Okay. I will call to order our meeting October 20th, 2025 meeting of the Williamson County Board of Education. Uh thank everyone for being here. We will begin with uh recording our attendance. board members.
>> Mr. Durggers, >> there are 12 members present. >> Thank you. Next order of business is our pledge of allegiance, which will be led by Drayson Beasley, followed by a moment of silence. Please stand. Father
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. You may be seated. All right. Our next item is an items of
particular public interest. our public comment period. Uh this evening we have seven uh individuals who have signed up to speak. Uh each of you will have up to three minutes if you choose to take it. Uh I will call the first three in order and um so please be ready uh when the
person in front of you is finished to walk up to the podium. There is a screen on the podium that will show your uh time. So be please pay attention to that uh to make sure you stay within the three minutes please. Our first three uh speakers, Holly Algood, Brad Davis,
Hillary Stalker. Good evening. I'm the parent of a Woodland Ravenwood and alumni of the district. I had the privilege of serving the middle middle school science textbook selection committee last year. That experience solidified my faith and
appreciation for the administrative staff and especially the science teachers of our district. This selection process was administered by staff and this board praised the committee after a report of their work last January. The process for the committee involved signing an oath, creating a strong
vision for science in our high-erforming district, evaluating texts alongside of representative teachers, interacting with publishers to learn about the resources available. Every science teacher in the district was engaged in a workday for textbook evaluation. We
collected feedback from the community and we finally voted. In the end, the textbook selected for middle school and elementary schools after this rigorous effort was not approved by this board. This has led to several concerns that need your attention. First, the science
textbook selection policy did not spell out what happens when the board does not approve of the committee's selection. This mo board may have overstepped to take that selection. And quite frankly, being part of this committee, the stem scope text voted in by the board was not
considered as rigorous, thorough, or high quality as the other options by the teachers of this district. Secondly, the oath was not signed by the board member who was exeicio to the committee. And finally, the action of the board undermined the committee's comprehensive
student focused work. Knowing that a revision to this policy textbook or this textbook selection policy is under consideration, I respectfully request three things. That the revision require all members exeicio and otherwise of the
selection committee sign the required oath to ensure that this this oath ensures that members do not have a conflict of interest. Secondly, the new revised policy needs to have deference to the selection committee as intended
in TCA49-6-2207C1. The teachers are the experts in this arena and as a high-erforming district, they have earned that role and the trust of our community. The current policy does not go far enough in protecting the work of the committee, nor does it
detail what should happen if the board does not approve the committee's selection. And third, my request is meant as encouragement. Please consider how you will support our science curriculum across the district if and when deficits
are noted. Support our teachers and encourage them to voice their concerns. We need them to be able to provide rigorous assessments, hands-on learning, and differentiation as necessary.
>> Thank you. >> This is my third time speaking to you guys as a parent, sharing the safety concerns I have for children in Williamson County. And it's clear that there's still confusion on the parental end of the equation. There's also
confusion and mixed messages coming from your end as well. I say this because on September 12th, just five weeks ago, my wife and I got an email. It's the typical email from our child's principal that has weekly news and events. and in it contained a link to a Williamson
County Schools published video about student safety that was clearly false and misleading, at least regarding our lived experience with it. The video is titled Time to Talk Threats. It's two years old. It's available on YouTube.
And it says, and I quote, "There's a new law in Tennessee, and any student who makes a threat of mass violence that's a threat to two or more people will be sent to the alternative learning center for 180 days. an entire school year. It doesn't say they may be sin or could be sentenced. It says they will be sin.
So if that video is true, why did the student who bullied, attacked, and threatened to murder my daughter and three of her friends, why were they immune from the consequences listed in that video? What series of events led to an outcome
nobody wanted where the child with a documented history of violence who had harmed and threatened murder was protected while four 9-year-old girls were faced with at least continuous
emotional trauma each day as they went to school and at worst death. I've been actively trying to find out those answers for the last year. And the only thing I've learned for certain is no one wants to take responsibility for
why that disciplinary action was taken. Nobody's nobody cares. Nobody wants to take responsibility for doing a root cause analysis to find out what led to the the thing that we didn't want. And
the video says the school could have done more. Mr. Goolan's email to me a few months before says his hands were tied by federal law and federal law needs to be changed. I spoke with one board member who agreed with the video and said the school system could have done more. I spoke
with another who said contact Marshia Blackburn's office. So I contacted Marshia Blackburn's office. She said it's a she her staff said it's a local state school issue, not hers. Mr. Golden, I know what you're going to say when you address my remarks. You're going to say something like, "You
appreciate my comments and suggestions on how I can you can make the school safer and you're already on top of it. are doing things every day to make the school safer. But I hope when you say that or something along those lines, I hope you'll excuse me and parents across the country as we roll our eyes and dismiss
your comments until we know until you identify exactly what allows violent students with clearly stated murderous intent intent to harm our children remain at school. >> Mr. Davis, >> why couldn't they be sent to Why Why couldn't they be sent to alternative
learning school? time. Thank you, sir. >> Thank you. >> Good evening. My name is Hillilary Stalker. I'm a local executive board member at High Hopes, a wife of a WCS middle school teacher, and most importantly, a mom to a fifth and second
grade student at Sunset Elementary School. I don't tell you all of that to impress you. I just want you to know and paint the picture that quite frankly I'm not standing here because I didn't think this was crucially important. I'm missing my son's baseball game to address this. But I stand before you
today on behalf of parents and teachers at Sunset who have admitted that they don't have it in them to speak. So I will do so even in my voice and handshake. A year ago, I emailed you, Dr. Golden, citing concerns about Tina Aaron's rhetoric, unapproachable manner, inappropriate interactions with
students, parents, and staff. My biggest fear was that we'd lose the best teachers and staff because prior to hiring her, the SCES was an idyllic elementary school filled with love, learning, and fun. I got no response. Then in June of 2025, I learned we lost an incredible teacher who quit with no
backup plan cuz she couldn't take it anymore. And worst of all, Christy Serpus was wrongfully terminated. I emailed him again immediately because exactly what I feared was playing out. Still no response. I tracked down Margie Johnson's email and it wasn't until I dragged her into it via copying her on
old emails that I finally got a response in 1 hour after 8 months. Then an apology from Julie Orer admitting she had my emails the whole time and it just slipped through the cracks. Imagine if someone cared enough to respond to me and all the other parents a a year ago.
My fear of retaliation was the reason I asked Tina not to be in my children's 504 meetings. She called and spent 30 minutes not respecting the law. my request in pressuring me to let her still come to the meeting. I refused and Laurel Chance, to her credit, stepped in kindly and respectfully on Tina's
behalf. Then Tina continued to spend a morning inappropriately so scolding my son and I called a meeting with Julie, Laura, and Tina. I did get an apology from Tina and so did my son, but no true resolution on how her behavior will be rectified. It was basically decided that
her experience is different than mine, so her behavior can just continue. The reason I'm here today is because as I was sitting at that table, I got Tina and Julie lying to me. And that's what I will not stand for. I have handled this professionally,
kindly, patiently, and I'm done. I Julie decided that no other parents have complained, which is interesting because I'll let her know on the spot that I know for a fact it's not true. I've personally received screenshots and been blind copies on emails to Margie and Julie. And since that meeting, four more
parents have sent letters citing concerns about Tina Aaron's rhetoric inside our school. A former teacher is currently writing a letter not only citing her experience and reason for leaving, but the complaints she's receiving from teachers inside the building currently because they're too afraid to speak up as they're afraid of
losing their jobs. Similar to Christy, I'll note I did have another meeting and Tina was fine, but I did tell her I was recording. So do with that what you will. At what point do we hold people of the highest power in central office and schools accountable? At what point do we start listening to the parents who are clearly stating something is wrong? I am
calling on you, the board, to investigate the wrongful termination of Christy Surprise, to investigate why no one is responsible for answering parents in the central office in a timely manner and why Tina Aaron is being given so much slack for her poor behavior choices and continues to get multiple chang
chances when something is clearly wrong. Thank you. Our next two speakers are Beverly Pervvis and Valerie Dibley. Good evening, members of the board and fellow community members. My name is Beverly Pervvis and I speak on behalf of
the Williamson County Education Association. We stand at a pivotal moment in public education across Tennessee. The Advisory Committee on Innovations in K12 education, what many call the Freedom to Teach Committee is examining issues that will shape our schools for years to come. Their work is
not just about one bill. It's about the kind of classrooms we want for our children and the kind of future we want for our community. At its heart, freedom to teach means giving educators the trust and flexibility to do what we entered this profession to do, to teach. Right now, we know that our students
deserve more than weeks of bubbling in answers that provide feedback long after they've moved on. They deserve instruction tailored to their needs, their interest, and their goals for life beyond graduation. This conversation is also about respect. Respect for the
expertise of teachers who know their students best. It's about resources, ensuring schools have the tools and support staff to make teaching and learning thrive. And it's about retention, keeping great educators in our classrooms rather than watching them leave because the system
makes it harder every year to stay. Which is why later this year, I hope we focus on improving teacher salaries. When I talk to colleagues, one thing comes up again and again. We want to make our district the best place in which to live, teach, and learn. That vision is only possible if decisions
made in Nashville and here at home are grounded in the voices of those who teach every day. So tonight, I'm asking you as our locally elected leaders to take action. Join us in advocating for legislation that reduces unnecessary testing, strengthens respect for educators, and provides the resources
our schools need. Urge the state to listen to educators at this committee as this committee continues its work. And here at the district level, commit to policies that lift up rather than limit the work of our teachers. An example of that policy is being discussed tonight about wireless communication devices.
The committee formed of parents, teachers, and staff came to a consensus that on recommendations to meet the requirements of the law that was passed last year. We ask that you honor the consensus and look to make that policy reflect the recommendations and not make it a completely away for the day, but at
least have some cell phone areas in high schools that students can utilize at lunchtimes and not make these drastic changes mid year. Wait until the next school year. Our students futures are being written right now. Let's make sure those pages tell a story of trust, opportunity, and success for every child
in this community. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Good evening. My name is Valerie Dibbley and I'm here today as the concerned parent of a second grader at Kinrose and an 11th grader at Ravenwood regarding the textbook selection process. I trust
physicians with my health, attorneys with legal matters, and accountants with my taxes. I likewise trust our professional educators and subject m matter experts to select appropriate and rigorous materials for our students. It is extremely important to me to see the
board implement changes to offer the highest level of difference to the appointed committee. Our committed community members who devote time and effort to these committees deserve that consideration. Board members participating in these meetings should
be accountable to take the state state mandated mandated oath as committee members to ensure transparency. The final revote should require secondary review if the committee choices are not followed. We have a wonderful community
that is engaged and interested in the textbook process and I ask that you consider giving that community input in make consider that community input in making any adjustments to this policy. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Our final two speakers uh Adam Wright and Avery Allen. >> Thanks Mr. Chairman. I'm Adam Wright. I'm a professor of medicine and biomedical informatics at Vanderbelt the midad to four current and future WCS students and my academic research sits
at the intersection of health and technology and I've been honored to serve on the WCS screen time committee for the last couple months here. I wanted to say that this fall's wireless communication policy is a big step in the right direction but there are two key improvements that I think we need to see. One of those is going to be moving
from a silent and not used standard to an away and off the body standard. And then the other one is uh moving towards a bell-to-bell K- through2 policy and eliminating the current uh exception for lunch in high schools. So as a scientist, I believe in using data to make decisions and I've seen uh this board uh use the same value. And so I
observed that there's a cognition study from the University of Texas, Adrien Ward showed that participants whose phone was in another room performed better on several cognitive tasks than participants who had their phone sitting on a desk or in their pocket or in a purse or in a backpack. uh they explained that the mere presence of one
smartphone uh reduces available cognitive capacity and impairs cognitive functioning. So even though people think they're giving their full attention when they have their phone sitting on their desk or in their pocket uh they're really uh their mind is somewhere else. So I also think silent but naive is going to be harder to enforce. There's a kind of game of cat and mouse uh uh but
on the other hand often away is a simple unambiguous policy. It's easy to track and enforce and it avoids a slippery slope of uh sorry teacher I'm not it's here but I'm not using uh my phone of course I also think that lunch is a vital time for socialization physical activity not just for through uh K
through eight but also 9th through 12th graders uh I recently learned the word fubbing uh snubbing people by using your phone you're supposed to be talking to them uh and I was recently observing a uh field trip and noticed that there were four lunch tables three of them were silent kids were just using their phones and ignoring each other and there
was one I guess these were the the less phone oriented kids and they were having a great time. They were uh laughing. They were playing spoons. They were singing songs and you could really see a stark contrast between the phone table, the phone tables and the non-phone tables. Uh uh every school uh who has
reported on this that I've been able to seen reported improved social skills, reduced bullying, cafeterias that got a lot noisier as kids switched from uh to playing card games from watching Tik Tok videos. actually couldn't find a single report of a district or school that had gone to an away for the day belto policy and expressed any regret. Nobody goes
back once they make that uh decision. This is happening all around us. Arkansas, South Carolina, and Louisiana have adopted these policies statewide. Um and about 40% of schools have already gone to the bell to bell uh policy which I think is right for us here. Um, I signed up for this after I saw that Clare Reeves had uh proposed a new
bell-to-bell policy to improve upon what we're already using this fall. And I think this policy clearly addressed the ambigu ambiguities and limitations of the current policy. And I hope you guys will adopt this uh simpler, clearer, cleaner policy that will serve our students better in the long run. I know you guys value like I do our students
mental health and safety. And so I think a policy that goes halfway is not what we need. I think the data, the community this moment all point to the same conclusion that we're ready for a bell-to-bell away for the day policy. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Good evening. My name is Avery Allen and
I'm honored to be a class of 2023 WTS graduate. My time in Williamson County Schools impacted me in more ways than one and I am forever grateful for the knowledge, skill set, and personal growth that I gained during these formative years. I'm here tonight to talk about something close to my heart.
ensuring no child in our state is hungry. About 58% of Tennessee kids are eligible to receive free or reducedpric school meals. This is a fantastic program as hungry kids cannot learn and grow effectively. Unfortunately, according to Feeding
America, roughly 3,600 kids, about 5.4% across Williamson County, struggle to access healthy meals. Williamson County Schools has robust food services across schools, providing close to three million meals per year. This is a life-changing program and ensures that
students have reliable sources of nutrition through school breakfast and lunch. However, when May rolls around, students lose access to these meals when they are out of school for the summer. Some students can access community programs, child care, and summer camp
activities. But this isn't the reality for the 3,600 kids in Williamson County who are food insecure. Luckily, a federal nutrition program called Summer EBT is designed to help. In 2024, this program helped 700,000 kids in Tennessee have access to
consistent healthy meals over the summer just by providing a benefit of $120. Tennessee opted out of this program this year, leaving hundreds of thousands of kids without the accessible healthy meals during the summer. Though the amount may feel small, it
goes a long way in alleviating children's summer hunger. Our hope is to bring this program back to Tennessee children and get Governor Lee to opt back in for 2026. Our office has counted contacted county mayors, engaged local advocates and
legislators and shared the stories of individuals impacted by the loss of summer EBT. We need your voice to get to the governor's ear. We ask that you join our fight to bring this program back to Tennessee by advocating with us, raising awareness, and emphasizing the
importance of this program. Together, we can ensure that no child in Tennessee goes hungry next summer. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> All right, that concludes our public comment. Um before we move on, I want to
thank uh Deputies Whitley and Mock for being here tonight and serving us. Thank you, gentlemen. Okay, we will now move on to approval of the agenda. Um as always, we will uh do this via voice vote. Um
all those in favor of approving the agenda say I. >> I. >> Any opposed? You approve. We will now uh proceed with approval of our consent agenda. There's three items on the consent agenda tonight. That's
approval of our September 15th schoolboard meeting minutes. Uh board policy for second reading 3.202 emergency preparedness plan and recommendation for field trip B request. We'll do this by voice vote as well. Do
we have a motion in a second? We can do this by hands or and a motion and a second. Okay. All in favor say I. >> Any opposed. >> Okay. With that, the consent agenda, as previously read, is approved.
All right. We will now move on to communications to the board, Mr. Golden. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. And I uh um as I often do, and it was noted in the public comments, thank our public commenters. I will say that uh at least a couple of public commenters do deserve a direct conversation, and we'll make sure we
have that. Uh I also want to uh thank uh some of those others who have spoken. Uh we actually at the work session spoke to the adoption of the uh the upcoming adoption of health textbooks and some of our college and career technical
education programs. Certainly refer folks to the presentation that our team gave regarding that ongoing process. To just give you a nutshell or a thumbnail, this year's adoption process is relatively small compared to what we
experience with ELA or English uh language arts, science, mathematics, and social studies. Next year is the social studies adoption. And so we're having some conversations now to try to make sure that we're prepared for that much
more involved adoption process that's more involved at the Tennessee textbook commission level. uh and also at the state board level and the involvement of the Tennessee Department of Education as well. Board members, we also presented to you our draft 5-year capital plan. I just want to give you a reminder that we
had a discussion with you about making sure that over these next few weeks as we prepare for the November vote where that will be discussed. Certainly be uh feel free to send any questions you have uh related to the work we've done on preparing that. I did want to also
mention a a trend that we have seen not just here in Williamson County, but I've also heard from some of our neighbors that especially the kindergarten level there there are fewer students enrolling uh and there are some demographic numbers
that support that based on uh state information on ages of children. That is a focus of ours that we're going to continue to work on. With that, uh, I did want to mention to you that Carol Birdong is standing in the back. And as
we traditionally do, we celebrate our state and national championships. And Carol Bird Song will share, if I'm not mistaken, Carol, the first share of these student and staff spotlights for this school year. Is that right? No, we
did. We did. We had a few from last year. I mean, from last month. >> Well, we did we didn't do any last month. We were saving them for this one. >> Okay. All right. So, I had it right. >> You're making me nervous up here. Okay. Not used to getting quizzed. Okay. So, but we do have state and we have
national, y'all. So, quite exciting. Let's start with Sunset Middle School. They have been named the 2024 25 Best Buddies International Outstanding Middle School Chapter of the
Year. and Abigail Hardage is um the their um their sponsor. So that's your international award for you. Okay. And now we have a national award for you. This is uh in honor of Paige Middle School's. This is for their eighth grade
band last year, but this award uh has just recently occurred. They've have been named the 2025 Mark of Excellence commended winner by the Foundation for Music Education and Evan Burton and
Carolyn Henkins are uh their directors. Now get ready. Lots of sports. These are state awards. We are going to start with Woodland Middle School and the girls tennis team is your Tennessee Middle
School Athletic Association state champions and they the team consists of May Crraust, Su Hana Deamin Holly, Olivia Young, Eva Shui, Macy Mclofflin, Koko Davis and Ruby
Miller. Their coach is Lynn Broski. And then over at Heritage Middle School, we have Asher Salmon. And he is your Tennessee Middle School Athletic Association boys class 3A cross country
individual state champ. And Jacob Connors is Asher's coach. We also have the girls state championship and this is Scott Lindo
and she is your state champ class 3A. Her coach is Vince Kabisc Kabis Kabisac. I'm not sure about Vince's last name but anyway congratulations to Scotland and her coach. And then we
have the boys class 2A cross country state champs Legacy Middle School. Their team members are Brooks Bishon, Will Haymon, Rigs Johnson, Matthew Critz, Lincoln Moore, Rhett Smith, and Hudson
Zap. Daniel Styles is their coach. And here we go with Woodland Middle School again. boys class 3A cross country state champions Matthew all good Oliver Brown Ty Burton Ryder Chapman Adam Johnson
and William Thursby their coaches are Andrew Swanson and Emily Lucas high school golf Paige High School golf your TWSAA class 2A girls golf state champs team members include Elizabeth
McCann Stella Edwards Brooke Bennett and Sushi Acre. Their coach is James Iikoff. Now for some state uh step spotlight. Hold on just one moment. This is Chris
Sanders and he is your TWSAA boys golf coach of the year from Brentwood High School. And now Superintendent Golden. These are some that we have been well my goodness. Pam Baden may come after us
for that picture, but she is quite proud of her team. And that is but that is not Ricky Rodriguez there. That must be Ricky that Pam is celebrating. Anyway, from Ravenwood High School, TWSSAA girls flag football coach of the year. And
then wrestling coach of the year, Pete Miller from Summit High School. Congratulations to all of our students and staff members. Thank you, Carol. And Mr. Chair, I did want to mention I notice we have a number of scouts in the in the building
and I want to welcome you all. You're working on some badge or another. I'm not sure. Well, I got a few nods. So, I I hope this helps with uh with your work towards badging. Uh also, we have a number of principles and I want to thank you you all as well for being present here tonight. Uh with that, Mr. Chair,
that is my report. >> Thank you. Scouts, why don't you stand up and be recognized? All right, we're glad you're here. Okay. Uh we will dispense with a board chair report and move right into new business. Uh the first item on under new business
is uh we have three items under 2526 school board budget. First one is approval of the general purpose school fund amendment 10.25. 25 special schools transportation reimbursement in the amount of $136,618.
Mr. Golden. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is a special education grant for uh transportation. We do recommend approval to receive the funds and place it place the funds in the appropriate expenditure lines. >> All right. Thank you for that. Do we
have a motion and a second? Thank you. Any questions or discussion? All right. All right, let's proceed to a vote. >> The vote is 12 yes, zero no. >> All right, the item is approved. Next item is approval of the general
purpose school fund resolution 11.25 for buses in the amount of 3,184,000. Mr. Golden. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. As you all know, annually we come to you with replacement requests for our school buses. Those school buses generally have a life of
from 15 to 18 years depending on mileage and condition of the buses. Uh Mr. King uh did uh some detailed work with our transportation department and is recommending replacement purchase of eight buses, seven uh eight general education buses, seven seven special
education buses and four growth buses for special education. the there that includes a net reduction in our total fleet of general education buses. Do recommend approval for this year's bus purchase. Thank you for that. Uh we have
a motion in a second. Uh any questions or discussion? Seeing none, we're ready to vote. The vote is 12 yes, zero no. >> The resolution is approved. Next, we have approval of the general purpose school fund resolution 11.25
inter category transfer for salary for 20 202526 in the amount of 12,465,616. Mr. Golden. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is the annual placement of the uh pay increase for our
faculty and staff approved by the county commission into the appropriate the appropriate line items. I do recommend approval. >> Thank you. And we have a motion and a second. Any discussion? >> Seeing none, we are ready to vote.
The vote is 12 yes, zero no. >> Resolution is approved. All right, we'll now move on to board policies. Both of these for first reading. The first one is uh policy 4.401 textbooks and instructional materials.
Um Mr. Coward, do you want to give a any read out there from the policy committee or Miss Osbrooks or Mr. Golden? I'm not sure how you guys want to handle that. Um we had quite the um discussion both at the policy meeting and the um the
work session. Um I I think the just the gist is um this was a I think we had all agreed to to review this. Um again we waited gave a little bit of time to uh to allow some time to pass after which
is um which is why you'll see in the um in the request Mr. Bosik's um request was in March and we um agreed with him to uh to kind of bring this back at a at a later time. So um I think the um the
gist of the u of the of the changes are um or that we're of kind of specifying the the committee makeup and then describing a little bit better the process for the information that we're um that we're going to get. But I don't know. Well, I we can we can talk about
it more, but that's it. >> I don't know, Mr. Bostic, you had um brought this forward. You have any comments you want to share tonight or or want to move on? Um, nothing other than just, you know, when I put this forward for some changes
because we all had kind of agreed, you know, from the last time that there were just some changes that we would make and um trying to bring it closer between the board and the teachers and the committee throughout the process. just keep the communication open so we can understand
more of their thinking and they can understand more of kind of like what our questions are, what we're looking for and uh bridge that gap a little bit. So that's kind of the heart behind it. >> Um yeah, that's kind of basically all I have at this point unless we want to get
in discussion for it. I would I do have a question though or do you want me to wait until we go ahead? Um cuz I know uh people have kind of brought up the committee oath and one of the things about the um this policy change is that really any board member could be a part
as an ex-ficio um serve as an exeicio member of the committee. Is there a Jason maybe this is a better question for you. Is there a big difference in the oath that we take versus the oath that a committee would take? Is it redundant or is there a big
gap there? Is there something we're missing if we don't take the oath? >> Those oaths are different and I may defer to to Miss Osbrooks as well on on some detail. Uh but you all as board members take take an oath and you have uh commitments that are built into
policy that that you will make the best decisions based on the information you have in addition to that key component which is uphold the constitution of the of the of the US and Tennessee. Uh, so I'm going to give my interpretation,
Dane, and you correct me if you think this is inaccurate. For each vote you have, you have that obligation regardless of the content. Uh, and and now the the that committee uh is does have a more specific
commitment to that particular process. Um, I did want to mention one other item. The uh the conflict of interest was mentioned. you all do have an obligation to disclose financial conflicts of interest in your votes in any vote. Uh so uh if if if the board
asks uh we will do a a a a deep double check and so I'm going to refer to Dana on that. happy to look at it, but as superintendent and and have a a deeper discussion at the next policy committee
meeting in November, but as Superintendent Golden mentioned, you in policy and state law, you already have many obligations that you've got to disclose um ethical obligations
particularly regarding finances. Um, and I will also remind you, and you know this, every year, in addition to um any obligations that you would need to let us know, you also file with the state of
Tennessee a disclosure of your finances and where you are receiving um money. that again we'll I can compare and see if there's any language we want to add but at first glance you are you
already have that obligation under other laws >> Miss Wyatt >> thank you I just want to say I do I do support that deep double check thank you for offering that I mentioned this in the work session and I know we heard it here tonight um that I I I would be in
support of adding the oath just because to show our alignment with that shared work, the schoolboard members that choose to be on the textbook committee. Thank you. >> All right. Any other questions or comments? As as noted, this is first
reading. So, this will go back to policy committee for a second review and back to us for second reading in November. >> Mr. question. >> If we >> decide to add that oath, which I'm kind of fine with either way, is that something we would want to detail out in
the policy >> or is that just like a SOP or something that we would do? should for the next one or something. >> So my recommendation if that is something that you want to add is that we make it clear in the policy that it
would be members of the committee who aren't board members who don't have that obligation but board members as well. So that can be if that is um I'll have some proposed language for y'all to look at if you want to add it. We definitely can
do that. >> Great. All right. Any other questions or comments? All right. We're ready to vote on first reading. >> The vote is 12 yes, zero no. >> Okay, that policy um language uh is
adopted on first reading. Um, next item is policy 6.312, use of wireless communication devices. Uh, Mr. Galbert, do you want to uh also give a readout where we stand with that from policy committee?
Yes, sir. As soon as I get there. Um, so we have a um proposed update to the wireless communication device. Um, that I guess I'll probably Claire's speaking
first, so I'll I'll just let her talk to it. Um, I mean, it it's a it has a it has some a couple of differences from the uh from the current policy. Um, not to mention, I guess specifically it was it went into detail around a couple of
things as one of the speakers said around the committee um discussion about um about off the body. Um and then it um it is intended to um to go away for the day for all students including the 9 through
12. So that's where it sits today. So, like we did before um for explanation purposes since you brought it forward um Dr. Reeves, do you want to give an explanation and then we'll move into the order of speakers uh on the board? >> Certainly. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um so,
we did get feedback from the um tech use committee. They prioritized evaluating the policy that we passed in June um and gave us feedback on changes that they would like to see incorporated into the policy. So I took that feedback and I
address addressed every point that they had brought forward and wrote it into the policy. The the one place where I differed with the the committee's recommendation was on um keeping lunch
for for 9th through 12th grade as a time when those students could use their wireless devices. I um feel very strongly that the data shows that um a way for the day policy
promotes um the strongest possible school culture. And as one of um our committee me members here tonight spoke to, every school district and state that has gone in the direction of away for the day for K through 12th grade has
reported nothing but positive results from improving academic outcome to reducing um disciplinary referrals and bullying to creating an overall general uh positive school culture where the kids are actively socializing and
talking and engaging with each other, which is exactly what we want students to do. So, um I I do want to I I really listened to what my fellow board members had to say at the work session and I
heard some of you say that you were concerned about the timing of implementation. So, if we pass this policy, it would go into effect immediately upon second reading. And so I would like to propo propose an amendment to the policy. Um so I'd like
to make a motion to amend if that's >> well so >> that was really for explanation purposes. So if you want to go in the queue >> Okay. >> Um >> we've got somebody on the board already for recognition. So if you want to get in the queue for recognition then bring the amendment at that point.
>> Sure. Okay. >> Josh I just can't mine so she can go. >> Okay. All right. So Okay. So do you want to be recognized for an amendment? >> Sure. Okay. Please. >> And I think I mean it speaks to what Miss Wyatt said at the um work session and so I heard your concerns and um
heard some of the concerns from emails that came in. So it's the timeline and we want to give the district time to um be able to come up with ways maybe for to provide that parent student communication either via email or some
other method. So the motion to amend would be to add on line three um after devices by K through 12 students and will take effect August 1st 2026.
So the entire first sentence would read, "This policy is required by Tennessee law and establishes clear and consistent expectations for the possession and use of personal wireless communication devices by K through2 students and will take effect August 1st, 2026.
>> Okay. Have you heard the amendment? Have you heard the Everyone's clear on the amendment? That is a proper motion. Do we have a second? Second by Mr. Galbreth. I'm sorry, Dr. Dreger's on the board. Um, any discussion of the amendment?
>> Mr. Cash. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is a first reading. We've got feedback uh on on many issues. Um, I I believe this is the the right
kind of policy we're looking for, but I think there's wiggle room here and there. Um, why are we making amendments to the policy here when it's the first reading and we're going to meet be meeting on
this again? I just I don't think it's you know we had we've got four policy members led by Jay Galbreth who's doing a great job. We have our our attendance superintendent
uh and staff members in these meetings. We had eight board members at our policy meeting that sent this forward knowing that there was going to be some adjustments possibly in the second reading. So, I just don't know why we can't talk
about it at that point rather than have amendments and counter amendments or whatever. I mean, that's just my thoughts. Thank you. >> Thank you, Miss Wyatt. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. I think it's important to move forward with this
amendment right now just to help our staff with their timing. We've discussed a lot of different ideas and different solutions that could work. And I think if we want to have this be a successful bell-to-bell policy for next school year, this is the some of these things we need to start working on now. And I
don't think that the feedback or the data is going to change in a month. So I think it makes makes sense to move forward now. And that way we at least have an agreed upon timeline. A couple of the things that I was going to say with a similar amendment were that I'm one of two board members on the screen
time committee. The committee is made up of parents, teachers, administrators, and two board members. We've met four times and spent two consecutive meetings talking about this cell phone policy. Those meetings were our August and September meetings, and it was helpful to hear from so many as the new policy
went into effect this school year. In response to the information requested by the committee, all nine of our high school principles asked that we not rest restrict cell phones during lunch and that we not make any changes to the policy in midyear. Additionally, the
committee discussion made up of parents, teachers, and administrators was in agreement with that request from the nine high school principles not to make changes in the policy in midyear that would restrict phone usage during lunch for grades 9 through 12. I have
researched what other schools are doing and the majority of schools with bell-to-bell stu have bell-to-bell policies have student email accounts that allow students to send outside emails to parents, employers, coaches, and check their college application
status. Our current WCS student email accounts cannot do that. One of our strategic goals is preparing students for life after Williamson County Schools. And I think it is reasonable that they have access outside of Williamson County Schools to access
through their phones during a limited time each day. They are learning to manage their time, their family obligations, and their future opportunities. an enhanced W count Williamson County schools email account would allow our students access to out to outside people and we could consider
restricting the phones or move forward with restricting them for next school year. But to follow up, Dan, I just feel like we need a lot of time to work on those to work on those systems based on the comments from last week. Thank you. >> Thank you. Um before I recognize Mr.
Cash, can we bring back up the language on the screen for everyone, please? All right. Thank you, Mr. Cash. >> Chair, uh, I agree with you 100% and I think there's more than just the timeline or
just the emails we need to talk about. We need to talk about uh maybe an area, a designated area for for the kids. Um, and I'd like to see something done about the school buses because, you know,
they're on the bus 20 minutes to up to 45 minutes on average where there is absolutely no adults, no nothing watching what's going on on the phone. And those are answers. But what I'm saying is I think I believe every
board member here has heard these issues and a lot of them carry a lot of weight. So, but that that's what we have the first reading for is to put this down and go back to the second
reading and put this in place. So, I was just saying this is one step with that doesn't generally happen when it comes to policy. So, we're we're going to sit here and talk about, you know, you can't you can't take the time to talk about the
ins and outs and all that like we can in a policy meeting is what I'm saying. So, that's why I said that, but I do agree. So, thank you. >> Okay. Uh, Miss SMA. >> Um, yeah, I I agree with Melissa as
well. uh listening to the parents and especially knowing that the private schools um those students have access um for you know those same type of reasons to be able to communicate um outside during the school day. And um so then on Saturday I talked to Brian King and he
sent the school board um an email um you know saying that he's going to be working on addressing those issues. And then I also brought up some other issues like um what was the other issues? I can't think of him right now that we discussed in the um in the work section
and he's going to work on that and um it might take a little time but um and you guys all got the email. So yeah, I think um I think we're moving forward and um that's about all I want to say. >> Thank you, Mr. Galbra. So Dan, I just wanted I want to address
your question, at least my my perception of it, and it's it was essentially to save us from a lot of discussion that we had on on Thursday night that hope to I think I think this was Claire's thoughts on because I had the same thing, but um
not to not to get into whether we're going to do it on on January, not make that the focal point and make the overall policy the focal point and from not just tonight, but then like moving into the next board meeting. So, if we all agree, that's that was the only that was my thought.
>> Order. >> Yes. >> While I appreciate the um motion to amend on the floor, parts of this policy, the current portions of the policy are struck out.
So just by changing the date of implementation, we would not have any thing to implement until the end of the school year. So I do want to make that clear. That section right there that I think
that Mr. McNise has brought up. So there will have to be discussion in the policy meeting about what we're doing for the rest of this school year. Okay. Well,
you're you're going to be recognized next, Dr. Reeves, so you can answer this question. But I it's it certainly seems based on the amendment language you offered that it's delaying the entire policy until August 1st, not just any one portion of it. Is that correct?
>> So, with that motion, would the current policy remain? >> Do we need to add that to her motion? Wouldn't it wouldn't it remain by definition? >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Okay. You're recognized.
>> And so just to reiterate, Mr. Cash, I after after our discussion at the work session and really thinking about it and hearing what people had to say, I felt like it was important to give some board members reassurance tonight. I understand it's unusual to make a motion
to amend on first reading because we could easily have the discussions at um the policy meeting next month. But I wanted to reassure those board members that I had heard them and was willing to make a change there. So um
one last thing I do want to leave everyone with is I wanted to show this. This is a piece of artwork that was on display at the Frist Museum in 2023. And it's, you know, the Frist Museum will will display artwork from Tennessee
public school students. And this piece of art was um produced by Katie Hallmark at Rosview High School in Clarksville. And it really struck me at the time when I saw it. I took a picture of it and she titled it Sucked In. And it's a picture
of a a student or an adolescent with her phone and strings coming out and she the body is a genie. She's being sucked into the phone. Our students on some level know how addictive these devices are. And so as we move into second reading, I
hope you all will approve the amendment tonight that we will pass this polity policy into second reading. And let's not forget that the phones, the apps, they are designed to be addictive. And research is showing that there are
changes happening to our kids' brains that are similar to what happens in drug addicts brains. So, let's not forget that as we continue to discuss this policy. I'd like to call the um call the question. Is that >> No, I can't.
>> Not not at that not at this point. >> Okay. Okay. >> You could have before you started. Sorry. >> Okay. >> Um Mr. Welch, >> thank you. Um so I Claire, I appreciate you doing this. I I think it's um
a good amendment and and I can support it. Um my only question is the timing. Would it be better to defer consideration and then vote on these
changes as we get closer? It just strikes me as a little bit odd. We're going to pass a a policy now, but doesn't go in effect till later, but we're going to keep the old one. That's the only thing that's confusing for me. Um, but you know, if
you can sort of assure me on that, it's it's not a hill I want to die, but it just seems an odd sort of timing as opposed to sort of deferring the vote until a little bit later and then perhaps there's even additional amendments or tweaks or changes that we get out of the uh technology committee
to add to this as well. the substance of it though I I I don't have any issue uh now with you know well we haven't passed the amendment yet but if and when uh at that point so I think on the substance of what
you're asking I think there's a couple of things one is um effectively if the policy were to be moved on to second reading as written it's effectively a deferral to the next month even though it's taken us to second reading so it is giving us the
additional chance to um discuss that policy and at another work session. Um so effectively there would be a deferral there but officially if it if there was a desire to defer it there'd have to be
a motion to defer until a date certain. Um, I'm not going to do that tonight, but I I it's maybe for for second reading to deferring it to then. >> Um, one one thing I'm going to mention, not not as chairman, just as a board
member. Um, and and Dr. Reeves is going to be recognized in a second. You might be in a position to answer this. Um, it seems to me there's really two issues um at play here. one is the issue of the timing of it which we we're addressing
now and then the other issue is the the substance of it um and in particular the substance of the part about the lunch whether or not to allow it for lunch the lunch period um which is the thing that I think based on work session and based on previous conversations has been the
thing that's gotten the most discussion um effectively I just just so I'm this is what I asking for it to come back up on the board because effectively if we approve this on first reading as written with the
August one date. Um we're essentially saying that we're agreeing as a as a board to that provision about lunch, right? Is that is that your understanding that we're agreeing on first reading to not allow
the phones during the lunch period >> on on first reading? Yes. Yeah. >> So, I think I think the the issue for me just personally again is I don't I'm personally um okay with students have the high school students having their phones during the lunch period. Um I
think it's a reasonable thing to do. I think there's reasons to do that. I know there's difference of opinion about that. Um, and I have great respect for um, the work that you've done in writing this policy because you've spent a lot of time on it um, and very thoughtfully
looked at this and presented um, really thoughtful arguments. So, that's just the one issue for me is that provision if if I vote to def if we vote to to agree to the policy as written, we're agreeing that that is going to be something that we're going to
definitively do next school year. Um, and I'm I'm not personally prepared to do that. Um, I don't disagree with the timing, delaying the timing and giving us um giving us more time to consider this and think through it. That's just that one part of the language is the
part that I'm struggling with. Um, Miss Clemens. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I like you, I struggle a little bit with the lunch issue simply because I want the kids to be able to
get an email from their parents if their parents need or I just want them to have that ability to communicate what we've seen other the what we talked about the private schools have that. Um, and but the other thing I want to encourage us all to do, and I'm I'm going to try to get back to another one of the high
schools in my area. But as I shared at the work session, I went to Franklin High Lunch and I was there for both periods and I was pleasantly surprised. I didn't see many kids on their phones at all, which was I was very pleasantly surprised on that. But I would I would
encourage you guys between now and next month to get to your high schools, talk to your principles um and and try to um create that dialogue with the principles to understand the functionality of this. And um but I
agree I I I see everyone moving further and further away from the phones and having less the phone at their school, but u I mean at with their kids. Um um so anyway, so that was my encouragement is that um we can get back into the high
schools and visit and talk with the principles. >> Mr. Mr. Gworth >> chair. Um just want to speak to the I guess to to the process and when we go to second reading for the for the policy committee are the way we've uh the way
we've handled these things is um yes the the policy as written with the with the with total away for the day and the and August um effective date would would come before us in the second reading. Um but then we would we would discuss at
the at the policy meeting and if we can get a um if we can get a consensus there that the policy we'll we'll we'll basically decide there what we bring back to the board. So if the I mean and we and we typically have a a pretty good
turnout of the of the board. So, I think we can get a pretty good feel of where where we should go with um if we if we agree that the policy should be um should be effective August 1 and not January, then we can agree on the substance on the on the details that what we bring back. So, I think we'll
have a pretty good idea once we get back to second reading on what that should be. >> Dr. Reeves, >> now I'd like to call the question. >> All right, that's proper motion. It's not a debatable motion. So, we'll move uh straight to a vote on the amendment
uh which again uh would you mind restating it just for the for the purpose of getting us clarity and as we're about to vote? >> Sure. Let me just make sure >> can we guys can we bring that back up on
the screen one more time? I'm sorry. So, I move to amend the policy so that the first sentence reads as follows. This policy is required by Tennessee law and establishes clear and consistent explanations for the possession and use of personal wireless communication
devices by K through2 students and will take effect August 1st, 2026. >> All right. Thank you. I should have asked, is there any objection to the question? Seeing seeing seeing none um just want to make that official. All right. So we
will now move to a vote on the amendment as stated. Uh Mr. Golden, do you have a uh any input on that? >> Uh I do have a recommendation with a caveat that is actually in the form of a question for our attorneys. uh just to
just to make sure with the caveat that a vote tonight does not commit the board to a particular content vote at the next meeting. >> No, no, that can be amended again. >> Okay. So, uh with that caveat, I do
recommend approval of this amendment. >> All right. Thank you. So, is there is everyone clear on what we're voting? We're voting on the amendment brought by Dr. Reeves. Is everyone clear on that? Okay, we are ready to vote. >> The vote is 11 yes, one no.
>> All right, the amendment carries. Uh we're now back on the main motion, which is the policy um as amended. So, any questions? We have our original motion and our original second. Any questions on the policy as amended?
Again, first reading with the clarity that um there will be opportunities for further changes uh at the next board meeting if the board desires. Any questions or comments? All right, seeing none, we're ready to
vote. The vote is 11 yet or 11 yes, one no. >> All right, the U motion carries on first reading. All right, we will now move on to item C, approval of textbook committee. Mr. Golden.
>> Thank you, Mr. Chair. As you all know, we have brought to you a proposed textbook committee for that adoption cycle that I mentioned. And I actually did not mention PE uh PE health science and some CTE courses. Uh you all as
board members based on our discussion at our last month's work session, many of you included some recommendations for parents to participate in the committee. Dr. Allen's memo includes the name of seven par seven parent nominees, but we actually have 12 uh in the actual
document. So I wanted to mention that that detail. do recommend approval of the textbook committee for this year's adoption. >> All right, thank you for that. Do we have a motion and a second? Thank you.
Any discussion? Okay, we're ready to vote. >> The vote is 12 yes, zero no. All right, the committee membership is approved. Uh item D, approval of the 2526 superintendent uh and district goals.
Mr. Golden. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Based on the discussion that we've had the last two months at our at our board work session, we do have recommended superintendent goals uh for for this c for this current school year. I did want to acknowledge and thank some of your thank you for
some of your comments made especially at the work session. Uh specifically uh Dr. Johnson, thank you for your for your specific recommendations. I I am of the opinion that that some of your specific recommendations in in if not necessarily
this excuse me if if if if not necessarily this the specific numbers but the concepts are something that I I think we ought to be talking about especially for next year. Uh I did want to specifically mention that each one of these four that you all talked about at
the previous polic includes deliverables that are the product of that discussion that we had back in September. Uh so with that I I do recommend approval. >> All right. Thank you. Um and thanks for
the thought that and the time you put into preparing those goals and certainly appreciate the input of the board. Um, I have a motion in a second. Uh, Dr. Johnson, >> thank you. Um, did we ever get an
estimate of how much the salary study is going to cost? >> We don't have a the excellently clear estimate. Uh, but we have a minimum $40,000. >> And do we already have that budgeted or >> would we have to come back and approve
that? We will need to once we get an actual vendor, we will actually come with a with a motion to with a request for a motion to move from fund balance to that is my anticipation based on my conversation with Miss Farmer.
So, with that in mind, I'm going to make a motion to strike goal number one from his goals. >> Okay. Do you have any um explanation do you want to provide to that or context? >> I'm just afraid that it's going to
almost put us in a catch 22 because you know what? if it comes back and it costs 200,000 or it costs, you know, and I really would not want to obligate us to say we're going to approve that because it's his goal and I wouldn't want us to
look like we weren't supporting him if we say, "Well, we're not going to approve $200,000 or you know, whatever the amount is." So, I that's my big concern. I'm just afraid that that one's going to cost us money and I don't know if we want to spend it and
yeah, it's just a messy one a little bit to me. >> Mr. Golden, based on previous um studies that are similar in nature, do you have any sort of sense of the range we might be talking about? I know you said 40,000
on the low end. Is there a second for then we could we could we can discuss that after. >> Fair enough. Is there a second on the motion? >> Hey, we have a second. Uh so I'll I'll restate my question. Is there um is
there any history that you can give as far as other examples of studies that we've done recently where you have a sense of a range that we might be looking at there? I'm going to actually uh uh defer to both Miss Farmer and Miss Hall re related to that. I will give you the the the 40,000 the the source of the
40,000 number. That's based on a conversation we had with county government. They went through a study for county government jobs. Uh school jobs are different. Uh and that's why I I anticipated that that 40,000 is is a minimum. Uh, and so, uh, Miss Farmer,
Miss Hall, anything else you can add to that to give a to give another parameter above that 40,000. >> I I don't know for sure because we still are drafting the RFP, but would want to get that out if if that's approved by the board. I I do think
I'm and I'm really I really don't know yet because we haven't gotten anything back, but I would say that 40 is definitely on the low end. I could see it going maybe a hundred, but I'm really ballparking. >> All right. Thank you, Mr. Welch. >> Clarification. If it if it did come back
as as Dr. John said, the 200,000 and I know that's a number you were just throwing, right? I know, but the board would have to approve that before moving forward still. Correct. >> That is correct. >> Okay. Thank you. Any other Mr. Goworth?
>> Sure. I I guess I think we I definitely want to leave it. I I don't want to and I think I think in order to I think we all want to understand how competitive our compensation is. We've all talked about increasing our compensation. Um when we do increase our compensation, I
think we just approved a 12.5 million um 2% raise. um it's going to be in the millions of dollars and I I mean it's just we we we have to do our diligence to to figure out what that's going to be. I mean that costs money unfortunately, but um but I would want
to know. Um I I think the the salary um study was was pretty effective for the um for the county to uh to get support for from the county commission for for its raises last year. Um, and I think we'd need to
do the same. Um, and follow suit. So, I I'm not I'm not saying whatever it costs that we would do it. I think we could we could agree. I I think there's a there's definitely a scope of a study that this board can approve that we could find a for for the appropriate price that we
can we can figure out something to do. And I I think we'd much rather do that than to than to not. And so I think with this with this meeting, what we're doing is we're saying that we're committing to to looking into the study. You'll come back and we'll agree on the scope and
the price and we'll move forward to let you support your work in doing this. So >> Miss Hall, are you um you talked about an RFP. Are are we the district obligated to go with the low bidder in that and when the proposals come back in
or do you have a choice? I yield to Miss Farmer for that. So with an RFP there there are different variables that can go into it and and the price is one of those and so not necessarily with a bid you would go with the lowest bid but there are other variables that play into the RFP and so
that will be one of the evaluating points and as Mr. Um, Welch said, "We will go through the process and then once we have a recommendation off of that, we would bring it back to you for your final approval." So you at that point in time,
you could say, "We're not going, you know, we don't agree with this." And then we would not award the contract. >> And in that particular RFP, what waiting does price get? It >> it'll depend on how we write it. And so we are still in the process. >> Issued yet. Okay. >> Correct. >> Thank you, Mr. Bostic.
Um a question first. So is is the goal is written you know because the deliverable is a professional salary study document with recommendations which I would assume we would want by
>> May. Yes sir. That's that may be >> when we have to evaluate you know you. >> So is is that timeline even feasible at this point? Do we do we have an idea at all? We we believe it would be. Sorry.
>> Yeah. No, we will go through the process and so we're probably not looking to actually being able to award until or going through until November. And so it does back things up, but could the work be done? We do think that it's still doable. >> Okay. >> Basically six months. >> Gotcha. Okay.
>> Maybe a tiny bit less. >> Yeah. I guess what I kind of understand and what I think Margie is getting at, which I agree with Jay and I agree with Margie on this in in a different way maybe, but is I would hate to have this
goal be that when we have to evaluate you coming that the deliverable is a professional salary study document with recommendations and if we don't have it then that's you know that's a zero.
Well, in my mind, you know, not to forecast everybody, but um >> so I don't know if maybe we should change maybe the the deliverable on it slightly. I just I don't want to set you up for failure in some sense because and
I know we talked about this a little bit at the the work session too, but you know, it's like when we actually get these goals done, it's like all right, you got like four months really to knock it out by the time, you know, we vote on it November, then we go for Thanksgiving, then it's Christmas break, and then it's like, hey, we're in a mad
dash till the end and and we're going to evaluate it in in June. So, um, and I and I think that's what Margie's getting at. I definitely want us to move forward with it. I just wonder if instead of and maybe this is the wrong discussion to have. It's on the amendment. I don't
know. But maybe we need to instead of remove the goal, maybe alter it slightly to keep the process of it moving forward, but to also not be like I don't want to have to give a zero if we don't have it. And that was the whole thing. So that's that's where I'm at.
>> Well, if I may, Mr. chair. Uh my plan based on this and the timing of the goals would be we would include in the RFP a final date for them for it actually being delivered. Might that influence a particular provider not to make a proposal? I can't speak to that.
It's possible. Uh I uh I I will tell you all that if in our analysis with all these providers, we get all of them saying, you know, this timeline just won't work for us with our business, we'd bring it back to you. But I I want to
specifically thank you. I was thinking about that when I mentioned Dr. Johnson in the discussion we had at the work session. Thank you for those comments related to the goals. Um we we spoke to that a little bit at the work session. Um that the timing has a potential to be odd.
Dr. Reeves. >> Um I would like to see us conduct a salary study. I think that this board in general has talked about wanting to uh well last year we had the goal of allocating
um discretionary funds for certain types of of staff members and I think this is an extension of that. Um, I'm particularly interested in still considering pursuing merit-based pay at some point and things along those lines.
So, I think it's important to get this work started. I did have one question and that is um if like you just said like it became obvious that it wasn't going to be feasible in the timeline or it was we felt it was too expensive and
we didn't want to approve that line item. Could we come back and revisit the goals and remove this particular goal at that point in time so it doesn't remain as part of the evaluation? >> From my perspective, yes. But that may be a procedural question. Um, just as a
double check. >> It's not really a procedural question. >> Okay. >> A contract question. >> Yeah. I would need to look at his contract and review whether or not there is a provision
um regarding his goals. So I don't I don't have his con I don't have his most recent contract in front of me. >> I'm assuming in theory to this sort of addresses Mr. Bostik's comment about how we would have to score it. I guess in I'm making an assumption here, but I
think that board members would have the discretion to score on that goal however they saw fit based on if there were circumstantial reasons why the goal didn't get completed that we could take that into consideration. >> That on the evaluation. Yes.
>> Yes. Um, what I'm not sure about I that I need to double check is if there is I believe there is a deadline for the board to set his goals. Um, >> so it doesn't it seems counterintuitive
to me unless there was an agreement by both parties to then move that goal. While he's working on one goal, now we're going to move the other one. That's the piece of the contract I think would be important to review prior to
moving a goal um after you've already set one. >> Dr. Ree, to to your question, at least from my perspective, as you the the only employee of this board, uh if we agreed to remove something because we acknowledge that there was an
impossibility, um it strikes me that that'd be a reasonable thing to do. uh making a change in of of a goal uh you know after that window I think would need some more study. >> Okay. Well, so that satisfies me and so
I would um I would not be in favor of this amendment because I would like to see us keep the goal. >> All right, Miss Edma. >> Yeah. Yeah, I agree with Jay and Claire's additional comments and um uh
and I'd like to see that uh the original proposal go forward, but I'd also like this is the first reading, correct? And I would find >> this is a final vote then >> is it? Okay. Okay. So, okay then. Then definitely um I'm still with Jane Cla on
that. So, yeah. >> All right, Dr. Johnson. Uh, so given what I've heard, can I take back my motion? >> You can withdraw if somebody agrees. >> Okay. Um, because I wasn't sure how the the process would work with like us
having to approve and as long as Jason's okay with a goal that we may have to tweak. Um, I would like to withdraw my motion to amend. >> Do you withdraw your second? >> All right. Thank you. All right. So, the amendment's been withdrawn. Uh we're
back on the main motion which is the goals as written in front of us. Um any further discussion on the goals? >> Mr. Chair, if I may, one other thing that this discussion prompted. Uh I do anticipate especially in that
number one. This may be an ongoing issue. We're going to get information. Our plan is to get information that my my professional experience tells me we are not going to be able to solve in one year. >> Just as a reminder.
>> All right. Any further discussion? >> I can't request to speak. >> Oh yeah. >> Can we uh >> They're all blank. They're all down. I can ask a question. >> Can we uh get Mr. Beasley's mic turned on?
>> Great. >> All right, we're back. Mr. Beasley. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. I was just curious like how much um did the county spend on their salary assessment? >> Uh we we've been told it's $40,000. How much was it?
>> 20. Oh, we were told it was 20,000. >> Excellent. Yeah, we yeah, we had actually looked at the substance of their work and and set it at that minimum 40. >> So 20,000 and I believe they have way more employees. Is that correct? >> No, we have more.
>> You have more. Okay, got it. All right, that's it. >> All right, any further questions or comments? >> Okay, we will move to a vote on the goals as written. The vote is 12 yes, zero no.
>> All right. Thank you. Those goals are approved. Mr. Golden, you have your goals. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, all right. Next item is approval of board goals and affirming our strategic plan. Um, Mr. Golden.
>> Uh, thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, as you all know, Mr. Brown recommended the board consider these two goals for yourselves. I will tell you that many years even though it's been in policy, the board has not set goals for itself. Instead,
we focused on district goals. Uh and u you all may recall that in that discussion back at the September work session. Uh the discussion was related to to uh what was at that time goal number two related to corporate um corporate support and corporate
sponsorship. uh and we had some discussion that that there was some value in for to use an old country phrase you all participating in beating the bushes. Uh and so that that discussion was held. Uh also you all had
some detailed discussion about making yourself more uh visible and available in the schools and I want to specifically uh thank thank the board members. some of you took that to heart already. Uh and so thank you uh for going out and visiting the schools. Uh
so there's there's the goals uh for you all to discuss. >> All right, we have a motion in a second. I'll just make one comment which is to say I know Mr. Golden mentioned that we have not in recent times had board goals. Um, I thought it was important for us to do that, put something on
paper that again, there's not, as we all know, there's not consequences to, you know, if we don't achieve these goals. But always good to put a marker out there. Um, and I think on number one in particular, there's a lot of value that we as individual board members can bring in helping uh, Mr. Golden achieve that
goal because it benefits not just him, obviously, it benefits the entire district. Um and then number two is simply you know giving us something to aim towards in terms of our own visibility and engagement in the schools. So um with that I will uh see
if there are any further questions or comments. Okay, seeing none we're ready to vote. The vote is 12 yes, zero no. >> All right, the go board goals are approved and with that we have completed our agenda. We are adjourned. Thank you.