We don't have a choice around that. The state is requiring all districts to do that. And then lastly, we're going to use this platform starting in May. Um, I can't tell you
what the results are going to look like of this, you know, and this is the thing. Every time we change these platforms, we get new reporting kind of parameters. So, as soon as I have information, I'll be able to share it with the curriculum committee and and update the board on that. Frustrating thing about the field test is we're not
getting any results back. So there's no information that we are going to get back in terms of how students did on the field test or or you know what took place with that. So it's just something that the state is requiring us to do. That's take place next week. And then this is our schedule going into next year for assessments.
So with that uh that's I conclude my my presentation to all of you. Thank you for your attention and if there's any questions I'm happy to respond. >> Thank you Mr. Kimck. Does any board member have any questions? Okay, thank you so much. Thank you very
much opportunity. >> Okay, moving on. We do have a second presentation this evening relating to the feasibility study on regionalization and shared services which will be publicly presented this Thursday, October 30th at the high school. I want
to make a couple of preparatory remarks. Firstly, the presentation will be led by Dr. Mingle. However, the presentation reflects the collaboration between the administration and the board's ad hoc committee on regionalization and shared services, which has spent a lot of time
looking at the study. All of the administration has worked hard over the last years to respond to information requests from the study team. And I want to thank in particular Dr. Mingle, Chris Hegel, Bill Kimick, Molly Lang, and all
of their staff for their hard work. Secondly, the last draft of the study that we saw was 222 pages long. That represents a monumental effort on the part of the study team, and we recognize that effort. We have not seen a final
copy of the study, but know that they are continuing to work on it right up to the last minute. Finally, we met with the study team lead members Kathy Helawa and Mark Maguar this morning.
As you will hear in the presentation, Warren provided extensive comments on the drafts of the study. We were told this morning that as much as 98% of the factual inaccuracies that appeared in the drafts have been corrected.
We also advised Miss Hela and Mr. Maguar that this very presentation was taking place this evening. I want to make it clear that they were completely fine with this conversation taking place in advance of their public presentation of the report on Thursday.
They understand that the Warren board calendar together with meeting dates related to other committees and the working group together with the duty to keep the Warren community informed necessitated this conversation happening tonight.
We encourage everyone to also attend their public presentation of the final report on Thursday and to read the final report. But again, they could not have been more supportive of our proceeding this evening with this conversation.
And with that, Dr. Mingle. >> Thank you, Mrs. Zan. Okay, with that introduction, the goal tonight from my perspective is really to bring everyone up to speed on two related topics. The regionalization feasibility study that maybe some people have started to see in their news feeds
or on their social media and our district's planning for growth work, which is internal. We are particularly concerned with the potential for confusion as people might start to mix these two different efforts which are unique independent of each other. My goal is simple tonight to make sure you
understand what the regionalization feasibility study is, what it isn't, what the Warren Township Board of Education's position is, and how all of that connects to the work that we've already been doing to prepare for Warren's future. Tonight's presentation is intended to
provide clear information about the regionalization feasibility study that has been circulating publicly. It reflects, as Mrs. Zan said, the collaborative work of the board's ad hoc committee and the administration to ensure accuracy, transparency, and stability. Because this the full study
has not been released publicly, and we know from our meeting this morning that there will be additional edits to factual information. I'm not going to speak to specifics of what the study itself says, but more about the process and kind of where we are in our analysis of the drafts.
First, you should be aware that regionalization studies are part of a state initiative called the school regionalization efficiency program. The goal of that program is to examine whether combining or sharing certain services among neighboring districts
could improve efficiency or lower costs. This is part of a relatively recent state law uh that was passed to fund these programs. The study that affects us was conducted by Rowan University's school regionalization institute. It was not conducted by any of the school
districts themselves. Wong Hills Regional High School was the lead applicant for this study with Wong Burough as a co-licant. That's an important piece of information because some of you who have been watching meetings for a while may remember this discussion taking place several years ago. It was important from the legal
perspective that there be a lead applicant and at least one K8 applicant as well. Greenbrook, Long Hill, and Warren were invited to participate by providing data and joining advisory conversations. The Warren Warren Township participated to ensure that local data and perspectives were
accurately represented. It's important to clarify that participating does not mean endorsing. Our board agreed to share information so that the study would be based on accurate data, but Warren has not sought to join a regional district.
The study looked at three different analyses. First, what it would look like for a single preschool through 12th grade regional district that combines all of the communities that feed into Wong Hills High School and Wong Hills High School into one school district.
That would be including Greenbrook, Long Hill, Wong. Who did I not say? And us. Second, to consider a smaller regional district that's just among the Wong Hills constituent towns. That's all of the above minus Greenbrook. And I'll
explain that more in a second. And then third, to look at different shared services opportunities between and among the districts without making any governance changes to the structure of the districts. It's important to know that these are conceptual models that were used to test different ideas. None
of them are proposals from any individual school district of something uh necessarily to consider. I mentioned the difference between Greenbrook status and the others because it's important to how things would play if this would were to move forward for further discussion. Greenbrook is in a send receive um
relationship with watching Hills Regional High School. What that means is that people who live in Greenbrook pay taxes only to one governmental entity for their schools and then the Greenbrook Board of Education negotiates the tuition it pays to Wong Hills High School for any students it sends there.
On the other hand, Warren, Long Hill, and Wang are formerly part of the regional school district that makes up Wong Hills, which is why residents of those three communities see two different tax bills for schools that go directly there. That the preK8 boards in those three towns do not negotiate with
the high school over uh anything when it comes to tuition. And because of those differences, any nextstep discussions require different considerations for Greenbrook as to the other districts involved. Our board's ad hoc committee members and our
administrative team have has worked closely to make sure that the study reflected the reality of our programs, our staffing, and our facilities. We have been fully cooperative and transparent throughout the process, responding to every data request we've received, uh, which included hundreds of
man-hour time to to gather information and provide it. We've supplied every data set requested, participated in the advisory committee, and carefully reviewed each draft of the report. As Mrs. Zan said, totaling well over 200 pages in each of the two drafts. Our feedback is focused on three things:
accuracy, transparency, and respect for local governance. We want any regional conversation to start with facts and mutual respect, not assumptions or mischaracterizations. The board's focus has been ensuring that Warren's data and the Warren community values are represented accurately
throughout the process. When we reviewed the drafts, several issues stood out. Some of the data didn't match what we provided. Class size and capacity assumptions didn't reflect how our schools actually operate. program descriptions, especially in special education, didn't
always capture the quality and complexity of what our staff deliver every day. And finally, the financial projections, in our view, significantly overstated potential savings, often by overlooking real world costs and service needs. As Mrs. said earlier, we've
communicated that feedback to the team both after the first draft in August and the second draft earlier this month in quite comprehensive memos uh with detailed line by line um comments and citations to the backup that we believe supports our concerns. Uh we were
assured this morning that many of those factual questions would be addressed in the final report, but we don't have that tonight. And so we needed to talk about kind of where things are and the due diligence that we've taken to ensure that the process is as complete as possible. The ad hoc committee has recommended to
the Warren Township Board of Education that it adopt a resolution this evening that documents Warren's position on the regionalization study. You'll hear more about that in discussion in just a few minutes. That resolution makes clear that while Warren values collaboration with neighboring districts, the study as
written includes factual inaccuracies that must be corrected. The resolution also affirms that Warren's focus remains on what has always guided this community, doing what's best for our students and the taxpayers through sound, transparent decision-making. The Rowan University team will present
its findings to the public later this week. Each district's board of education will then determine whether any follow-up action is warranted. For Warren, that process begins tonight at in the public setting with a formal resolution and an ongoing commitment to keep our community fully informed. The
event is open to the public. It's on Thursday beginning at 6:30 p.m. at the Wong Hills Regional High School Learning Commons uh and is also streamed on their YouTube channel. So it the most important part probably of my update is the connection between this work and the work that we've been
talking about here around planning for growth. While the regionalization study looks outward, planning for growth looks inward in our own district's roadmap and our strategic plan. We've established a proactive process that we've talked about at these meetings several times already and that is well underway. We're
studying enrollment patterns, preschool capacity, special education needs, facility usage, all to ensure that Warren leads its own future. Since launching in June, the Planning for Growth Group has already completed significant work, reviewing preschool
options, studying special education space, visiting every school, and analyzing how we've managed past growth. This has been a collaborative process. The group of about 20 people includes staff, parents, board members, community members who have children, community members who don't have children, elected
officials from this board and the township committee, and reflects the best of how Warren plans ahead. Our goal is to be proactive and not reactive to these kinds of changes in our community. Looking ahead, the group tomorrow, the group will dive into updated demographic
data that not only projects continuing ongoing natural growth we've talked about at these meetings, round three housing growth that we've talked about these meetings, but also the first time we'll put numbers to round four housing growth for the next 5 to 10 years. And we will look at updated facility
capacity analysis based on those numbers. The goal is to ensure our buildings and our programs and our budget can meet the needs of a growing and evolving student population for the next decade and beyond. So to be clear,
the publication of the regionalization study doesn't change anything operationally for the Warren Township schools at this time. Regionalization is an external conversation, not a district reorganization. Our mission, our staff, and our goals remain the same, ensuring
that every student learns, grows, and thrives in the Warren Township Schools. Tonight, there will be discussion at the board table. We have our opportunities for public comment. This is an agenda item. And then we will move to the board's formal discussion of the resolution.
The full presentation will be posted on the district website. As always, we publish the videos of our meetings and that will be out tomorrow as well. We also invite you if you have any questions to contact us at communitywarbeoe.org. Just to speak more broadly than just
this study, uh the board has a board goal around getting into the community and building relationships and communications. Any group that is interested in learning more about our strategic plan, the work we're doing, or this topic or any other, simply email communityboe.org and we'll figure out a time that we can
get together. We invite you to continue to stay informed as we update through our community briefings on Friday afternoons as well. With that, I'll rejoin Adis and open it up for questions and comments. >> Thank you, Dr. Mingo. Again, we recognize that undertaking a study of five different school districts, their
budgets, facilities, curriculum, and programs is a monumental task. And the resulting 220 plus page study reflects that effort. All of the comments and concerns that we have expressed here and which appear in
the draft resolution that we will be discussing in a moment have been previously shared with the feasibility study team. There are no surprises in the content of our comments and there is nothing to be read into the timing of this discussion. I encourage everyone to
read the final report when it comes out on Thursday. And again this morning when we advised the study team that we would be talking about this this evening they were um completely fine with that and um uh supportive.
So based on our review of the studies and our conversations this morning, um we are not while we are not going to discuss the specific content of the reports or their conclusions, we understand and expect that the analysis we've already seen and the final conclusions and recommendations that
appeared in the drafts uh will be unchanged in the final report. The ad hoc committee does believe it's appropriate to give guidance to the community regarding its review of these drafts and accordingly we've prepared a draft resolution for tonight's meeting which has been supplied to the board
members here and I'm now going to open this for discussion. >> I just wanted to ask Dr. Mingle, could you go into more detail about how it is ultimately decided whether or not to regionalize? Like what does that process look like?
>> Sure. go for it. >> There are a number of ways in the law, so I won't go into all of the different ways that um it could happen. The most likely way that it would happen in a situation like ours would be that the
regional district would bring forth um a resolution at one of their meetings, which would be yes or no. Do we want to, as we learned just this morning actually, apply to the commissioner essentially for review to bring that question to the voters in all the constituent towns? That was new
information to me actually. I didn't know the commissioner had to approve that question. But then that would go to the constituent towns. There are uh different legal interpretations that I don't think we need to get into tonight about exactly how the different votes are counted and what happens depending
on how those votes come out. Um, but traditionally this is a question that the members of each community affected would have to go to the polls and and vote on. I'm sure Mrs. knows the process better than I do. She can go into more if she in detail she'd like. >> Well, first of all, I want to um state
that uh both the study team and um uh members of the advisory committee have said that this is not an imminent thing. We're not expecting that there's going to be movement at the high school to act on this. um immediately and that there
would be an opportunity for the K8 districts to take the study uh after it's uh produced in final form at the end, you know, on Thursday um and hopefully take a look at uh what it offers in the way of shared services and see whether or not there's anything
actionable there and and anything we can work with. Um but the question of regionalization itself if it were to happen would be would be initiated by the high school board. Um the K8 boards do not have a role in that process other
than again us advising the community and the high school of um what our perspective is and and our feedback is on the report itself. um regionalization would happen if a majority of a majority of the communities said
yes. The questions that would be put to Longhill Wong and Warren in this hypothetical future would be two questions. One, do you want to regionalize? Two, do you want to let Greenbrook join? And Greenbrook would get one question of if they regionalize,
do you want to join? So those are the questions that would go some version of those that would go to the voters in the event that the high school were to initiate that process. Does that help? >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Uh two questions. Do you have any
insights as to why there are so many discrepancies and um in terms of data and also cost-saving assumptions given this is kind of the final report or a version of then the other one is I have zero experience of this but generally
increasing and broadening the size of bureaucracies doesn't go well so do we have any benchmarks from outside of this area as to other other part other geographies where they've regionalized and whether it really does deliver anything worth chasing There are
few examples in the state of New Jersey of regionalization and where it has happened. You're typically dealing with extremely small school districts that are already sharing perhaps a superintendent or are perhaps non-operational. So there are a few examples of that. Um there are no
examples in the state of New Jersey of regionalization of districts such as ours which are high performing districts um that uh uh us anything like us basically. Yeah. >> Yeah.
>> As far as specifics the the most similar example which predates the legal changes of recent years was South Hunan Regional. So the communities in Hunton County that feed into South Hunan High School. Most of those K8s were single school districts. Some of them had I
these aren't exact numbers, but um so few students that there were grades combined like there would be one third and fourth grade at a school or something like that. Um so there that's very different than our reality for sure. The other districts as Mrs. said um that are more recent tend to be um
districts that are already sharing a lot of people. So, the one that you'll hear referenced mo most often is um the Henry Hudson Regional School District, uh which the superintendent was already shared among all the constituent districts. So, they already had sort of
a combined district office and and all that. There was oftentimes there's like one K8 feeding one K one high school or something like that. We don't have just to reiterate because I think it's an important point. There are there are no examples of districts that would combine to be the size that we would combine to
or that already have what would by any state definition be considered high performing districts that have have gone through this. >> Thank you. >> Other questions? If >> I could just do a comment, I think um and I know Mrs. you've said this before,
I just want to thank administration for all the effort over the last year. um just our participation in this process that we didn't we were not a applicant for this but we said we would be happy to participate and cooperate. I know this whole year of doing that has been a
lot of work for Dr. Mingle uh Mr. Hegel and your staff. So a thank you for that. And then on top of that the amount of work that went into those memos um pages and pages of feedback with footnotes. You brought receipts for sure. Um, so I
just want to thank everybody for, you know, doing that over the last few weeks because, um, I think that was just not something I think you expected to do on top of all the initial engagement and providing data and, um, responding to the request for information as part of the actual study itself. But in the
last, you know, since basically mid August, late August, it you can just see how much effort went into that. So, uh, much appreciated that that effort. If we're at the the point of considering the resolution, um it does that the the
text of the resolution does not appear in tonight's agenda. Uh so we would need to read that aloud and add that in as item A5 on items for board consideration. The proposed resolutions a little more than two pages long. The first page of
which is all the recitations that just make up a resolution. a second page we do get into actual statements um truthful statements about the report and I'm going to take when we get to the second page I'm going to teach take each of those um slowly and individually in
case any of them individually raise any questions. So if everyone's fine to sit for a moment while I read I will commence. Whereas New Jersey Public Law 2021, Chapter 4022
PN PL2021, C42 Close BNEN was signed into law by Governor Murphy on January 18th, 2022 creating the school regionalization efficiency program, SR.
And whereas the SR created a grant program within the Division of Local Government Services in the Department of Community Affairs, PM the DCA, the purpose of which was to provide for reimbursement of costs associated with
conducting feasibility studies to form or expand regional school districts. And whereas a grant application was filed by the Wong Hills Regional High School, WHRHS district and the Wung
Burough School District, WAG, and approved by the DCA for the purpose of conducting a study of the feasibility of consolidating operations to enlarge the current limited purpose grades 912
regional WHRS district into one all-purpose grades pre kindergarten to 12 regional school district with its four constituent districts Wong Warren Township School
District Warren Longhill Township School District Longill and Greenbrook Township School District Greenbrook collectively the districts or alternatively to share services among the districts
and whereas WH RHS and WAN as co-licants engaged the services of the Rowan School Regionalization Institute which in turn engaged various consultants collectively the study team to study relevant data in
order to provide recommendations on the feasibility of one creating an all districts regional or two creating a current constituents regional with Greenbrook entering into a revised send
receive agreement or three maintain the status quo with recommendations to align educational programs and support services and whereas the Warren was not a co-licant on the SR grant application
but Warren nonetheless cooperated fully with all information requests and provided representation from its board of education on the advisory committee formed by the study team. And whereas on August 28th, 2025,
the study team circulated a first draft of a feasibility study on regional regionalization and shared services in the Wung Hills regional, Warren, Longill, Wong, and Greenbrook Brooks school districts,
the feasibility study. And whereas on September 12, 2025, Warren provided extensive comments on the August feasibility study. And whereas on October 10th, 2025, the study team circulated a revised
feasibility study, which it described as the penultimate report, requested any feedback on factual or egregious errors, and advised of the intent to make a public presentation of the feasibility study on October 30th, 2025. And whereas
on October 17th, Warren again provided extensive comments on the October draft feasibility study. And whereas Warren's extensive review of the draft feasibility study identified
numerous factual inaccuracies, data inconsistencies, and unsupported conclusions, including conflicting enrollment projections, unverified demographic and income data, inaccurate descriptions of class size and facility capacity, and mischaracterization of
district programs and special education practices. And whereas the draft feasibility study analysis depends on various assumptions such as using state guidelines for class sizes rather than local class size guidelines. Projecting unrealistic
facility capacity. Alternate alternatively promising that neighborhood schools would be retained but also that students could be transported to schools in other communities where space exists. And whereas the draft feasibility study estimates regionalization would provide
a modest overall taxpayer savings of 1 to 1.6%. Which understates the cost of aligning collective negotiation agreements, salaries, health benefits, filling district level positions as well as increased curriculum and transportation
costs of an enlarged district. And whereas the draft feasibility study acknowledges that all the districts are high performing with low administrative costs and that differences in student preparedness among the sending districts have become less acute over the years.
And whereas the draft feasibility study acknowledges that the creation of a regional district would result in a sharing of all existing debt obligations across the constituent communities without regard to where the debt originated. And whereas Warren does not
carry any long-term debt, but would contribute to the payment of debt incurred in other districts under regionalization. And whereas the credibility of the final feasibility report study depends on accurate information, evidentiary rigor,
balanced analysis, transparent process, and respect for local governance. Now therefore, Warren is committed to transparency, collaboration, and ensuring that discussions about shared services or regionalization across the Wung Hills
area are grounded in accurate information and thoughtful analysis. Warren recognizes the time and effort of the study team in conducting its review and remains committed to collaboration with the study team. Warren regards the feasibility study in
its current form as advisory only and does not endorse or support its conclusions and/or recommendations. Warren will continue to evaluate any future regional or shared services discussions through the lens of student
outcomes, community values, and long-term fiscal sustainability for the Warren Township taxpayers. Comments from the board on the resolution, please questions.
>> I'm good with it. >> All right, we are adding that as item A5, two items for board consideration, and we'll vote on that when we get to voting on those items. Moving on to
uh report of board members on appointed on external I'm sorry one moment I'm having to adjust my papers here. Um appointment to external assignments. Um a quick note from me with regard to the New Jersey
delegate assembly. Um note that the um NJSBA delegate assembly is scheduled for November 22nd. Uh look for additional information regarding the agenda for the assembly as we get closer to that date. Also, the Somerset County School Boards Association met on October 9th where we
had a spectacular meal prepared by the students of the Somerset County Votech and I'm the only board member who ever goes and you guys just don't know what you're missing because the food is that good. It's just really good. Um and the kids are fabulous. Um anyway, the program was entitled uh AI
implementation and academic integrity, an administrator-led conversation. There's a video of that presentation which I'll forward to each of you if you're inclined to watch that. Um with that said, do we have any other reports from external assignments?
>> So, please forgive me. I had a meeting for the SCESC, but I did not bring my notes with me, so I will update at the next meeting. >> That's completely fine, Miss Dalton. Anyone else? Okay, moving on then to committee reports. Um, curriculum and
technology committee. Mr. Tour, >> so uh I did not attend the last curriculum meeting. Um, Mrs. Granhome took the minutes and would report it back. Were she here? >> I'm I'm terribly sorry. We will carry that.
>> Thank you. >> Thank you. Okay. Um, moving on then to the Finance, Operations, and Security Committee. The last time we met actually was September 8th. That's quite some time ago. I was not present at the last board meeting. So, it's been a bit of a bit of time
since um this meeting took place. Um, the Finance, Operations, and Security Committee met on September 8th. Um, as the district begins to look ahead to the next budget for 2627, we reviewed the status of federal funding for IDEA and um, ESA,
uh, the X aid over the last 5 years, healthcare costs, and the 2526 underbudgeted staffing increases. This information was for our awareness as we look ahead to what we expect to be a very challenging 2627
budget. More to come on that. Uh we also discussed the importance of curb appeal relating to landscaping at our facilities. Curb appeal efforts um may represent an area where local fundraising could be of assistance. So I'd like to take a minute and talk about
the Warren Township Education Foundation. The WTEF is a nonprofit organization that is currently not operating um but has throughout time had various iterations. Um uh it could serve as an independent
source to raise funds from private and corporate donors to enhance the preK through 8 uh grade classroom and curricular initiatives including but not limited to educational programs, technological innovations, and physical asset investments.
Uh the foundation operates independent of but in cooperation with the board of education and other organizations such as the PTO's. Similar foundations exist in many neighboring communities and um are a
valuable source of funds supporting the schools and encouraging community involvement. So I'm going to put this out there to the world that's listening to us. If anyone out there is interested in working on growing a vibrant Warren Township Education Foundation, please
reach out. Uh we would be happy to help connect anybody who's interested um with the comm community members in the past who have been part of this effort. Um and it's a real opportunity I think as the school district moves forward into um you know growth and change uh for the
community as a whole to um be supportive and uh so we're really looking for interest um on that and that is my only com that's it for finance um planning for growth working group Miss
Keller I'll talk slow to give you a So, Dr. Mingle mentioned this in his presentation. The planning for growth working group met on Tuesday, September 30th at the Warren Middle School to review current space usage and specialty programs across the district. Following
an initial discussion, members visited Mount Horb School where Mr. Cook provided a tour highlighting how classrooms and specialized spaces are being utilized. The group continued to central school for a similar walkthrough with the school principal, Mrs. Chua. The group then returned to the middle
school for the final tour by the middle school principal, Mr. Velar. Touring the schools during the instructional day offered members a valuable firsthand perspective of student life across multiple schools and grade levels. The group convened on October 1st, the next
day, to reflect on the tours and key observations. During this session, Dr. Mingle provided historical context on the town's development and outlined how the board of ed has managed both periods of growth and decline over the years. The notes and key takeaways from the
facility tours are available on our website along with materials from all the previous working group sessions. Uh the next meeting of the working group is tomorrow, October 28th, and the key agenda item for that session is a
presentation by our demographer on updated demographic and enrollment data. Thank you, Miss Keller. The ad hoc regionalization and shared services committee met on October 15th and October 24th and has been the
subject of quite a lot of presentation this evening. I will not add to that other than to say um the goal for that ad hoc committee appears for approval tonight as item A4. Um the ad hoc calendar committee met
October 16th. I do not sit on that committee. Um so Mr. Valentino will will carry that for Mr. Valentino to our next meeting, but I will point out that its goal appears um tonight on the board's agenda as item A3 for approval. Yeah,
please do >> just like to add one thing because it's timesensitive and we have a a larger than typical audience tonight. It is the expectation that the ad hoc calendar committee will be prepared to bring a conversation to the board at its next meeting about the 2627 calendar. So I
just want people to be aware of that. We will publish a draft of whatever is proposed for discussion in advance so that people can read it and bring comments if they wish. So that expect that to be on the November agenda. >> Thank you Dr. Mingle.
Okay. Um, it is now our first opportunity of two for public commentary. I ask that anyone interested in addressing the board please raise their hand or use the raise your hand feature on Zoom. Each speaker is asked to limit their comments to three minutes. Please begin your comments by
stating your name and address and by directing your comments to the presiding officer. Please know that the board of education welcomes and encourages input from the public. Public commentary is intended as an opportunity for the board to receive such input, but is not
intended as a Q&A session. Following public commentary, if appropriate, the presiding officer or the superintendent may provide some response. For this first opportunity, we ask that your comments be limited to items that appear in tonight's agenda. There will be a
second comment opportunity for all other comments later in the meeting. At this time, I look to our audience. Does anyone in our audience wish to address the board on agenda items? >> Kevin Brozb is 8 Snider Road. Um, first
I'd like to um give kudos to the board for getting ahead of the regionalization report. Um, I know you guys had to tiptoe around it a little bit because it hasn't been released yet, but um, I appreciate that you guys are being proactive about that. Um, a question
that I have and I know you can or cannot answer it at the end. That's fine. I'll ask it. um is I want to un I want to make sure I understand it correctly about the majority of voters and and my question on that is is there a scenario in which
Warren could vote no on regionalization but other towns vote yes and we would still be required or compelled to be regionalized. Uh so I pose that question and then um a couple comments and
thoughts on Mr. chemics uh presentation. Um so you know when I went to school a 60% was a F or a D a 70% was a C. I struggle to understand and I think it would be
helpful and I know Mr. Kimick is required by law to make that presentation. So take my s my my my thoughts as how could that presentation maybe be more impactful and informative to um the community. But I struggle with
understanding how six 60% 70% of students can test at um at grade level and that be an acceptable result. Um to me like like I said growing up 60% was
an F or a D. Um, so I'd like I think it would be helpful to understand why that's an accomplishment and not a problem. Um, and I don't mean to to throw shade. I there's probably a very good explanation for it, but we don't
hear it. Um, and I think even particularly so for the science results, which I thought were like 50ish% which seems alarmingly low. Um it would be very helpful to understand the context of those scores and why those scores are
not raising red flags in this room. Um and it would also be helpful to hear what a reasonable expectation would be as far as what those results could get to. There may be an a a a limit on what we can achieve, but it'd be helpful to
hear that and so we can understand why these results are what they are. And it would also be helpful to understand if there is a greater goal for these these results what are we doing to get to that to that level and how can we achieve
that um so those are things again I understand it's a mandated report and um but there may be an opportunity to um give more flavor to it. Thank you. >> Thank you Mr. Broadspace. Anyone else in
the audience present who would like to address the board on agenda topics? Okay, seeing none, we're going to move to the Zoom audience. Is there anyone in the Zoom audience that would like to address the board on agenda topics?
I don't see any. Do you? Seeing none, do I have a motion to close the first opportunity for public commentary? Motion >> second. Anyone? >> Second. >> Okay. Um, the first opportunity for a public commentary has now closed. Dr. Mingle, do you want to respond to
anything? Okay. Yeah. Um, so there is, um, a long history of, uh, statutes in this area that don't always,
um, uh, conform one to the other. I know this is shocking to anybody who knows anything about the law and legislators that there might be inconsistency among statutes, but they do exist. The SR um program uh contemplates as we read it
that you could have using Mr. is your example. A yes vote in say for instance long hill and watch a no vote in in Warren or frankly two yes votes of any of those three districts and one no
vote that would result in the two yes voting districts and the high school forming a regional prek through 12 district and the no voting district uh being in a send receive relationship.
now or not. Legal opinions are being sought. Nothing we've seen thus far would suggest that the no voting district can be compelled to join the regional legal opinions are being sought.
That summarizing yeah the inconsistency has to do with the consistency of the send receipt the the statutes relating to send receipt relationships. Is that I hope that's helpful. >> That it. >> Okay. Um Dr. Mingle, do you have any
comments on items for board consideration? >> I preempted my own comments. So, I just wanted to mention to anticipate calendar drafts and discussion at the next meeting with a likely um vote in December. And then to reiterate our appreciation for the donation from Judy Winger and Wineer Realy for the video
that we saw at the beginning of the meeting. >> Thank you, Dr. Mingo. Does any board member have any item for board consideration they'd like to pull for a separate conversation or vote? Seeing none, Miss Keller. Motion to approve items for board consideration A1
through A5, B1 through B6, C1 through C10. Motion. >> Okay. Mr. Hegel. >> All right. I will call the role on the consent agenda. Mrs. Dalton, >> yes. >> Miss Keller,
>> yes. >> Mr. Tor, >> yes. >> Mr. Weinstein, >> yes. >> And Mrs. Zan, >> yes. >> Motions pass 50. >> Uh, thank you, Mr. Hegel. We do not have any unfinished or new business, so we will be moving on to the second
opportunity for public commentary. Uh this is the second opportunity and it is open to any topic you wish to raise to the board's attention. Again, I ask that you raise your hand or use the raise your hand feature on Zoom. Remember that comments are limited to
three minutes and please state your name and address before beginning. Looking first to the room, is there anybody in the room that would like to address the board on any topic at all? No. Okay. looking to our Zoom audience.
Do we have anyone on Zoom that would like to address the board? Seeing none. Do I have a motion to close the second opportunity for public commentary? >> Motion. >> Second. Anyone? >> Second. >> Okay. All in favor? >> Opposed? Abstain. I should have said
that the first time. Anyway, uh the second opportunity for public commentary is now closed. Miss Keller >> motion to adjurnn. >> Do I have a second? >> Second. >> All in favor? Opposed? Abstain. The
board meeting is now closed. Thank you.