K. I will, call to order our meeting, 10/20/2025 meeting of the Williamson County Board of Education. Thank everyone for being here. We will begin with, recording our attendance, board members. Mister Jurgers? 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. You may be seated. Alright. Our next item is, items of particular public interest, our public comment period. This evening, we have seven, individuals who have signed up to speak.
Each of you will have up to three minutes if you choose to take it. I will call the first three in order and, so please be ready, 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 time. So if you please pay attention to that, to make sure you stay within the three minutes, please. Our first three, speakers, Holly Allgood, 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 performing 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 work day 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 more 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 ex officio to the committee. And finally, the action of the board undermined the committee's comprehensive student focus 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 ex officio 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 TCA 49 dash six dash two two zero seven c one. The teachers are the experts in this arena, and as a high performing 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 Williamson County, and it's clear that there's still confusion on the parent parental end of the equation. There's also confusion and mixed messages coming from your end as well. I say this because on September 12, 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, it contained a link to 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 a hundred and eighty days, an entire school year. It doesn't say they may be sent or could be sent. It says they will be sent. So if that video is true, why did the student who bullied, attacked, and threatened
to murder my daughter and three of her friends, how 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 the murder was protected while four nine 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. Mister Gollins emailed 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's agreed with the video and said the school system could have done more. I spoke with another who said contact Marsha Blackburn's office. So I contacted Marsha Blackburn's office. She said it's a she her staff said it's a local state school issue, not hers. Mister Golden, I know what you're gonna say when you address my remarks. You're gonna 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. You're 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 county 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. Mister 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 Hillary Stocker. 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, doctor 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 SES was an idyllic elementary school filled with love, learning, and fun. I got no response. Then in June 2025, I learned we lost an incredible teacher who quit with no backup plan because she couldn't take it anymore. And worst of all, Christy Serpis 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 till I dragged her into it via copying her on old emails that I finally got a response in one hour
after eight eight months. Then an apology from Julie Oyer 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 year ago. My fear of retaliation was the reason I asked Tina not to be in my children's five zero four meetings. She called and spent thirty minutes not respecting the law, my request, and pressuring me to let her still come to the meeting. I refused, and Laurel, a chance to her credit, stepped in kindly and respectfully on Tina's behalf. Then Tina continued to spend the 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, 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 not stand for. I have handled this professionally, kindly, patiently, and I'm done. Julie cited 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. The former teacher is currently writing a letter not only citing her experience and reason for leaving, but the complaint 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 Christie. 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 Serpz, 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 changes chances when something is clearly wrong. Thank you. Our next two speakers are Beverly Purvis and Valerie Dibley.
Good evening, members of the board and fellow community members. My name is Beverly Purvis, 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 k twelve 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 lunch times 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 Dibley, and I'm here today as the concerned parent of a second grader at Kenrose and an eleventh 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 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 deference to the appointed committee. Our committee 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 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 Thank you. Thank you. Our final two speakers, Adam Wright and Avery Allen. Thanks, mister chairman. I'm Adam Wright. I'm a professor of medicine and biomedical informatics at Vanderbilt and the Med DAT 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 WCS screen time committee for the last couple of 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 gonna be moving from a silent and not used standard to an away and off the body standard, and then the other one is, moving towards a bell to bell k through 12 policy, eliminating the current, exception for lunch in high schools. So as a scientist I believe in using data to make decisions and I've seen
this board use the same value. And so I observe that there's a cognition study from the University of Texas, Adrian Warch 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. They explained that the mere presence of one smartphone, 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, they're really, their mind is somewhere else. So I also think silent but not you is gonna be harder to enforce.
There's a kind of game of cat and mouse, but on the other hand, off and away is a simple and ambiguous policy. It's easy to track and enforce, and it avoids a slippery slope of, sorry teacher. I'm not it's it's here, but I'm not using, my phone, of course. I also think that lunch is the vital time for socialization physical activity, not just for through, k through eight, but also ninth through twelfth graders. I recently learned the word fubbing, snubbing people by using your phone. Now you're supposed to be talking to them, and I was recently observing a, 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 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. Every school who has reported on this that I've been able to see reported improved social skills, reduced bullying, cafeterias that got a lot noisier as kids switched from, to playing card games from watching TikTok videos. Actually couldn't find a single report of a district or school that had gone to
an away for the day, bell to bell policy and expressed any regret. Nobody goes back once they make that decision. This is happening all around us. Arkansas, South Carolina, and Louisiana have adopted these policies statewide, and about 40% of schools have already gone to the bell to bell, policy which I think is right for us here. I signed up for this after I saw that Claire Reeves had, 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 ambiguities and limitations of the current policy. I hope you guys will adopt this, simpler, clearer, cleaner policy that will serve our
students 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 WCS 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 fifty eight percent of Tennessee kids are eligible to receive free or reduced price 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 five point four percent across Williamson County struggle to access healthy meals. Williamson County Schools has robust food services across schools, providing close to 3,000,000 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, childcare, 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 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 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. Alright. That concludes our public comment. Before we move on, I wanna thank, Deputies Swidley and Mott for being here tonight and serving us. Thank you, gentlemen. Okay. We will now move on to approval of the agenda. As always, we will do this via voice vote.
All those in favor of approving the agenda, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? You approve? We will now, proceed with approval of our consent agenda. There's three items on the consent agenda tonight. That's approval of our September 15 school board meeting minutes. Board policy for second reading 3.202 emergency preparedness plan and recommendation for field trip be request. We'll do this by voice vote as well. Do we have a motion and a second? We can do this by hands. We're and a motion and a second.
Okay. All in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Okay. With that, the consent agenda as previously read is approved. Alright. We will now move on to communications to the board, mister Golden. Thank you, mister chair. And I, as I often do, and it was noted in the public comments, thank our public commenters. I will say that, at least a couple of public commenters do deserve a direct conversation, and we'll make sure we have that. I also wanna, thank, some of those others who have spoken. We actually, at the work session, spoke to the adoption of the, 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 experienced with ELA or English, 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. It's more involved at the Tennessee Textbook Commission level, and also at the state board level and the the involvement of the Tennessee Department of Education as well. Board members, we also presented to you our draft five year capital plan. I just wanna 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, feel free to send any questions you have, related to the work we've done on preparing that.
I did wanna also mention a 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, and there are some demographic numbers that support that based on, state information on ages of children. That is a focus of ours that we're gonna continue to work on. With that, I did want to mention to you that Carol Birdsong is standing in the back.
And as we traditionally do, we celebrate our state and national championships. And Carol 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 month. Okay. Alright. 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, the their, their sponsor. So that's your international award for you. Okay. And now we have a national award for you. This is, in honor of Page Middle School's. This is for their eighth grade band last year, but this award, has just recently
occurred. They have been named the 2025 mark of excellence commended winner by the Foundation for Music Education. And Evan Burton and Carolyn Hankins are, 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
Kraust, Suhana Deaminihaly, Olivia Young, Eva Shruti, Macy McLaughlin, Coco Davis, and Ruby Miller. Their coach is Lynn Bruske. And then over at Heritage Middle School, we have Asher Salmon, and he is your Tennessee Middle School Athletic Association boys class three a cross country individual state champ.
And Jacob Connors is Asher's coach. We also have the girls state championship, and this is Scott Linzavo. And she is your state champ class three a. Her coach is Vince Cabisco Cabisco Cabiscocec? I'm not sure about Vince's last name. But, anyway, congratulations to Scotland and her coach. And then we have the boys class two a cross country state champs, Legacy Middle
School. Their team members are Brooks Bichon, Will Heyman, Riggs Johnson, Matthew Kritz, Lincoln Moore, Rhett Smith, and Hudson Zapp. Daniel Styles is their coach. And here we go with Woodland Middle School again. Boys class three a cross country state champions, Matthew Allgood, Oliver Brown, Ty Burton, Ryder Chapman, Adam Johnson, Jack Johnson, and William Thursby. Their coaches are Andrew Swanson and Emily Lucas.
High school, golf, Page High School golf, your t double s double a class two a girls golf state champs. Team members include Elizabeth McCann, Stella Edwards, Brooke Bennett, and Sushi Aker. Their coach is James Eicoff. Now for some state, stuff. Spotlight. Hold on just one moment. This is Chris Sanders, and he is your t, double s, double a boys golf coach of the year from Brentwood High School.
And now superintendent Golden, these are some that we have been oh 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, t, double s, double a, 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, mister chair, I did wanna mention, I noticed we have a number of scouts in the in the building, and I wanna 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, with your work towards badging. Also we have a number of principals and I wanna thank you you, as well for being present here tonight. With that, mister chair, that is my report. Thank you. Scouts, why don't you stand up and be recognized? Alright. We're glad you're here. Okay. We will dispense with a board chair report and move right into new business.
The first item on under new business is, we have three items under 2526 school board budget. First one is approval of the general purpose school fund amendment 10.25, special schools transportation reimbursement in the amount of $136,618 Mr. Golden. Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is a special education grant for, transportation. We do recommend approval to receive the funds and place it place the funds in the appropriate expenditure lines.
Alright. Thank you for that. Do we have a motion and a second? Thank you. Any questions or discussion? Alright. Let's proceed to a vote. The vote is 12 yes, zero no. Alright. 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 fifteen to eighteen years depending on
mileage and condition of the buses. Mister King, did, some detailed work with our transportation department and is recommending replacement purchase of eight buses, seven, 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. We have a motion and a second. 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 twenty twenty five, twenty six in the amount of $12,465,616 Mr. Golden. Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is the annual placement of the, pay increase for our faculty and staff approved by the County Commission into the appropriate the appropriate line items.
Do recommend approval. Thank you. 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. Alright. We'll now move on to board policies, both of these for first reading. The first one is, policy 4.401, textbooks and instructional materials. Mister Coward, do you wanna give any readout there from the policy committee or miss Osbrooks or mister Golden? I'm not sure how you guys wanna handle that. We had quite the, discussion both at the policy meeting and the the work session.
I I think the just the gist is, this is a I think we had all agreed to to review this. Again, we waited gave a little bit of time to, to allow some time to pass after, which is, which is why you'll see in the, in the request, mister Bostick's request was in March, and we, agreed with him to, to kinda bring this back at a at a later time. So, I think the, the gist of the, of the of the changes are, are
that we're kind of specifying the the committee makeup and then describing a little bit better the process for the information that we're, that we're gonna get. But I don't know. But I think we can we can talk about it more, but that's it. I don't know. Mister Bostick, you had, brought this forward. You have any comments you wanna share tonight or or wanna move on? 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 we were just some changes that we would make and, 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 bridge that gap a little bit. So that's kind of the heart behind it. Yeah. That's kind of basically all I have at this point unless we wanna get in discussion for it. I would I do have a question though, or do you want me to wait until we Go ahead. Because I know people have kinda brought up the committee oath and one of the things about the, this policy changes that really any board member could be a part
as an ex officio, serve as an ex officio 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 the 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. But you all as board members take take an oath and you have, commitments that are built into policy that that you will make the best decisions based on the
information you have. And in addition to that key component, which is uphold the constitution of the of the of The US and Tennessee. So I I'm gonna 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. And and now the the the committee, is does have have a more specific commitment to that particular process. I did wanna mention one other item that, the conflict of interest was mentioned.
You all do have an obligation to disclose financial conflicts of interest in your votes in any vote. So, if if if the board asks, we will do a a a a deep double check, and so I'm gonna re, refer to Dana on that. Happy to look at it, but as superintendent and and have a a a deeper discussion at the next policy committee meeting in November. But as superintendent Golden mentioned, you're in policy and state law, you already have many
obligations that you've got to disclose, ethical obligations, particularly regarding finances. And I will also remind you, and you know this, every year in addition to, 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, money. That, again, will 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 White. Thank you. I just wanna 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, that I I I would be in support of adding the oath just because to show our alignment with that shared work, the school board members that choose to be on the textbook committee. Thank you. Alright. 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. Mister Boston? If we if we do decide to add that oath, which I'm kinda fine with either way, is that something we would wanna detail out in the policy? Or is that just like a SOP or something that we would do? I that's no issue. I'd like to manage 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, but board members as well.
So that can be if that is, I'll have some proposed language for y'all to look at. If you want to add it, we definitely can do that. Great. Alright. Any other questions or comments? Alright. We're ready to vote on first reading. The vote is 12 yes, zero no. Okay. That policy, language, is adopted on verse reading. Next item is policy 6.312, use of wireless communication devices. Mister Yower, do you wanna also give a readout where we stand with that from
policy committee? Yes, sir. As soon as I get there. So we have a proposed update to the wireless communication device, that, I guess, I'll probably Claire's speaking first, so I'll I'll just let her talk to it. I mean, it it's a it has a it has some a couple of differences from the, from the current policy, not to mention, I guess, specifically, it was it it went into detail around a couple of things as one of the speakers said
around the committee, discussion about, about off the body. And then it, it is intended to, to go away for the day for, for all students, including the nine through twelve. So that's where it sits today. So like we did before, for explanation purposes since you brought it forward, doctor Reeves, do you wanna give an explanation? And then we'll move into the order of speakers on the board. Certainly. Thank you, Mr Chair. So we did get feedback from the, tech use committee.
They prioritized evaluating the policy that we passed in June, and gave us feedback on changes that they would like to see incorporated into the policy. So I took that feedback, and I addressed every point that they had brought forward and wrote it into the policy. The one place where I differed with the committee's recommendation was on, keeping lunch for for ninth through twelfth grade as a time when those students could use their wireless
devices. I, feel very strongly that the data shows that, a way for the day policy promotes, the strongest possible school culture. And as one of, our committee members here tonight spoke to, every school district and state that has gone in the direction of away for the day for K through twelfth grade has reported nothing but positive results from improving academic outcome to reducing, disciplinary
referrals and bullying to creating an overall general, 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, 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 propose an amendment to the policy. So I'd like to make a motion to amend if that's Well, so that was really for explanation purposes. So if you wanna go in the queue Okay. We've got somebody on the board already for recognition. So do you wanna get in the queue for recognition and bring the amendment at that point? Sure. Okay. Okay. Alright. So oh, okay. So do you wanna be recognized for an amendment? Sure. Okay. Please. And I think I mean, it speaks to what miss Wyatt said at the, work
session. And so I heard your concerns and, heard some of the concerns from emails that came in. So it's the timeline. Now we want to give the district time to, 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, after devices by k through twelve twelve students and will take effect 08/01/2026.
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 through 12 students and will take effect 08/01/2026. 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 mister Galbraith. I'm sorry. Doctor Greer is on the board. Any discussion of the amendment? Mister Cash. Thank you, mister chair. This is a first reading.
We've got feedback, on on many issues. 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. Why are we making amendments to the policy here when it's the first reading, and we're gonna 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 Galbraith, who's doing a great job. We have our our attendant superintendents, and staff members in these meetings.
We had eight board members at our policy meeting that sent this forward, knowing that there was gonna 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, mister 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 sense to move forward now. And that way, we at least have an agreed upon timeline. A couple of the things that I was gonna 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 principals asked that we not res restrict cell phones during lunch and that we not make any changes to the policy in mid year. Additionally, the committee discussion made up of parents, teachers, and administrators was in agreement with
that request from the nine high school principals not to make changes in the policy in midyear that would restrict phone usage during lunch for grades nine 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 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. Before I recognize mister Cash, can we bring back up the language on the screen for everyone, please? Alright. Thank you. Mister Cash? Mister Chair, 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, maybe an area, a designated area for for the kids.
And I'd like to see something done about the school buses because, you know, they're on the bus twenty minutes to up to forty five 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 gonna 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. Miss Sibma. Yeah. I I agree with Melissa as well. Listening to the parents and especially knowing that the private schools, those students have access,
for, you know, those same type of reasons to be able to communicate, outside during the school day. And, so then on Saturday, I talked to Brian King, and he sent the school board, an email, you know, saying that he's gonna be working on addressing those issues. And then I also brought up some other issues like, what was the other issues? I can't think of them right now. That we discussed in the, in the work section, and he's gonna work on that. And, it might take a little time, but, and you you guys all got the email.
So, yeah. I think, I think we're moving forward. And, that's about all I wanna say. Thank you. Mister Galbert? So, Dan, I just wanted I wanna 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 that I think this is Claire's thoughts, because I I had the same thing. But, not to not to get into whether we're gonna 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. Yeah. That's good. Yep. Order. Yes. While I appreciate the, 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 anything to implement
until the end of the school year. So I do wanna make that clear, that section right there that I think that mister McNees 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. K? Well, you're you're gonna be recognized next, doctor Reeves. 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 1, 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 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, 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, produced by Katie Hallmark at Rossview 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 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 policy 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, call the question. Is that No. You're not. No. I can't. Not not at that not at this point. Okay. You could have before you started. Sorry. Okay. Mister Welch. Thank you.
So I Claire, I appreciate you doing this. I I think it's, a good amendment, and and I can support it. My question is the timing. Would it be better to defer consideration and then vote on these changes as we get closer? It it just strikes me as a little bit odd. We're gonna pass a a policy now, but doesn't go into effect till later, but
we're gonna keep the old one. That's the only thing that's confusing for me. But, you know, if you can sort of assure me on that, it's it's not a hill I wanna dine, 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, technology committee to add to this as well. The substance of it though, I I I don't have any issue, now with, you know well, we haven't passed the amendment yet, but if and when, at that point.
So I think on the substance of what you're asking, I think there's a couple of things. One is, 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 a second reading. So it is giving us the additional chance to, discuss that policy and at another work session. 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. I'm not gonna do that tonight, but I I it's maybe for for second reading to deferring it to them. One one thing I'm gonna mention, not not as chairman, just as a board member, and and doctor Reeves is gonna be recognized in a second. You might be in a position to answer this. It seems to me there's really two issues, at play here. One is the issue of the timing of it, which we were addressing now. And then the other issue is the the substance of it, and in particular, the
substance of the part about the lunch, whether or not to allow it for lunch, the lunch period, 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. Effectively, I just just so I'm this is what I was asking for it to come back up on the board because effectively, if we approve this on first reading as written with the August 1 date, 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. It mhmm. So I think I think the the issue for me just personally, again, is I don't I'm personally, okay with students have the high school students having their phones during the lunch period. 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. And I have great respect for, the work that you've done in writing this policy
because you've spent a lot of time on it, and very thoughtfully looked at this and presented, really thoughtful argument. So that's just the one issue for me is that provision. If I vote to if we vote 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. And I'm I'm not personally prepared to do that. I don't disagree with the timing, delaying the timing and giving us, 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. Miss Clements. Thank you, mister chair. I like you. I I struggle a little bit with the lunch issue simply because I want want the kids to be able to get an email from their parents if their parents need or 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. And the other thing I want to encourage us all to do, and I'm I'm gonna 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 principals, and and try to, create that dialogue with the principals to understand the functionality of this. And, but I agree. I I see everyone moving further and further away from the phones and having less
of the phone at their school, but, I mean, at at with their kids. So, anyway, so that was my encouragement is that, we can get back into the high schools and visit and talk with the principals. Mister Galbert. Chair, just wanna speak to the, I guess, to to the process. And when we get a second reading for the for the policy committee, are the way we've, the way we've handled these things is, yes. The the policy is written with the with the with total away for the day and the and the August, effective date would would come before us in the second
reading. But then we would we would discuss at the, at the policy meeting. And if we can get a, if we can get a consensus there that the policy we'll basically decide there what we bring back to the board. So if, I mean, and we typically have a pretty good turnout of the board. So I think we can get a pretty good feel of where we should go with, if we agree that the policy should be, 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. Doctor Reeves? Now I'd like to call the question. Alright. That's proper motion. It's not a debatable motion, so we will move, straight to a vote on the amendment, which again, 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 I have 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 clear and consistent explanations for the possession and use of personal wireless communication devices by k through 12 students and will take effect 08/01/2026. Alright. Thank you. I should have asked, is there any objection to the question? Seeing seeing seeing none. Just wanna make that official. Alright. So we will now move to a vote on the amendment as stated.
Mister Golden, do you have a, any input on that? I do have a recommendation with a caveat that is actually in the form of a question for our attorneys, 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 could be amended again. Okay. So with that caveat, I do recommend approval of this amendment. Alright. Thank you. So is there is everyone clear on what we're voting?
We're voting on the amendment brought by doctor Reeves. Is everyone clear on that? Okay. We are ready to vote. The vote is 11 yes, one no. Alright. The amendment carries. We're now back on the main motion, which is the policy, as amended. So any questions we have our original motion and original second. Any questions on the policy as amended? Again, first reading with the clarity that, there will be opportunities for further changes, at the next board meeting if the board desires.
Any questions or comments? Alright. Seeing none, we're ready to vote. The vote is 11 yeah 11 yes, one no. Alright. The, motion carries on first reading. Alright. 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. I actually did not mention PE, PE health science and some CTE courses. 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. Doctor Allen's memo includes the name of seven parent seven parent nominees, but we actually have 12, in the actual document, so I wanted to mention that that detail. Do recommend approval of the textbook committee for this year's adoption. Alright. Thank you for that. We have a motion and a second. Thank you. Any discussion? Okay. We're ready to vote.
The vote is 12 yes, zero no. Alright. The committee membership is approved. Item d, approval of the 2526 superintendent, and district goals. Mister Golden? Thank you, mister 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, for for this cut for this current school year. I did wanna acknowledge and thank some of your thank you for some of your comments made especially at the work session. Specifically, doctor 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 the the specific numbers, but the concepts are something that I I think we ought to be talking about especially for next year. I did wanna specifically mention that each one of these four that you all talked about at the previous pulse the previous work session includes deliverables that are the product of that discussion that we had back in September.
So with that I do recommend approval. Alright. Thank you. And thanks for the thought that and the time you put into preparing those goals and certainly appreciate the input of the board. We have a motion and a second. Doctor. Johnson. Thank you. 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, but we have a minimum $40,000. And do we already have that budgeted or We do.
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 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, explanation you wanna provide to that or context? I'm just afraid that it's gonna almost put us in a catch 22 because, you
know, what if it it comes back and it costs 200,000 or it costs you know? And I really would not wanna obligate us to say we're gonna 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 gonna approve $200,000 or, you know, whatever the amount is. So that's my big concern. I I'm just afraid that that one's gonna cost us money, and I don't know if we wanna spend it. And, yeah, it's just a messy one a little bit to me.
But Mister Golden, based on previous, studies that are similar in nature, do you have any sort of sense of the range we wanna be talking about? I know you said 40,000 on the low end. Is there a point forward by May. Yeah. But do we we need a second for Then we could we could we could discuss that after. Fair enough. Is there a second on the motion? Hey. We have a second. So I'll I'll restate my question. Is there, 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 gonna actually, 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 have with county government. They went through a study for county government jobs. School jobs are different, and that's why, I I anticipated that that 40,000 is is a minimum. And so, 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 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 100, but I'm really ballparking. Alright. Thank you. Mister Welch. If it if it did come back as as doctor Hunt said, the 200,000. 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, mister Galworth? Sure. I I guess I think we I definitely wanna leave it. I I don't wanna 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. When we do increase our compensation, I think we just approved a $12,500,000 2% raise. It's going to be in the millions of dollars.
And I mean, it's just we're we we have to do our diligence to to figure out what that's gonna be. I mean, that that costs money, unfortunately, but, but I would wanna know. I think the the salary, study was was pretty effective for the, for the county to, to get support for from the county commission for for its raises last year. And I think we'd need to do the same, and follow suit. So I I I'm not I'm not saying whatever it costs that we would do
it. I think we could we could agree. I think there's a there's definitely a scope of a study that this board can approve that we could find for for the appropriate price that we can figure out something to do. And I think we'd much rather do that than to not. And so I think with this meeting, what we're doing is we're saying that we're committing to looking into the study. You'll come in 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, were you, you talked about an RFP, or are you are we, the district, obligated to go with the low bidder in that in when the proposals come back in, or do you have a choice? I yield to miss Farmer for that. So with an RFP, there are 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 mister 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 weighting does price get? It it'll depend on how we write it. And so we're still in the process. You. Yeah. Okay. Correct. Thank you. Mister Bostrom. 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. Yes, sir. That's that's May would be fine. To evaluate, you know, you. Yeah. 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.
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 a 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 in my
mind. You know? Sure. Not to forecast everybody, but, so I don't know if maybe we should change maybe the the deliverable on it slightly. I just I don't wanna 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, alright. She 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 gonna evaluate it in in June. So 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 gold, maybe alter it slightly to keep the process of it moving forward, but to also not be like, I don't wanna 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, mister chair, my plan based on this and the timing of the goals would be we would include in the RFP, the 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. I, 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 bring it back to you. But I I wanna specifically thank you. I was thinking about that when I mentioned doctor Johnson in the discussion we had at the work session. Thank you for those comments related to the goals. We we spoke to that a little bit at the work session, that the timing has a potential to be odd. Doctor Reeves? I would like to see us conduct a salary study. I think that this board in general has talked about wanting to well, last year, we had the goal of allocating discretionary funds for certain types of of staff members,
and I think this is an extension of that. 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, if, like you just said, like, it became obvious that it wasn't gonna be feasible in the timeline or it was we felt it was too expensive and we didn't wanna 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, just as a double check. It's not really a procedural question. Okay. And it may be a contract question. Yeah. I would need to look at his contract and review whether or not there is a provision, 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 mister Bostick's comment about how we
would have to score it, I guess, and 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. 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.
There is. There is. 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 gonna move the other one. That's the piece of the contract, I think, would be important to review prior to moving a goal, after you've already set one. Doctor Reese, to to your question, at least from my perspective, as you the the only employee of this board If we agreed to remove something because we acknowledge that there was an impossibility, it
strikes me that it that'd be a reasonable thing to do. Making a change in of of a goal, you know, after that window, well, I think would need some more study. Alright. Well, so that satisfies me, and so I would, I would not be in favor of this amendment because I would like to see us keep the goal. Alright. Miss Ivma? Yeah. Yeah. I agree with Jay and Claire's additional comments. And, and I'd like to see that, the original proposal go forward.
But I'd also like this is the first reading. Correct? And I would find it This is a final vote. Is it? Okay. Okay. So okay. Then then definitely, I'm still with Jane Claire on that. So yeah. Alright. Doctor Johnson? So given what I've heard, can I take back my motion? You can withdraw. Okay. 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, I would like to withdraw my motion to amend. Do you withdraw your second?
Alright. Thank you. Alright. So the amendment's been withdrawn. We're back on the main motion, which is the goals as written in front of us. Any further discussion on the goals? Mister chair, if I may, one other thing that, this discussion prompted. 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.
Alright. Any further discussion? I would say my screen's blank. I can't request this week. Oh. Yeah. Can we, They're all blank. They're all it's dead. I can I can ask a question? Can we, get mister Beasley's mic turned on? Great. Alright. We're back. Mister Beasley. Thank you, mister chair. I was just curious, like, how much, did the county spend on their salary assessment? We've we've been told it's $40,000. How much was it? 20. 20. Oh, we were told it was 20,000. Excellent. Yeah.
We yeah. We'd 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. Alright. That's it. Alright. Any further questions or comments? Okay. We will move to a vote on the goals as written. The vote is 12 yes. Zero no. Alright. Thank you. Those goals are approved. Mister Golden, you have your goals. Thank you, mister chair. Alright. Next item is approval of board goals and affirming our strategic plan.
Mr. Golden? Thank you, Mr. Chair. 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. And, you all may recall that in that discussion back at the September work session, the discussion was related to to, what was at that time goal number two related to corporate, corporate support and corporate sponsorship. And we had some discussion that that there was some value in for let to
to use an old country phrase, you all participating in beating the bushes. And so that that discussion was held. Also you all had some detailed discussion about making yourself more visible and available in the schools and I wanna specifically, thank thank the board members. Some of you took that to heart already, and so thank you, for going out and visiting the schools. So there's there's the goals, for you all to discuss. Alright. We have a motion and a second. I'll just make one comment which to say, I know Mr. Golden mentioned that we have not in recent times had board goals.
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. And I think on number one in particular, there's a lot of value that we as individual board members can bring in helping, Mr. Golden achieve that goal because it benefits not just him. Obviously, it benefits the entire district. 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, with that, I will, see if there are any further questions or comments. Okay. Seeing none, we're ready to vote. The vote is 12 yes, zero no. Alright. The goal board goals are approved. And with that, we have completed our agenda. We are adjourned. Thank you.