##VIDEO ID:UURsSKzoqZQ## e e e e e e e e e the time we are good afternoon everyone at this time call to order the special meeting of the federal Public School Board here on November 12th 2024 uh uh Miss Steves will you determine if we have a quorum present yes Mr chair there is thank you uh would you everyone please remove your hats and stand if you are able for the Pledge of Allegiance I pledge aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation under God indivisible with liy and justice for all thank you all thank you all for those in attendance here and those who are watching online uh as a side note here to begin uh in the audience here if you are a a uh member of the United States military or retired member of the United States military would you please stand and be acknowledged if is there anyone or those of you at home thank you very much we appreciate thank you for your service and commitment and those at home that are veterans as well thank you for your service and commitment approval of agenda uh before we have a motion for approval of the agenda I'm going to explain to all here how the agenda is set up and because I know there was some confusion whatever and I did send out an email to the board uh explaining the rationale for setting up the agenda here one as I said I I we did item three consider approval reorganization Plan D because that upon consensus Plan D and plan B were the two from the rubric that were the highest scored and through consensus would be discussed in setting an agenda it's difficult or confusing if you have approval of reorganization Plan D and the next one re approval of reorganization Plan B So to avoid that confusion and in my explanation is that in the discussion of option plan D if Plan B is mentioned it should be in comparison and contrast with Plan D D or there would be an amendment to uh have approval of reorganization Plan B for full discussion there that's why I set it up that way and then item four uh consider authorizing McKinley remodel bids of course is dependent upon uh the decisions made in agenda item number three so just rationale as to uh why the agenda was set up by myself and Mr benty in that in that particular uh manner so moving on now to item number two approval of the agenda I'll have a motion entertain a motion for approval of the agenda move thank you Miss budo do have a second I'll second thank you Mr Wolf discussion discussion and discussion hearing none all in favor of approval agenda signify by saying I opposed motion passes item number three uh consider approval of reorganization plan option D um could I entertain a motion for approval of reorganization plan option D so move thank you Miss budro and a second I'll second thank you Mr Wolf and discussion Mr chair Dr Moore uh for option D and and I maybe I should have said something before the agenda because I did put another option in that I think Mr benty sent that to you those options one of the problems that I'm having with this is um and first of all I do want to say that for the alc students they need to be moved to McKinley and that's all of the options that I see uh I think uh it's important that we have our ALC students uh at their own site um because I don't think they will Thrive at the Fable high school or fairell middle school and that's not one of the options but and I think whatever we do we need to move them to McKinley but what I'm having a problem with is that with the reorganizational options so far I have seen research I know that suggests students in totally prek or k setting do not do as well achievement wise as in a traditional setting uh and they have trouble with uh they don't Thrive as well with social emotional standpoint also there are less positive relationships between the students and teachers and uh I actually saw a constituent and send me some uh research and I don't know why that research wasn't brought up before it should have been because what I'm seeing for the with Standalone kindergarten pre kindergarten uh they don't learn as fast and uh in as in a more uh traditional setting the transition uh with the transitions there's correlation there's a correlation with decreased achievement increased negative behavior and as I said uh few are positive student uh teacher relationships uh in the K in in the prek and K setting its deficits in uh reading and math some of the research shows uh there's more anxiety when they have to uh transition and uh I think it's very important that we step back and look at this again because this research was not um from what I can see the research is fairly sound that this will be a detriment to our student achievement we haven't seen research with achievement so I'd like to take a step back and really I don't know how to do this but start over again with some of these uh especially with the prek andk and that's why my option that I set forth was that why can't we excuse me Dr Moore okay your the discussion should only be about option D all right and so because that's that's the motion second for option that's fine I I am totally against this prek and K setting I don't think it's it's uh uh by what the research shows it's detrimental to the students and I in good conscience cannot vote for it and I think I mentioned some of the reasons and um that's my um I guess my comments right now anyway thank you further discussion Mr Wolf uh anything yeah I I wasn't here on the 28th and I appreciate everybody's uh discussion and finishing the questions and answers in the in the Matrix and all that I was able to watch it um on the tape and stuff so thank you uh Mr bham so I've got like eight or nine things to read is is now uh regarding option D and whatnot is now the opportune time or this is Mr Wolf in my opinion this is the time as we're in discussion of option D okay um so this is what I came up with after watching that and and uh I don't mean to change anybody's opinion or anything of that nature just where where I'm coming from here um option D is the most favored plan out of seven Plans by the committee of roughly 20 or so people uh made up of District staff community members the board according to the Matrix that was reviewed on October 28th and recommend and recommended excuse me by the superintendent the board's least favored plan is to do nothing or the status quo while not embraced or favored by some I believe it is the best overall plan presented not necessarily the best overall plan that we could come up with if we had magic wands uh but I believe it's the best overall plan presented and it was rated this way by the board total of 100 a score of7 compared to the next closest 90 and the reorganization committee in fact six out of seven board members rated it their Top Choice on the matric according to scale some ask how this will benefit student outcomes we aren't completely developing something new as we would be moving first through fifth graders to two other elementary schools and and moving them in with their with their peers I would ask the question in Reverse how increased class sizes and or reduced programming would likely lead to increased student outcomes if we do nothing and we have to cut roughly $700,000 for this upcoming year we will have to cut roughly 10 staff members and that will likely lead to increased class sizes and or reduced programming which I do not believe will lead to better student achievement if option D is approved class siiz projections show we would go from four Elementary classes with 30 plus students down to one or possibly zero this helps solve our building issue with the alc students estimated cost to repair the current ALC are approximately 2.3 million if we don't do some or reorganization plan can someone please tell me how we move forward with the alc and what our plan there is that cost will likely go up as we continue to Kick the Can down the road option D is projected to save the district approximately $3.5 million over 5 years nearly 5 million over 7 years and almost 7 million over 10 years this is substantial money and something that we owe to our taxpayers to look at if some form of reorganization isn't done we are simply wasting this and being irresponsible with regards to option D and the additional transition School transfers we got a fair amount of emails on additional transfers and and um I've ran this by a couple people and maybe I'm misunderstanding but I don't believe there will be any additional transfers or transitions compared to what we have now if we have a prek that's children entering uh their first typically education session um the way we have it right now they're in preschool and then they transfer to a K through five so if they go prek and then they transfer one to five I believe that's one transition but maybe I'm looking at it incorrectly um change isn't easy I mean it's really really hard at times we all know the definition of insanity we've all sat up here and talked about the definition of insanity we all want better test scores we all want a balanced budget we all know that we can't go to the community and and ask for a levy at this time uh I would really encourage people to support change and come together to help make a difference for our students whether it's option D or some other option I believe we need to do something when we gave super tendent benty uh Direction in the April time frame to form a new committee with volunteers we the board agreed that it is possible and likely that we would get a recommendation or recommendations that would not satisfy us 100% however we all agreed that we needed to do something here something is and if we don't do anything we go back to the status quo that ranked second to last on the board M Matrix um just once again a huge thank you to all of the uh committee members that participated in in the handful or so of um meetings and the education and the prodding and the and the poking and all that type of stuff to hopefully come up with the best uh option possible or whatever you uh came up with but option D was what was rated um we do greatly appreciate your feedback to all the emails that people sent us thank you for uh reaching out to us and just on uh to close the final question of the board if you don't support this do you have other alternatives for the alc and the potential 700 $750,000 in budget cuts that we will be looking at this upcoming year thank you for the time thank you Mr Wolf further discussion board members Dr Roa thank you um thank you for your statements uh Mr Wolf let me first of all say that I have absolutely no question that we need to find an alternative for the alc they deserve a program and a building that is comparable to the rest of the district uh they've been in that uh building for long period of time and with that they have done a wonderful job of educating students now facility certainly has a factor relating to it so make it very clear I believe that the LC deserves a facility that's appropriate for the education of the students that they're educating however in talking in in addressing the motion that's on the floor um I have struggled with this uh for the last several weeks and I have asked Mr benty a couple of times or three times what is the evidence what is the educational evidence that this is in the best interest of students and of parents and of teachers if we're going to reorganize a district that isn't just a one-year reorganization this is something that's going to be in the books for years to come and I don't I have not seen any evidence that says this is the best alternative that we can have for our students and for our um families I too want to thank all the individuals who have sent uh emails over the last couple of weeks addressing their concerns not only his parents but we also saw that one video from a student who expressed his concern about uh the transitions um so I I really have a a concern about making a comprehensive decision about this district and what the long-term effect is going to be without some very solid evidence even be that anecdotal about how this will impact the education of our students yes Mr Wolf we talk about about test scores I'm not so anybody to sit here and say test scores are going to be the wherewithal I am very interested in growth of the students and their learning and so to take a look at that and say that um this is going to increase test scores I don't know that I don't know if it's going to do a long-term effect on it my plan is my my question is where's the evidence that says this is not going to maintain the status quo and if it's going to maintain the status quo why do we take this on for the long term for the next 10 20 years in this school district without evidence that says this is the best interest of our students our staff and our families class size yes class size will be reduced but we all know educationally class size is significant if in fact you develop a different teaching methodology in a smaller class sizes if you continue to do the same thing with 30 students as you would with 15 that class size is not significant I know that our students are resilient that they're going to benefit they're gonna they're GNA they're going to survive they're going to come to our schools to learn and our teachers are going to do the best job they can to teach the students in their classroom they have commitment over and above what probably most of us have so I have no problem with the fact that whatever option comes up that our teachers are going to do what they they can to make sure that our students are learning but let's give them the opportunity to be in an environment and in some kind of a grade structure that takes a look at what is going to be a projected outcome I look at what we're proposing right now option D or B or C or whatever it is is driven by cost savings not by educational relevancy and yes we need to take a look as you indicated Mr wol at a cost savings that we're going to be looking at dollar amounts and budget cuts in the future but we should not have dollars driving what we want to have happen in our schools so I too uh am concerned about this option um any of the options that are laid out because again I have not seen any evidence other than transition that this is the best interest of our students and our families thank you so i' like to um just kind of share my perspective as a parent um so there's three of us um that have children actively in our school district I'm the only one on this current board um that will be dramatically affected by this decision um over the last couple of days I've driven around town just trying to visualize how it would work the logistics of dropping my kids off without snow or other complication it a averaged me about 48 minutes uh to take my kids to the three intended spots it's not undoable um but I'd like to remind everyone that we're asking our families to be actively involved in their child children's activities and education currently I have two students in school one hopefully next fall and it's really difficult uh not undoable again but it's been really difficult over the last three months to be active and engaged in both schools I'm concerned that separating Elementary age would make it even more difficult um for other parents and speaking with many families I know that they're grappling with this choice you know they just like me have to have to make a decision about do they send their child on a bus do they pick up do they drop off or do they choose another local school option that fits their needs better again it took me about 3/4 of an hour to be able to drop off all of my kids and I understand that due to the age of my kids that it will eventually happen and again it's really unknown but we haven't surveyed families and I'm conc concerned again unknowingly that families will choose other local options for their education furthering the out enrollment I really appreciate taking the time I appreciate all of the efforts all of the options all of those that served but I'm frustrated and I'm frustrated with the lack of compromise the lack of ability to make any the options more palatable for one group one school anyone and I'm not really sure how to say this but I'm I don't have the pulse of even the narrowed down options from staff that will be dealing with this decision right alongside our students and families I know that they were offered an opportunity to serve on the committee but it was important for me to get a pulse and I didn't receive that information like Mr W said there's no easy answer there never will be it will likely leave some unhappy but at this point I can't support either option good M buo Mr Olsen you one yeah I'll keep it uh I'm I haven't written a speech or anything like that um I've always said in fact this has been quite difficult for me um I've always believed in neighborhood schools my kids went to Neighborhood schools and I I just can't force myself to get away from that um I believe that three elementaries and they have space to to prek through five in each of elementaries um and the alc would move to a newly remodeled mckenley um so again that's where I'm going to be voting on I I won't be I'll be voting no on this thank you Mr Bellingham can I ask Mr Olson just to followup questions did you have anything go ahead Mr Mr Olson real quick um fully understand your neighborhood school um thoughts but when I watched the October 28th you voted you rated option D at 20 which was the highest it could be can you just I wasn't here um and but again that was difficult vote but then you know talking to people I've had calls and emails and basically I've changed my mind okay I go back to the neighborhood schools I think it's the best way for parents and students I'm sorry it just I just can't I just can't support it uh I'm for neighborhood schools no I respect that I just didn't know what I was missing with the with the 20 you voted at the highest it could be and then just a followup question Mr benty correct me if I'm wrong but to my understanding maybe I'm maybe I dreamt this but Mr Olsson just mentioned prek through five in all three elementary schools my understanding is that room at all three elementary schools is not available to go prek through five or or am I missing something there that is correct the reason that was not an option to go prek through five at each Elementary is the space is not there for that okay okay thank you I just wanted to get those answers Mr chairman M Miss bud I I wanted to touch on that too if that's what we're looking at because last February we also voted down the same proposal that now the committee has worked on and has recommended to us and I felt it was solid there are transitions I understand that's difficult for students and teachers it's difficult for for families we understand that but so it's difficult also to make such Cuts cut teachers cut staff make our class size larger we don't want to do that I don't want to do that I don't think anyone here wants to do that so after our February vote I asked superintendent benty why can't we just put all the kids in McKinley in the other element schools and I got the very same answer I mean it's not that that wasn't asked about or looked at and I think the committee even looked at it so what I got was moving prek kids from McKinley is dependent on sufficient and suitable space for special needs Early Childhood Su are three and four yearold special ed learning and future growth we don't have that I I should say I was told we didn't have that space currently could you verify Mr benty what you shared I happened to look at my text from last year yeah and so if you're just running the raw numbers people will say I've looked at the map I've looked at the number of classrooms I've looked at the number of students it fits that is true but what they're leaving out is our special ed programming our community school programming and our El programming and those spots take up significant room that was not calculated in in previous you know Decades of of understanding the size of uh buildings and the needs of buildings so with those programs that we're running and the dedicated special ed and El programs that we're running in each site the space is not there it's the space is there but it can't be used for classroom General Ed classroom space it's used for other purposes thank you and in addition addition to that I was also informed that there is no savings because the savings that we need to fill the deficit which I would hope we can get a number of how much money we need to cut um the savings is dependent on grouping prek and K together that is is that still accurate this was in my notes so for us to be able to achieve the E efficiency savings to write our Personnel based off of the number of students that we have it is based off of closing down one of the elementary schools and creating a prek andk center without that if if we were to keep three elementary schools open that efficiency savings goes away so just to reiterate should we Pro s should another proposal come forth which has not been even discussed or looked at or researched Beyond conversation would there be any savings or would there be additional costs so any proposal is going to have a one-time cost of Staff moving based on the contractual requirements for that so that any any option besides the do nothing option will have that um the the uh and that option really it the board saw that that didn't change between the two different options that we were that were presented um the the the savings will be based on where our students are and where we can find efficiencies um so that you you saw from the options that were in there that ranged from roughly I think 180 all the way up to over $700,000 depending on the option so not only thank you superintendent benty but not only does the fit there's not a fit for putting all of McKinley's students into the current elementary school schools it doesn't fit we don't have the sufficient space and it may cost us more so it it doesn't fit with our current programming correct right and so the whole situation I feel we're in is like we're it's a Deja Vu we're right back to February where we had a recommendation one that would work one that would satisfy the needs of our ALC that would still have our great teachers teaching our students our teachers are the key to transitioning our students they are the ones that can make a situation successful just with attitudes and just with the way we approach things I personally do not want to make 700,000 more in cuts and and I think that is what I keep going back to but I also feel that the proposal offers us efficiencies it offers us some advantages it gives us a waiting our waiting list is no longer there for prek we would not have any more room if we chose to put everybody in the elementary schools all the K pre and k um with the proposal we have that room in space and we have you know much more space than we ever anticipated and uh I also feel that our objectives are important our educational outcomes I I don't know why we would have less educational outcomes with the same great teachers that we have I don't understand that how our outcomes would be worse and I think we have also other support staff that can help us get through a transition we also are looking at efficiency in all of our buildings operational efficiency and cost Effectiveness we owe that to our community and our district to be as cost effective as we can I understand that there's challenges but I also understand that there's challenges here financially and I would like some verification if Barbie or someone could give us some at least input as to what our potential cuts are going to be or verification so our preliminary numbers right now is somewhere between 600 and 750,000 we will have a more uh directed or a more uh Focus number come Monday uh Barbie's been working on that okay um but that this is the number that we've been kind of saying all along that somewhere between 600,000 and $750,000 is what we were going to be short for next school year um so that that would be that would be the budget reduction that we would need to make and then Mr benty is there a continued reduction in the next uh budget section that I do not know yet okay I believe there was but I just don't have the exact number a lot of that so we know those numbers are based on we don't know what the legislator is going to legisl legislature is going to do so we're we're going off of the 2% that is supposedly guaranteed um but it could potentially be higher um so that you know not that that percentage on the general formula changes it drastically for our district um but there are some other pieces in there around compensatory which is a large piece for our district that has been played with so going looking to go out that far with some real questions at the legislative level level is difficult we will get some numbers put together but it is difficult well I'm just grateful that we I was grateful that we had an opportunity to remove that deficit and also serve our students as we are required to do and serve them in a way that is I don't know I don't know what to say wonderful I mean we can serve our students we all do a good job at that and I just wish that we had a little better collaboration on our options I'm disappointed thank you Mr chairman welcome so we've gone through all the board members but myself so I have a few things here obviously for the record let's set this straight we've been working on this for approximately two years now I believe at one point the board uh uh with the leadership of Mr Wolf's chair directed Mr benty to put forth the reorganizational proposal for efficiency within our buildings he did that and brought it forth to the board I going say last February and obviously and as we all know it was that was defeated with the message going staff wasn't consulted teachers weren't heard teacher we need a committee we need parents to know um we we need everyone involved so the directive came in March or April here of this year to Mr benty from everyone on this board saying develop a committee include anyone that wanted to be on the committee you're welcome to I think they're close to 30 correct Mr benty 30 people on the committee uh staff parents community members we're all on all on that committee to put for to go through present options to go forth and examine them and make recommendations to this board came forth with six of them a seven if you can't to do nothing okay throughout this process then of reorganization and with the many emails we get and calls I have learned a great deal one uh as chair here trying to facil facilitating uh a board decision on something this is indeed difficult and I hope I've done a best job that I can and develop and Miss Steves and I developing the rubric and going through all the possible options here uh as well to give a a depth of what we know and what and what could be I've also learned the history of the schools um just remember I did teach at Washington School Old Washington School on the second floor uh where you open the windows when it was 20 degrees below zero because it was too hot in there it was very hot building and those buildings were fire traps Garfield in Washington with the wooden staircase whatever had many administrators tell me if there was a fire we we might not be able to get kids out fast enough therefore in I think it was 1996 or 95 the bond issue was passed to replace those buildings with Roosevelt School I learned the history this past week or so of how that land was acquired very interesting used to be Farmland there how it was acquired and agreements to you know that obviously was a school on the east side of Washington being Washington that students on the east side would be serviced you know have a school on the east side on the of the straight River and ve very very interesting and I understood all that and then um of course then with ourmes for the deaf and Academy for the blind how we mainstream uh except those kids coming in for part-time classes or activities Etc and as a teacher at McKinley I had students mainstream in my classroom from the academy from the deaf and Academy for the blind virtually every year so I learned about that and the importance of all this and so a decision like this is indeed difficult because change is hard and I try I'm stepping back and looking at the big picture which I've always tried to do any of this what's good for Stu what's best for students what's best for the district and what's best for this community and we need to look at all our kids preek through adult basic Ed which means ALC adult B Bas adult basic education all those here and give all of them the best facilities we can with a high efficiency Etc so with this it's it's just a and presenting and again like in February people come out at the 11th hour and 58th minute of information whatever I sure would hope from now on board members if you find research you might share it I know some board members have shared research with the entire board when they have it so we we all try to know know what's out there and what we find Etc so to me that is important uh but here uh this is going to be and it's and it's a historical change it's going to be how do we deliver instruction and where do we deliver instruction for our kids in fwal public schools especially prek through th grade and where where are our valued students at the alc going to be because those kids are part of us as well and deserve a best facility the facility that best facility that we can obviously I will be in I'm support of option D have been all the time I think these details have been thorough or whatever and however this board decides to go and I know now we go to the second round and I been indicated first by Mr Wolf and then by Dr robish show to have anything else and I'll pick and Dr Moore will be third with that so Mr Wolf you are uh for a uh discussion second call for discussion here uh based on the comments and what's been shared I Mr chair I would move to postpone this meeting until uh our first school board meeting in January for board members to have time to ask Mr venty uh for more information or whatever would be needed but it's clear that um we don't have enough to make a decision uh to move forward with any type of reorganization tonight and so uh I I would move that we postpone it to our first school board meeting January 6th in uh 2025 okay we have a motion for for to postpone the motion of reorganization plan option D to January 6 board meeting is there a second M bu has a second now we open up discussion on the amendment is that Amendment or a tbling well it's a it's an amendment to the um motion postponing it postponing the discussion and things to January 6 thank you for clarification welcome Mr Wolf would you like to speak to your maybe you already have no I mean I I have nothing more okay than what I just said there Dr MO um well I would like to make a few comments before because if he if this goes through then I can't comment on uh uh option D anymore then correct because I would like to make a few statements but we do have a motion and a second for an amendment to to the motion further discussion so is there I mean is this where I can request a survey for staff to put their input on the narrowed down two versions so by postponing it my my vision and my thought is at the November 25th business meeting the a plan or this will be on the agenda for discussion and put forth requests for different plans different W but that that needs to be at the November 25th business meeting I'm sorry no you went firstan am um so between now and then if we have any questions we direct them to Mr benty Mr benty myself further clarification and yourself yes okay Dr Moore um yes I was just disappointed I had more comments to say now I can't say them right cor we have a motion in second for postponing my my apologies Dr Mo any further discussion last call Miss Steves I will do a roll call on the motion for amendment to postpone till January 6 so just to give you heads up heads up there anything last let call again we're we're voting on the motion to postpone the consideration of reorganization plan option D to January 6th board meeting Miss Steves please Linda bu I Linda Moore no Richard Olson no Jerry Risha hi Cassie Steves I Chad wolf hi John Bellingham I 5 to2 motion passes 52 so uh that is the agenda item number three consider approval reorganization plan option D is postponed till the January 6th uh board meeting there so we move on to agenda item number four which is consider authorizing Kinley remodel bids but since we have not decided on that we can voice this as moot uh moot or we can act upon it to again uh postpone that as well to um there but I guess right now we need a motion to it how do we want to do that how would you like to I would move to postpone that till January 6th whenever you say moot we had that conversation before and it didn't go so well so yes I know so let let's do this let's have um a motion to approve authorizing McKinley remodel bids and then we can do the postponing if that if that works there so could we have that Mr Bellingham can I ask a question real quick certain really directed at superintendent benty um is there any harm in going out in getting bids to understand I mean one of the reasons why we were on this timeline is to get the best bids possible before you know have these out there and before so if we end up doing something I mean I think this board is unanimous and something has to be done with the alc I believe right and and from the sounds of it the most likely thing is to go to McKinley yes so is there any harm in continuing with this I mean these are these are non you're the you're the building professional um I mean we don't just because we go out to get doesn't mean we are going to accept anything or move forward um but is there anything wrong with actually going through this process so we're able to get what we believe are our best bids should we do something if we can't agree on something then we just scrape it I know it's work for some on our team and it's going to be work for General Contractors and all that type of stuff but is there Harmon still moving forward with this potentially there's some concerns and Barbie I'll ask you to correct me if if if I mess this up if we were go out for bids and we don't have approval from the board that that's the changes we're going to make then we would have to say we're not moving forward with that then if the board were to decide that we were going to reorganize and we were G to I don't know if we would be able to post the same bit the same work because it would be it would then appear that we didn't like the bids so we said no and reposted again which we're not always allowed to do uh when you say we're not always allowed to do that that tells me there's some room to allow it but I'm not the expert on how also yeah it's also really difficult to post the bids or post for bids when we don't have a timeline because the bids are based off of a timeline so if a company says oh if we have longer to to do this work the bid will come down so financially bid wise it might be advantageous for the district to say wait until January for the bids for the remodel of McKinley because it wouldn't we wouldn't have the alc even if we decided in January yes to do that we would not have the ALC in McKinley by August it would be at least the following January if not the following school year Alto together um so that might lower the bids for us because those construction companies would have more time did that answer your question enough you would recommend that we do not move forward with this at this time is that what I'm understanding you're saying I recommend that the board does not move forward with any bids for remodeling anything unless one until you've decided exactly what it is you're doing okay okay we'll go back to the original plan here so motion for approval of authorizing McKinley remodel bids do I have a motion for that second did I get a mo we you make the motion Richard I didn't have a oh yeah okay thank you thank you very much and I'll second that um and discussion now we should make an amendment for it to postpone till January 6th CH I would move that we postpone that item on the agenda until January 6 2025 you and do we have a second with that second thank you Dr Rish show and discussion Dr Moore do you have something I'm sorry no not now discussion Mr chair I mron I'll be opposing this we know that I believe its fact that we're going to be moving the alc to mckenley why don't you go ahead and remodel the building what are you waiting for accident that happen in the alc it's a substandard building oh that's right I don't know anything that's right just doesn't make sense it does not make sense remodel the building bring it up to code for the alc students incredible anything else no that's enough thank you further discussion Mr chair I think we should go ahead with that remodeling the building we have to do something with the alc because uh they need to go to McKinley and putting it off is just not my idea of assisting the students um so Mr Bellingham Mr Wolf I just want to make sure I'm understand Dr Moore you said remodel move forward and remodel McKinley right for the alc yes what we had planned on doing thank you and and Mr Olson that's what you said as well okay thank you yeah this was the second part of that pack Y no I'm with you thank you I just want to make sure when you're saying that building I just want to make sure we're talking about McKinley yes so Mr bellam my my confusion is then what do we do with the Early Childhood kids at McKinley we don't have a plan for them so we're going to remodel the alc um we're going to remodel McKinley and move the alc there but what is our plan for the preschoolers I don't understand that so I just wanted to Dr Moore do you have an answer for that or Mr Olson do you have an answer for that what it goes back to the option of put it back into the elementaries Roosevelt's got at least when I was there two empty rooms large rooms now if there's a waiting list well there's a waiting list for life you know sorry we can't accommodate every student maybe we don't have the room we don't have the staff but thank it just so again remember uh board members we do have a motion in a second to authorize the McKinley remodel bids we have an amendment a motion in a second to amend the motion to to amendment to postpone the McKinley remodel bids until the uh authorizing those until the January 6th meeting so that's what we'll be voting on the motion for for the amendment any further discussion discussion Miss Steves will you do a roll call on this please Linda buam I Linda Moore no Richard Olson no Jerry robas I Cassie Steves I Chad wolf I John Bellingham I passes 5 to2 okay the amendment passes 5 to2 two so now we have the I guess we've virtually authorized that we don't need to go back the amendment will now read consider uh we'll authorize the McKinley remodel bids on January uh will be discussed on January 6th uh 2025 correct so I don't believe we need a further motion on that that's going from there with that item five uh motion to adjourn so moved thank you Mr Wolf we have a second second thank you miss budro any discussion discussion discussion all in favor of the motion signified by saying I opposed motion passes we will begin our um