Several scenarios were laid out for the board’s consideration, each with its implications for the community. The first scenario involved offering only busing required by the state and identifying students who qualify based on mileage, which could necessitate a bid process for bus routes. The second scenario suggested continuing with the current system while developing the transportation policy. The third scenario would maintain current routes, providing mandated busing and opening remaining seats as subscription seats. The board debated the implications of each scenario, particularly concerning the financial impact on families and the number of subscription seats that could be available.

The discussion also touched on the need for gathering data from families to understand their transportation needs better. The board contemplated the necessity of including the term “thereafter” in the motion to provide mandated and subscription busing and whether to separate resolutions to address different transportation service aspects. A motion was made to establish the principle that the district will offer both mandated and subscription busing, along with any required busing for special education and Vex students, starting in the 2024-2025 school year. The conversation included concerns about the financial burden on families and the uncertainty of subscription seat availability in the future. The motion was seconded, and the board members moved to vote on it.

Another discussion revolved around the district’s budget and the proposed 1.99% tax levy increase. The board debated the necessity of the increase in light of the district’s reserves, with concerns raised about whether it was reasonable to request additional funds from taxpayers when the district had a notable surplus. Questions arose regarding the surplus funds and whether they could be used to offset the tax increase. Members also deliberated on what constitutes an acceptable percentage of contingency in the budget.

The meeting addressed various capital projects and maintenance issues, such as delays in roofing projects due to missing paperwork from the state, which led to discussions on reallocating funds to the next year’s budget. The condition of school parking lots was also a concern, and there was talk of using funds from the maintenance reserve for repairs.

A resolution was passed authorizing the district to enter into a settlement agreement concerning litigation over the district’s response to open public records act requests. However, concerns were raised about the transparency of the district’s spending in this matter.

Furthermore, the board addressed the community’s response to changing the school mascot, with the acting superintendent promising to re-evaluate the decision and potentially involve the community in further discussions.

There was also debate on the publication of committee meeting minutes on the district website, the need for confidentiality, and the timeline for publishing these documents. A motion was amended to publish the minutes within three weeks after the committee had met.

In addition, the board established limits for legal fees and marketing expenses, setting a maximum of $150,000 for legal fees and $10,000 for marketing, despite some opposition.