Dec 02, 2020 Board of Education Special Called Meeting

[Call to Order ]

[00:00:05]

AVOIDING SPECIAL ARGUED SEPARATE 2020 THE ORDER HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE

[Approval of Agenda ]

MR. EARL CAMPBELL SECONDED BY MR. MEL CAMPBELL. ANY DISCUSSION OF ALL THOSE IN

FAVOR? >> I SO EVERYBODY HERE IN THE ROOM WAS YES.

>> I BELIEVE THAT STARTS TO HAPPEN. AND I WELCOME THE THUMBS UP WE'LL GET COMES UP AND DAVID YES. YES.

THANK YOU, JOANNE. >> NO, I THINK IT WAS NOT I MEAN THIS DAVID AND DAN DOWNING

I DON'T SEE NO SECRET IN THE LIVE MY BALANCE OF BUSINESS. >> SPELLINGS SAID IT WAS A CHRONIC RIGHT TO GO. NINE MEMBERS. YEAH, THAT'S RIGHT.

SIX IN THE ROOM AND THREE CLIENTS. SMITH SPENT A YEAR AND NETSCAPE. SO EVERYBODY SAID YES. THE MOTION CARRIES WILL NOW

[Pledge of Allegiance, Statement of Media Notification ]

STAND FOR THAT PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. >> I THINK IT RELATED TO THE WAY UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND CHAMBERS WHICH IS THE UNDER GOD INDIVISIBLE WITH LIBERTY.

>> IT'S HER OFFICE. >> SO HE'S EXCEEDED. MEDIA HAS BEEN PROPERLY NOTIFIED. THERE WERE BASICALLY TWO TOPICS ON THE AGENDA TONIGHT OR THIS AFTERNOON THE CONTINUATION I NOT. I ON SOME ISSUES OF YOU

COMPLETE YOUR WHOLE TEAM SIMPLY GIVEN TWO ITEMS ON THE AGENDA. >> FIRST IS THE CONTINUATION

[Board Policies – Continuation of First Reading ]

AND AS I RECALL FROM OUR MEETING WHEN WE DECIDED TO HAVE THIS MEETING WE WERE NOT GOING

TO EXTEND THE SIX O'CLOCK. SO IT'S A LITTLE ON THE FLOOR. >> SO LET'S START WITH THE POLICIES AND MR. SCRIPTURE I THINK HERE. THERE SEEMS TO BE CONSENSUS THAT WE'RE ON PAGE 28 CHOWDER. YES. YES.

WE WERE GETTING READY TO START ON PAGE 28. HOWEVER, BEFORE WE DO THAT, I DON'T LEAVE. DR. WISNIEWSKI WANTED TO REVISIT GC FOR THE ELECTION BOARD OFFICERS SO THAT'S THE REASON I SPEAK. THANK YOU, MA'AM.

CARE. THIS IS THE I BELIEVE ROBIN GETS THERE IS THE AREA WHERE WE DISCUSS THE ELECTION PROCESS AND I JUST WANTED TO HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT NOW THAT WE HAVE SOME NEW BOARD MEMBERS THAT ARE GOING TO BE COMING IN IN JANUARY.

I RECALL WHEN I WAS A NEW MEMBER THERE WAS THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION THAT WAS HAD REGARDING THE PROCESS NOT NECESSARILY TERMS OR KNOW MOUNTAIN OF VOTES THAT IT TAKES TO RECEIVE IT BUT MORE SO THE PROCESS. SO I WANTED TO OPEN UP A DISCUSSION WITH THE FULL BOARD BECAUSE I'D LIKE TO HEAR FROM THE OTHER BOARD MEMBERS AND JUST BE SURE THAT THAT'S STILL THE PROCESS. WE WANT TO UTILIZE THIS COMING JANUARY, ASK YOU TO USE ELECTRONIC CAN PARTICIPATE IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO HONOR DISTRIBUTOR DOCTORAL RESEARCH THROUGH SOMETHING SPECIFIC ABOUT THAT PROCESS THAT YOU

NEED TO NEED US TO FOCUS ON. >> YES, SIR. IT WAS THE NOMINATION PROCESS.

IT SEEMED THAT IT WAS VERY MUCH A WHOEVER RAISED IN THEIR HAND FIRST AND WAS RECOGNIZED FIRST.

AND I KNOW THAT THERE WAS SOME TALK ABOUT THAT. I KNOW THERE'S OTHER WAYS THAT IT'S DONE SUCH AS TAKING ALL THE NOMINATIONS AT ONCE AND THEN GOING THAT WAY.

SO I JUST WANTED CERTAINLY OPEN UP FOR DISCUSSION BECAUSE I WASN'T NECESSARILY ABLE TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION AT THE TIME LAST JANUARY WHEN WE VOTED FOR OFFICERS FIRST OFFICER THANK

YOU. >> I HAVE THE SAME CONCERNS AS DR. WISNIEWSKI.

[00:05:02]

THEY DON'T GET THE MAJORITY. >> SO HOW EXACTLY THE PROCESS SHOULD BE DONE.

AND THEN ALSO I WAS LOOKING AT A LETTER A AND I BELIEVE WE DID CHANGE THAT.

RIGHT. DIDN'T WE HAVE A MOTION THAT IT CHANGED DUE TO A ONE YEAR JUST

FROM THE FIRST READ? >> YES. I'M GOING TO SAY THAT I WOULD BE UNDER THE FIRST READING. SO LET ME JUST COMMENT ABOUT THAT.

SO SINCE THIS WAS THE FIRST READING AND WHERE WE HAVEN'T FINISHED THE FIRST READING, I

READ THE WHOLE MANUAL RIGHT. >> IF YOU WANTED THAT TO BE IMPLEMENTED ON THIS ELECTION IN EARLY JANUARY, WE WOULD HAVE TO WAIT TO BE COMPLETION OF THIS FIRST READING AS A SECOND AND THIRD READING AND THAT YOU WOULD NEED TO BE POSTED ON THE AGENDA AND WE'D HAVE TO HAVE A BOARD VOTE ABOUT IT WHICH WE COULD DO IT DECEMBER 8. THAT'S WHAT WE'D LIKE TO DO IS TO SPEAK OUT. YES. THE FIRST READING WE WE DID TWO THINGS UNDER A WE AND WE'VE CHANGED TWO TO ONE YEAR TERM. RIGHT.

AS WE'VE AGREED UPON AND THEN WE STRIKE IN JANUARY EACH AT A NUMBER HERE.

>> NO VOTING IS UNDER A STRAPLESS AND WE'RE EVERYTHING AFTER THAT FIRST SENTENCE.

>> SO IT STARTED WITH ELECTION OF OFFICERS IS THAT CORRECT, MR. SCRIBNER? YES. YES, MA'AM. SO THAT'S ANOTHER ISSUE WHENEVER WE'RE TRAINING FOR THE ELECTION RIGHT NOW REALLY IT'S NOT GOING TO BE IN EFFECT UNLESS WE TAKE A STEP FURTHER AND SAY THAT WE'RE GOING TO WAIVE FURTHER READINGS AND THAT AND A VOTE ON IT AND THEN IT HAS TO POSTED ON THE AGENDA AS SUCH.

>> SO YOU CAN'T JUST SAY BECAUSE IT'S NOT TODAY. TODAY'S THE IS THAT WE'RE CHANGING IT FOR RIGHT SO WE DON'T IT ON DECEMBER 8. JACK ALL RIGHT.

AND YOU MIGHT NOT FINISH YOUR COMMENTS. YEAH, JUST THOSE TWO THINGS I THINK WE NEED TO CLARIFY THE PROCESS AND WE NEED TO MODIFY THAT PROCESS.

>> YOU KNOW, BECAUSE I DON'T THINK IT'S REALLY CLEAR EXACTLY HOW IT'S DONE.

>> MR. SMITH, ALSO WHEN YOU SAID ABOUT THE THREE READINGS WHICH WE'RE ONLY TALKING ABOUT THE THREE READINGS OF THAT SECTION. CORRECT.

NOT THE HOLD. NOT NOT NOT THE OLD ACTUAL ME NOT ALL BUT ALL THE POLICIES,

CORRECT? >> RIGHT. >> SO IF YOU'RE GOING TO WHAT OUR POLICY IS THAT WE HAVE THREE READINGS OF THIS MANUAL SO HEAVILY TO PUT INTO EFFECT ANYTHING SHORT OF THAT AND IF FOR WHATEVER PART OF THIS MANUAL WOULD WANT TO DO SOMETHING SHORT OF COUNTING CHANGE IN A SAP, WE STILL HAVE TO POST THAT PUBLICLY ON THE ON

AN UPCOMING AGENDA WHICH WOULD BE DECEMBER 8. >> ALL RIGHT.

>> SO SO WAIT MY MY MY WHAT MY QUESTION IS THAT BASICALLY WISH BASICALLY FOR INSTANCE IF WE WANT TO TAKE SECTION A WHICH IS THEN WHICH IS THE SECTION THAT WE'RE ALLOWED ALL OF WILL ALLOW OFFICERS FOR ONE YEAR THEN WE'RE ONLY RUSHING THAT SECTION NOT THE WHOLE GOVERNANCE MANUAL IS THERE IS THAT IS THAT IS BEST AS THAT IS WHAT I'M TRYING TO I'M TRYING TO PROCESS WHAT WE'RE SAYING HERE. I WAS JUST WE'RE JUST WE'RE JUST MOVING THAT PARTICULAR

AREA UP TO TWO TO VOTE ON. CORRECT? >> EXACTLY.

AND SO IT HAS TO BE POSTED. WHAT IS SPECIFICALLY TO BE BRODY ON WITHOUT THE THREE READINGS YOU HAVE TO SAY EXACTLY THE ELECTION PROCESS, WHATEVER.

YOU KNOW, A SIMPLE ONE. THANK YOU. THAT MY QUESTION.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. YOU'RE BOTH ALSO DR. WISNIEWSKI

,MA'AM. >> I WAS JUST GOING TO SUGGEST YOU KNOW, I'VE I'VE TAKEN A LOOK AT IT AND I CERTAINLY CAN TAKE A STAB AT MAKING ANY MODIFICATIONS OR BRINGING FORWARD A MOTION AT THE DECEMBER 8TH MEETING TO POTENTIALLY CLEAR THIS UP AND PUT IT INTO EFFECT PRIOR TO JANUARY. I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT REQUIRES A MAJORITY VOTE CORRECT ON JANUARY 1, DECEMBER 8?

>> YES, MA'AM. I'M PRETTY SURE IT REQUIRES A TWO THIRDS VOTE AND I'LL HAVE

[00:10:03]

TO VERIFY THAT. >> OK. YEAH, I DEFINITELY DON'T WANT TO TAKE UP TOO MUCH TIME FROM READING THE REST OF THE MANUAL TODAY.

SO FOR PURPOSES OF MAKING THINGS EXPEDITIOUS WE CAN. I WOULD LIKE TO REQUEST THAT WE

DISCUSS THIS AS AN AGENDA ITEM ON DECEMBER 8. >> SO I THINK WE HAVE TO HAVE A BETTER IDEA OF EXACTLY WHAT PART WE'RE GOING TO BE DISCUSSING.

SO ONE IS THE IT SEEMS LIKE WE ALREADY CUT THE VOTE AND I THINK THERE WAS A SUPERMAJORITY FOR THE ONE YEAR TERM AS I RECALL. YEAH.

SO THAT WOULD BE ONE THING. BUT THE OTHER ISSUE STILL OUT THERE IS PRECIOUS ISSUE AND YOU'VE GOT YOU'VE ALSO ADDRESSED IT. WHAT ARE OTHER BOARD MEMBERS IDEAS ABOUT THE NOMINATION PROCESS? I THINK WE ALSO NEED TO DISCUSS THAT BRIEFLY TODAY. SO ANY I HAVE AN IDEA OF WHAT WE'RE GOING TO PUT FORWARD ON ON DECEMBER 8. OK. THAT WAS ASKING.

I'M SORRY. I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY THAT I GUESS MY UNDERSTANDING AND MY WHAT I TAKE FROM THIS AND THE CONFUSION LIES IS THAT B B DISCUSSES THE NOMINATION PROCESS AND THEN D TALKS ABOUT A BALLOT. SO I THINK SOMEHOW THOSE TWO NEED THERE NEEDS TO BE AN ADDITIONAL SENTENCE OR TWO IN THERE THAT DISCUSSES THE NOMINATIONS ARE TAKEN FIRST TO CREATE THE BALLOT BECAUSE I THINK BEFORE THE NOMINATIONS WERE TAKEN THE VOTE WAS TAKEN. THEN ON THAT INDIVIDUAL AND NOT NECESSARILY ON OTHERS I COULD BE MISTAKEN BUT MR. SMITH MANAGER OUT YOU I BELIEVE THAT SOMEBODY THAT AT THIS POINT WE COULD HAVE SOMEONE TO MAKE MOTION ON THAT IN DIRECT AND INDIRECT THAT WE DISCUSSED THIS AT THE NEXT BUSINESS MEETING AND THAT WOULD PUT IT THAT WOULD AUTOMATICALLY BE ON THE

AGENDA. >> I WOULDN'T TAKE A TO A TWO THIRDS VOTE BECAUSE THEY SAY ANYTHING. THAT'S NOT AN EMERGENCY. SO TO TO AVOID THAT, I BELIEVE AT THIS POINT IN TIME SOMEONE CAN MAKE A MOTION THAT WE PUT THAN WE THAT WE THAT WE PUT THAT SECTION ON THE NEXT REGULAR SCHEDULED BUSINESS MEETING.

>> SO EFFICIENT. I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING BUT LIKE MY COMMENT IS THAT BECAUSE WE'RE VITAL ARE AWARE WE'RE ALTERING WHAT OUR STANDARD PROCEDURE IS FOR APPROVING POLICY AS I'VE MENTIONED ABOUT SEVERAL TIMES ALREADY IS I DO THINK IT TAKES A TWO THIRDS VOTE EVEN IF WE TAKE A VOTE NOW AND SAY WE'RE GOING TO PUT IT ON DECEMBER 8.

>> IN ADDITION, I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE A HUGE LONG DISCUSSION.

WE HAVEN'T SORT OF PUT IT IN A SOMEWHAT WALKS TODAY. MY COMMENTS ABOUT WHAT DR.

WISNIEWSKI AND MR. RICHARD BROUGHT UP IS I THINK JUST WORDING PERHAPS COULD BE MODIFIED TO TWO THINGS. ONE IS I DON'T THINK IT'S REALLY FAIR THAT WHOEVER THROWS A NAME OUT THERE FIRST EVER RECOGNIZE FIRST. NO, I'M TALKING ABOUT WHAT I'M WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT IS FOR US TO DISCUSS THE BEAT BEAT ME BE THE READINGS OF IT.

>> SOMEONE CAN MAKE A MOVE AT I MOVE I'M I'M I'M SURE I NOW MOVE THAT WE THAT I AND I MOVE THAT WE MOVE TO THE NEXT REGULAR SCHEDULED BUSINESS MEETING THE AGENDA FOR THREE FOR THE THIRD THE FIRST AND FINAL FINAL READING TO THE NEXT REGULAR SCHEDULED MEETING ON

THE AGENDA OF DECEMBER 8TH. >> WE JUST MADE A MOTION. ALL RIGHT.

>> WE NEED TO HAVE A SECOND OF THAT MOTION AND IF THERE'S ANYBODY ON CAMPUS, WE'LL WAIT.

>> YEAH, YEAH. NOBODY HAS A SECOND THAT ALL OFF THE TABLE WAS THAT HE

DIDN'T UNDERSTAND IT. >> THE GAVEL SECOND THERE ARE SECOND AND THIRD.

>> ALL RIGHT. CAN HE CLARIFY HIS MOTION PLEASE? SO I THINK BASICALLY WHAT I'M SAYING IS THAT THE REASON WHY I'M MAKING THIS MOTION SO THAT FROM THIS VOTE THAT THIS MOTION THAT WE TAKE THE VOTE TO GO AHEAD AND VOTE ON THE

PROCEDURES. >> SO WE HAD THE FIRST AND FINAL READING AT THE NEXT SCHEDULED MEETING ON DECEMBER 8TH. SO IF WE VOTE AND WE VOTE IN FAVOR OF THIS MOTION, THEN THAT WILL AUTOMATICALLY PUT THIS THIS TOPIC ON THE AGENDA.

SO THAT'S THE POINTS THAT THEREFORE WE WOULD NEED A TWO THIRDS TO BEGIN THE MEETING TO EVEN HAVE THAT CONVERSATION. THIS WOULD SAVE TIME AND BEGIN AT THE NEXT REGULAR SCHEDULED MEETING SO THAT WE WOULDN'T HAVE TO HAVE THE DECISION WAS WE'VE MADE NOW THAT I'M

[00:15:03]

ACTUALLY PUTS IT ON THE AGENDA TO VOTE ON THIS OR NOT. >> I THINK THAT THE TWO BIG STEPS UP WITH A TWO THIRDS. CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG BUT I THINK CHAIR MEANT TWO THIRDS HAVE TO APPROVE THE POLICY CHANGE AND NOT THE FACT THAT WE HAVE TO DISCUSS IT WHICH IS WHICH I THINK WILL SAY FORGET IT. THEY'RE WE DON'T NEED TO DO IT TO GET IT NOW. WE NEED TO GET IT APPROVED CORRECT.

>> SO I. >> YOUR MOTION AS YOU JUST REPORTED ON THE AGENDA.

>> YES, SIR. BUT THE MOTION JUST IS JUST TO PUT IT ON THE AGENDA WHAT

EXACTLY ON THE AGENDA THE ELECTION PROCESS. >> WE HAVE THE SHIFT MAYBE THE

ELECTION PROCESS. >> OK, THE ELECTION THE ELECTION PROCESS AS AN OFFICE FOR YOU FOR IT FOR A YEAR AND WHATEVER ELSE WE DO WE WILL DISCUSS TODAY.

>> OH, I'M SURE ALL THAT WILL BE A PART TO THE ELECTION PROCESS.

>> OK. SO DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING YOU WANTED TO FINE TUNE IN TO THIS CIVICS PART OF THAT ELECTION PROCESS, RIGHT? THAT'S FINE.

THAT'S WHAT I'M SUGGESTING. SO I GUESS IT DOESN'T GET INTO LONG A LONG EXAMINED THING.

>> EXACTLY. SO THAT'S WHERE WE ARE. SO WE STILL GOT THE MOTION ON

OUR FLOOR. >> YEAH. I AM I SUPPOSE WE'LL MOTION

ENTAILS THAT. >> WELL IT'S. >> YOU GUYS.

I FIND WE HAVE TO HAVE IT OR WE'LL HAVE IT BY THEN. HE SAID SOMETHING ABOUT AFTER THE DISCUSSION THE DATE SO WE CAN ON THIS AND THEN WE CAN CONTINUE TO FIND HIM.

>> YEAH. YEAH. CORRECT.

I WANTED TO SUGGEST AN AMENDMENT TO WHAT WAS SAID TO CLARIFY AND TO MAKE IT CLEAR MY AMENDMENT IS THAT I THAT WE WAIVE THE SECOND AND THIRD BABY OF G C FOR ELECTION PROCESS A CHANGE IN THE TERM OF ELECTED OFFICERS TO SERVE ONE YEAR TERMS SECOND.

>> THAT TAKES CARE. >> THAT'S VERY SPECIFIC. RIGHT.

THAT'S WHAT I HEARD. I THOUGHT THAT DR. BOB SAID WE HAD JUST HOSTED THIS ON OUR MINUTE SO THAT PEOPLE WOULD KNOW OR HONOR THE AGENDA SO THAT PEOPLE WOULD KNOW WHAT

WE'RE PROPOSING TO DO UNLESS I MISUNDERSTOOD. >> SO I WAS SECONDED.

YES. YES, SIR. SO MY I WAS SO I DON'T THINK WE CAN. I MEAN I GUESS THIS IS I THINK REALLY SPLITTING HAIRS A LITTLE BIT. BUT I BELIEVE ON THE DECEMBER 8TH AGENDA IT'S YOU STILL HAVE WHAT'S NEW? YES, SIR. YOU CAN'T JUST HAVEN'T SAID HERE. OH NO. I AGREE WITH THIS.

HAVE IT POSTED ON THIS AGENDA AND THAT'S FINE. AND MAYBE I SHOULD PUT KNOW THAT WE PLACE I MOVE THAT WE I THINK TIBET DEC. 8 AGENDA THAT WE ADD TO THE FUNCTIONS DECEMBER 8 AGENDA TO SEND SOMEBODY RAISING THE SECOND AND THIRD READING OF THE CHANGE RIBAUT JAYCEE FOR ELECTION PROCESS A CHANGING THE TERM OF ELECTED OFFICERS TO SERVE

ONE YEAR TERMS. >> YES, THAT IS THE WAY I THINK IT ENJOY.

SO I TRY TO ALSO ADD TO THE DECEMBER 8 AGENDA. AGENDA ITEM THAT WE ADD TO THE

DECEMBER 8 AGENDA. >> MAYBE OR ACTION A WAVY WAVING WITH SECOND AND THIRD MAYBE TDC OR ELECTION PROCESS A GC NINE JUST COMING FOR GC FORUMS OUR ELECTION PROCESS A SAID WHAT IT ENTAILS IS CHANGING THE TERM OF ELECTED OFFICERS TO SERVE ONE TERM ENERGY THE TERMS OF CHANGING THE TERMS OF ELECTION OFFICERS LIKE OFFICERS TO SERVE ONE TERM

[00:20:25]

. >> IF YOU SEE FOR A ROBIN I THINK THE WAVE THAT WE'RE REFERRING TO HERE THAT'S AN EYE . AIN'T I HAVE SOME DEFINITELY IVY I AM. YEAH. OK I CAN'T SAY YOU CONTRIBUTOR THAT SUDDENLY SO THIS WAS DRIVEN RIGHT? YOU'RE RIGHT ARM CHAIR.

OK. THIS TAKES CARE OF THE TERM BUT I THOUGHT THERE WERE OTHER ISSUES. HOW ARE WE GOING TO DEAL WITH THE WITH THE OTHER ISSUES AND

WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT THIS TODAY. >> THAT WOULD BE MY PREFERENCE BECAUSE OTHERWISE IT'S THAT I THINK IT'S GOING TO WE HAVE A LOT ON THE AGENDA FOR THE EIGHTH AND I THINK IT'S GOING TO GET TOO UNWIELDY IF WE HAVEN'T SOLVED THIS DECISION

TODAY. >> OR A THEY ARE JUST FOLLOWING ME ALL.

SO WE CAN VOTE ON THIS AND THEN WE CAN GO ON TO PART 2 WHICH WAS THE NOMINATION PROCESS REALLY? DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY FURTHER COMMENTS?

>> KATHY GRIFFIN, THUMPER SORRY CHRISTIAN. >> THE NEXT PART.

I'M SORRY. ALL RIGHT. SO WE'LL VOTE ON THIS POSTED ON YOUR SCREEN. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR. I EVERYBODY IN THE ROOM.

I WAS ASKING. YES. ALL RIGHT.

OK. >> UNANIMOUS 9 0. ALL RIGHT.

SO THAT HOUSES. SO NOW LET'S GO BACK TO TRICIA .

ABOUT THE NOMINATION PROCESS. YOU HAVE IDEAS TO BEGIN WITH. WELL, I THINK THAT IF WE JUST PUT IN SOME VERBIAGE THAT SOMETHING ALONG THE LINES THAT SAYS ON B LETTER B AND IT SAYS ANY BOARD MEMBER MAY NOMINATE CANDIDATES FOR POSITION AS BOARD OFFICER A SECOND IS REQUIRED. THE BALLOT IS COMPRISED OF ALL NOMINATE.

>> I THINK IF WE JUST THROW IN A LINE LIKE THAT THAT THE BOARD IS COMPRISED OF ALL NOT AT THE BALLOT IS COMPRISED OF ALL NOMINATED CANDIDATES THEN THAT'S THE MESSAGE.

>> I THINK THAT'S KIND OF WHAT YOU WERE SAYING THAT WE JUST ADD SOME VERBIAGE TO SAY THAT WE HAVE A FULL BALLOT BEFORE WE VOTE. YES, MA'AM.

INSTEAD OF JUST NOMINATING ONE PERSON OKAY. LET'S VOTE ON THIS PERSON.

SO THEN IF WE TOOK THE SAME VERBIAGE THAT KATHY JUST PROPOSED FOR THE PREVIOUS MOTION BUT CHANGE IT TO THIS INSTEAD OF WITH A VOTE ON THAT AND THEN BRING IT FORWARD TO THE AGENDA. RIGHT. SO I MOVE THAT WE BRING INTO

THE DECEMBER 8 AGENDA. >> DECEMBER 8TH AGENDA. JAYCEE FOR ELECTION PROCESS.

LETTER V. >> TO INCLUDE A SENTENCE THAT THE BALLOT IS COMPRISED OF ALL

NOMINATED CANDIDATES EVERY SECOND BY SECOND. >> ALAN, THE BALLOT AS A GROUP

IS COMPRISED. >> OF ALL NOMINATED CANDIDATES. AND I THINK THAT JUST SAYS OK, IT'S EVERYBODY THAT WANTS TO BE NOMINATED FOR THIS POSITION AND THEN WE VOTE ON IT.

SECONDED. I DID BROKEBACK THAN THAT AND THAT ELIMINATES WHAT I WAS STARTING TO SAY THE THE REALLY POTENTIAL UNFAIRNESS OF WHOEVER GETS TO NOMINATE SOMEBODY FIRST. AND THAT PERSON VOTED. YEAH I THINK THAT'S MUCH BETTER. YEAH. ALL THE NAMES ARE THERE AND THEN EACH INDIVIDUAL BOARD MEMBER WOULD VOTE FOR ONE. RIGHT.

AND THEN IF THERE IS A. I MEAN IT'S JUST LOGICAL. OK.

YEAH. IT'S JUST RIBAUT JUST THE SIXTH ROUND.

SURE. I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT WORDING IS FINE BUT IT'S NO

[00:25:02]

>> WHAT WE WE NOMINATED ALL THE CANDIDATES FOR POSITION THEN WE HAD A VOTE.

THEN THE LOWEST VOTE GETTER WAS ELIMINATED AND A REVOTE. SO THIS IS NO DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE'VE BEEN DOING. BUT IT DOES CLARIFY THE PROCESS.

>> AND WE'RE TALKING WE'RE TALKING ABOUT EACH POSITION SEPARATELY BECAUSE THERE WAS WORDING BEFORE ABOUT A SLATE AND I'M OPPOSED TO THAT. ALL RIGHT.

I WANT EACH POSITION TO BE DONE SEPARATELY. SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE

THAT I'M UNDERSTANDING WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR HERE. >> AND NEWT GINGRICH.

>> YES, DANA, I'M JUST USING THE SAME WORDING THAT IS, YOU KNOW, FARTHER DOWN LETTER DAY AND YOU KNOW, I MIGHT NOT BE REMEMBERING TOO CLEARLY FROM WHEN WE DID THIS TWO YEARS AGO.

BUT I THOUGHT WE HAD SOME DISCUSSION AT THAT MEETING AS TO HOW TO DO IT.

AND WE I BELIEVE WE ENDED UP DOING EXACTLY AS YOU SAID. BUT I JUST THOUGHT WAS IMPORTANT THAT TO HAVE IT IN HERE THESE POLICIES FOR ANY FUTURE THAT WE KNOW EXACTLY HOW

IT'S DONE RIGHT. >> CAN YOU DISPLAY EMOTION? >> WILL WE BE IN THE SAME

MOTION? >> ROBIN, YOU DID THE BEGINNING PART OF WHAT WE'VE NOTED ONCE WAS WITH THE WANING SIGNS THE ENFORCEMENT THERE'S GOT TO BE POSTED ON THE AGENDA ABOUT THE

JIM WAKING SECOND IN THEIR MEETINGS PUMPS DAY. >> THAT SAID, DO YOU WANT TO ADD SOME LANGUAGE INTO THIS FOR EACH POSITION? IS THAT IMPORTANT TO CLARIFY THAT NO MATTER HOW IS JUST IMPORTANT FOR ME TO CLARIFY. I THINK WE ALL AGREE ON IT.

OK. IT WAS IT WAS WHEN YOU MENTIONED SLATE.

THAT'S WHAT BOTHERED ME BECAUSE I VIEW SLATE AS YOU KNOW TOP DOWN POSITIONS SO LONG AS YOU OUTPUT SLATE IN THERE I'M ON I'M. I'M FINE WITH IT.

THE OTHER THING THAT THREW ME OFF WAS WE SEEMED LIKE WE THOUGHT THAT THE FIRST NOMINATION HAD SOME PREFERENCE THAT IT NEVER HAS HAD ANY PREFERENCE.

ALL NOMINATIONS WERE TAKEN. AND THEN THE WAS TAKEN. AND IT DOES SAY THAT RIGHT NOW AND BE A POSITION FOR THE OFFICE. SO IT'S IT'S NOT CORPORATE AS.

OK. THIS IS NOT I WAS I WAS GOING TO AX IF YOU PUT IT WOULD YOU PUT IT UP WITH THE SAME QUESTION SHE DID ASK MRS. GIBBONS IF I WAS GOING TO ASK

HER WHY SHE MIGHT PUT THAT IN THEIR RACE POSITION. >> MRS. FAVORITES.

>> BUT IT'S IT'S ALREADY HERE. WELL, I THINK THAT WHEN I ASKED THAT QUESTION IT WAS CLARIFIED THAT THE PREVIOUS SENTENCE IS ONLY TALKING ABOUT A SINGLE BOARD OFFICER.

>> SO I THINK THAT THAT CLARIFIES THAT IT'S ONLY FOR EACH INDIVIDUAL POSITION FOR GUYS IF AS YOU BELIEVE WE HAVE THE CLARIFICATION THAT THERE'S NO QUESTION IF YOU QUESTION THAT THEN YOU KNOW, SOMEONE MAY INTERPRET IT THE WAY YOU INTERPRET IT.

>> SO I JUST SAY WE HAVE NO ROOM FOR FOR FOR ANY MISINTERPRETATIONS.

THAT'S ALL. YEAH. >> WHEN? SURE. I THINK THAT'S THE IMPORTANT THING IS HOW IT'S POSTED.

YEAH. AND SO WE'LL BE CERTAIN I WILL GO OVER THAT WITH ROBIN AS I ALWAYS DO TO BE SURE THAT POSTING CORRECTLY AS WE'RE AWAITING FURTHER READINGS.

>> WANT TO BECOME THE POLICY OUT MARCH. YES SIR.

MR. SMITH I REALLY THINK THAT BECAUSE OF THE PREVIOUS WORDS CANDIDATES FOR A POSITION AS

SUPPORT OFFICER COVERS. SO I FEEL VERY OK WITH THAT. >> ALL RIGHT.

>> THERE BEING NO FURTHER HANDS UP WE CAN VOTE ON THIS MOTION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.

I I. ALL IN THE ROOM I FAVOR MR. FRAME UP AND VOTE FOR

[00:30:03]

CHRONICALLY I THINK ALL OF THEM. >> DR. BRZEZINSKI I JUST MEANT YEAH IT'S A PRETTY STUNNING RESOLUTION UNANIMOUSLY. NOW IT DOESN'T APPEAR TO BE ANY OTHER BUSINESS REGARDING THE ELECTION PROCESS. WE CAN NOW MOVE TO PAGE 28.

EVEN ABOUT THE TOOK A HALF AN HOUR TO GET BACK TO THE STARTING.

>> IF WE DO THIS RIGHT THE FIRST TIME WE WON'T HAVE TO DO IT AGAIN.

SO WE'RE ON C9 ADDRESSING BOARD MEMBER VIOLATIONS. THIS ALWAYS BEEN A TOPIC THAT ENGENDER QUITE A BIT OF CONVERSATION. THE COMMITTEE FELT THAT WE SHOULD FOLLOW THE DIRECTION OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL WHO REVIEWED THE POLICIES AND SAID THAT THEY WERE FINE. SO THAT'S THAT'S WHAT YOU SEE BEFORE YOU IN CHECHESSEE 9 WHICH CAME OVER FROM OUR PREVIOUS POLICIES THREE POINT FIVE.

>> SO I WOULD LIKE TO ASK YOU DAVID AND THE COMMITTEE NUMBER FIVE MY WITH NUMBER FIVE IS

THAT IT? >> I'LL READ IT HERE AGAIN. IF A BOARD MEMBER MAKES AN INAPPROPRIATE OR OFFENSIVE REMARK FOR THE PUBLIC THAT A BOARD MEMBER MAY MAKE A MOTION AT THE TIME OF THE OFFENSIVE OFFENSE TO VOTE PUBLICLY AS TO WHETHER OR NOT THE VIOLATION WOULD REQUIRE AN IMMEDIATE PUBLIC REPRIMAND AND OR A FORMAL APOLOGY TO THE PARTY OFFENDED DOES THAT NEEDS TO BE THERE? I MEAN THAT'S A GIVEN THAT'S YOU KNOW, SOMEBODY CAN MAKE A MOTION WHATEVER. WHAT DO YOU GUYS THINK ABOUT

THAT? I DON'T IT'S ALMOST NET. >> IS THAT NECESSARY? IT'S A WELL I'M SURE THIS ONE TO DO AND I'M TRYING TO GO BACK TO THINK ABOUT WHAT WE'VE

DECIDED BECAUSE WE WENT THROUGH ALL THE BALLOONS. >> WE MIGHT HAVE ALREADY WON THIS ONE BUT I THINK IT WAS LEFT THERE BECAUSE WE DECIDED IT NEEDED TO BE A BOARD

CONVERSATION. >> THAT'S WHY WE LET THE LITTLE ONES.

>> BUT BUT WHEN OUR VOTE AT OUR VERY FIRST FIRST READING WE WENT THROUGH AND DID ALL THE BLUES AND I CAN'T REMEMBER WHAT WE DID WITH THIS ONE I DON'T HAVE IT IN MY NOTES EITHER.

I WROTE MY I CROSSED IT OFF WHICH I THINK MEANS THAT WE ELIMINATED IT.

BUT OK, I HAVE TO GO BACK. >> ALL RIGHT. I THOUGHT I THOUGHT WE ELIMINATED IT'S PRECISELY FOR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING NOW. DR. ROSS, I HAVE EXCELLENT.

>> SO IT IS SOMETHING THAT'S A LITTLE LIKE WHY DON'T WE DOUBLE CHECK THAT TO BE SURE THAT WE

GET WOMEN? I THINK WE DID. >> YES.

>> MR. SECRETARY, YES, MA'AM. >> I DON'T KNOW. I'M PRETTY SURE WE DIDN'T GO IN AND I DID. AND I APOLOGIZE FOR NOT HAVING MY NOTES ON THAT ONE.

>> ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THIS PAGE 20 GOING THAT CHECHESSEE GOVERNANCE GOVERNANCE COST.

I DON'T THINK THIS IS DRAMATICALLY DIFFERENT FROM FROM WHAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE OTHER THAN THE CHANGES THAT HAVE BEEN MADE BY MOTION'S TO WHERE TO MEETINGS IN THE SAME DAY YOU GET TO STIPENDS. IT USED TO BE IF THERE WERE TWO MEETINGS YOU'D ONLY GET ONE STIPEND AND THAT WAS CHANGED BY EMOTION. I BELIEVE.

BUT I WOULDN'T SWEAR TO THAT IT WASN'T BY CALCIUM BUT IT WAS BY THE INTERPRETATION THAT IT

SHOULD HAVE BEEN TO LONG. SO WE SHOULD LOOK AT THAT. >> WE IMPLEMENTED THAT ALREADY

I BELIEVE. >> YES. YEAH.

I LOVE YOU, DOCTOR ROBINSON. THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT. WE LOOKING AT THE EFFORTS OF POLICY AT THE TIME IT LOOKS LIKE THAT'S THE WAY IT REALLY SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE.

IT HAD BEEN I SHOULD SAY MISINTERPRETED. AND SO WE NOW ARE INTERPRETING

THE WAY WE THINK THAT WAS TO BE INTERPRETED. >> ALL RIGHT.

[00:35:01]

SO PATRICIA, WHAT WOULD IT BE NUMBER TWO? WHAT IS THAT SO THAT NO ONE SHOULD BE NUMBER TWO AMONG THE RANK? I'M SORRY TO SAY THAT I AM NUMBER TWO SAYS IN THE EVENT A COMMITTEE MEETING IMMEDIATELY PRECEDES THE BOARD MEETING.

BOARD MEMBERS MEGAN OR FARMERS THIS POLICY SHALL RECEIVE ONE FIRST STIPEND PAYMENT YOU GET

TO YEAH THAT'S WHERE THE DEBT OF I KNOW SO I CAN SAY THIS. >> I'M TRYING TO I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU JUST SAID. AND YOU'LL GET PAID FOR THAT. YOU'LL GET PAID FOR THE COMMITTEE AND THE BOARD MEETING. RIGHT.

I UNDERSTAND THAT. BUT THIS IS WE HAVE TO KNOW THAT THAT'S BECAUSE POLICY AND THERE SEEMS TO BE AGAINST THAT AS AN OVERALL WAS JUST TALKING ABOUT THE COMMITTEE MEETING I THINK COULD ACTUALLY BE ADDED THEN THE COMMITTEE MEETING SHOULD BE GETTING THAT ONE

STATEMENT BUT YOU ALSO WILL GET ONE FOR THE BOARD NOTHING. >> I THINK IF YOU LOOK AT NUMBER THREE IF YOU LOOK AT NUMBER THREE, I THINK MAYBE THAT DOES CLARIFY JUST THE WAY THE MEL JUST SAID BECAUSE THAT SAID YOU GET ONE FURTHER SECTION OR A BOARD MEETING OR A

HEARING AT. >> OK, I JUST MEANT FOR YOU TO WHERE THEY BELONG TO THE LAST MAN CHAIR DOESN'T OWE MR. MR. CAMPBELL NOT HAVE BECAUSE HE HAS HIS LAPTOP SO HE COULD SO

THAT HE CAN JUST BRING EVERYONE ELSE. >> I'M NOT SURE.

I'M NOT SURE WHAT YOU'RE REFERENCING, SAYS MADISON LOST AT MR. CAMPBELL WAS TALKING AND

HE WAS HE WAS HE WAS DEAD . >> I WAS I WOULD JUST ONE AND I KNOW SAID HE'S NOT UP ON THE HE'S NOT UP ON THE SCREEN FOR EVERYONE ELSE AND I WAS WANTING DID HE HAVE HIS MOBILE DEVICE SO HE COULD ALSO PARTICIPATE ELECTRONICALLY? MY HAT'S ON THE LEGISLATOR, YOU

KNOW, BECAUSE YOU'RE NO LONGER CONSERVATIVE. >> EVERYBODY LIKE YOU.

>> IT DOESN'T HAVE HIGH TRACKING NUMBER. I WANT TO READ IT.

WE EVEN NEED THAT NUMBER TO BECAUSE BASICALLY JUST SAYS UP ABOVE IT SAYS I'M GOING TO GET PAID 50 DOLLARS FOR EVERY FOUR COMMITTEE MEETING AND YOU'RE GOING TO GET PAY FOR THE NEXT ONE SAYS YOU'RE GOING TO GET PAID FOR ATTENDANCE AT A SCHEDULED WORK SESSION OR A

BOARD MEETING. >> SO WHY DO WE EVEN NEED THAT ? BEEN UP TO NUMBER TWO IF YOU'RE GOING TO GET PAID FOR EDUCATING MEETING THE FACT THAT PROCEEDS

BOARD MEETING DOESN'T MATTER. >> IT'S A COMMITTEE MEETING, RIGHT? SO IS IT NECESSARY TO HAVE THEM THERE? I WOULD SAY MAKE A MOTION I MOVE THAT WE DON'T BEAT NUMBER TWO ON IDEALLY I MOVE THAT NEED TO LEAVE.

>> NUMBER TWO, B TO G C 10 SECONDS. >> I WANT TO DO IT THE OTHER WAY. CAN FIRMS AFFECT THE BIGGER GUY? HE'S SAYING THAT WE DELAY G C E TO A SECOND THAT ANY DISCUSSION ABOUT.

>> ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT. SO I'M GOING TO WAIT TILL ROBERT PUTS ON BANK ARREST. WE ALL KNOW WE'RE COMING ON THIS, OK? SO THEY SAY THE MOTION TO BELIEVE HE CAN BE THE YEAH. SO NOW VOTING IS OPEN.

YES. YES. EVERYBODY IN THE ROOM SAYS YES

. YOU GUYS SNAP STRAIGHT. >> YES.

YES. >> STARTED. YES, 9 0.

ALL RIGHT. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ABOUT GOVERNMENT COST? ALL RIGHT. ELEVEN THIS DIVERSE CITY STATE SETTING GOALS WE HAD THIS COMPARED TO OTHER DIVERSITY STATEMENTS AND ALSO GOT REVIEWED BY SOMEONE WHO HAS SOME KNOWLEDGE OF DIVERSITY STATEMENTS WAS GIVEN THE THUMBS UP.

[00:40:02]

>> SO WITH THE COMMITTEE FELT THIS WAS A PRETTY GOOD DIVERSITY STATEMENT AND IF ANYTHING ANYBODY ELSE CAN COMMENT ABOUT IT I WILL GO ON CAN BE 50 PLUS I DO SEE ON UNDER DC TWELVE ROMAN NUMERALS SINCE THERE IS A YELLOW CAUTION THERE ABOUT THE ROMAN NUMERAL SEVEN I YOU KNOW 6 7 9 BLAH BLAH BLAH BECAUSE ACTUALLY WHAT A MAJOR EFFECT OR SOME OF THAT

DIFFERENCE SUMMER BOY IT'S DIFFERENT. >> THANK YOU.

>> I WANTED TO BRING UP A THOUGHT HERE WHEN WE WERE HAVING SOME CONVERSATION SEVERAL MEETINGS AGO ABOUT RAVEN SAYS BOARD MEMBER MENTIONED THAT YOU KNOW, IS IT A GRIEVANCE OR IS IT A COMPLAINT? HOW ARE THEY DIFFERENT? AND I WAS JUST SINCE THAT TIME I'VE BEEN WONDERING HOW YOU KNOW, IF IF IF THE WORDING IN THIS SHOULD SAY GRIEVANCE AND OR A COMPLAINT OR WHAT THAT SHOULD LOOK LIKE BE THE VERY

SPECIFIC SCENARIOS. >> IS THERE REALLY A DIFFERENCE BECAUSE LOOK AT NUMBER TWO.

SEVEN TO BE SEVEN COMPLAINT REGARDING COMPENSATION FOR THE THAT GOT BOTH WORDS IF YOU'RE ALREADY AS I RECALL IT WAS IT WAS A POINT OF CLARIFICATION THAT WAS BANDIED ABOUT.

I'D LIKE A LIST OF PUBLIC IMMEDIATELY. WOULD THERE BE A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A GRIEVANCE AND A COMPLAINT? COULD YOU SHOW ME JUST THOSE TYPE OF THINGS? SOME TYPES OF OF YOU GUYS HEAR ABOUT I CANNOT.

YEAH. YOU'VE GOT TO MOVE MICROPHONES WAY OVER THERE.

OH, THOSE BIG LOUD POINTS OF SCREEN. THANK YOU.

I KNOW THAT IN THE NEW TITLE 9 REGULATIONS INDIVIDUAL CAN COME FORWARD WITH A CONCERN FOR A COMPLAINT ABOUT A MATTER AND THEY DON'T WANT TO FILE QUOTE A FORMAL COMPLAINT OR GRIEVANCE.

>> IT'S TO BE A GRIEVANCE IS SOMETHING FOR YOU LIKE. IS A MATTER OF SERIOUS CONCERN SOMETIMES THAT THE PLANE COULD JUST BE BECAUSE IT CAN MATTER THAT IT DOESN'T FINDS THAT HIGH A LOW LEVEL. BUT IF Y'ALL WANT ME TO, I CAN LOOK OUT FOR COMPLAINT

INGREDIENTS. >> SO SO WOULD YOU. SO MY QUESTION TO YOU THAT IS IN THIS IS WELL WHAT WE HAVE TO DEFINITION AND WE HAVE WHAT A GRIEVANCES SHOULD THERE ALSO BE A DEFINITION OF WHAT A WHITE CAUSE HERE UNDER THE DEFINITIONS IT SAYS THAT HAVING A COMPLAINT ABOUT THE STATION NOT CONSIDERED INGREDIENTS AT SPECIFIC COMPENSATION.

>> YEAH. EXACTLY. SO I GUESS THE THE THE QUESTION AT HAND IS YOU KNOW WHAT DEFINES A GRIEVANCE VERSUS WHAT DEFINES A COMPLAINT FROM THE GRIEVANCE DEFINITIONS. RIGHT. AND I THINK THE QUESTION AT HAND IS WE HAVE A PROCESS POLICY THAT WORKS FOR THINKING ABOUT THE APOLLO.

HOW BUT IF A GRIEVANCE EMPLOYEE GRIEVANCE REGARDING THE SUPERINTENDENT OR BOARD MEMBER IF AGREED IF A GRIEVANCE IS DIFFERENT THEN A COMPLAINT. WE DON'T HAVE A POLICY ON HOW A COMPLAINT IS. SO WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE IS MAKE SURE THAT WE FOLLOW POLICY. AND SO IT JUST MIGHT BE SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE TO

DEVELOP A POLICY FOR A NON GRIEVANCE COMPLAINT. >> YOU KNOW MY POINT I THINK

THAT'S THE THAT'S MY POINT. >> YOU'RE RIGHT. SO MY QUESTION, WENDY, IS IF UNDER TITLE 9 SOMEONE CHOOSES NOT TO FILE A GRIEVANCE, THERE WILL BE FILES.

[00:45:04]

BUT IN THE FORM OF THAT FORMAL COMPLAINT IT IS WHEN YOU START PUTTING ALL THOSE PROCESSES ICE YOU'RE STARTING AN INVESTIGATION START THE INTERVIEW YOU START HAVEN'T BEEN CONCERNED BUT A LOT OF TIMES PEOPLE COME IN WITHOUT THEY DON'T WANT A TRACE LEVEL.

IN OTHER WORDS SOMETHING'S SEXUAL RISK. OK, I FEEL OFFENDED.

I WANT THIS TO STOP. WELL, IT'S NOT PERVASIVE OFFENSIVE A PATTERN FOR A REASONABLE PERSON WOULD BE OFFENDED. STOCKY BUT IT'S IT'S AN IMPROPER BEHAVIOR AND IT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED. THAT NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED.

THAT DOESN'T NEED TO ARISE WHEN YOU HAVE THAT INVESTIGATION OF THOSE PROCESSES IN PLACE, WE CAN HAVE A HEARING. YOU CAN HAVE AN APPEAL. THAT'S WHAT YOU DON'T OFTEN FIND IS IN THE PIPELINE. THEY DON'T CALL INTO THAT. IT'S NOT CALLED FEDERAL REGS.

THEY CALL IT A FORM. RIGHT. BUT IT'S HERE WE CALL IT A GRIEVANCE POLICY. AND AT THE SCHOOL DISTRICT THEY HAVE GRIEVANCE.

>> THOSE NEW TITLE 9 REGS CALLED THE SO. ALL RIGHT.

THIS IS RIBAUT. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. I WOULD SUGGEST THAT THE DEFINITIONS SECTION OF THE PROPOSED COMMITTEE POLICY MANUAL WE PUT ALL OF THE SYNONYMS FOR GRIEVANCE SO THAT THEY'RE ALL COVERED BECAUSE I BELIEVE THE INTENT OF THE BOARD IS THAT THIS GRIEVANCE SHOULD COVER COMPLAINTS, OBJECTIONS, EVERYTHING.

AND SENATOR OTHER WORDS. SO I THINK BACK TO THE DEFINITION SECTION PERHAPS WE CAN DEFINE GRIEVANCE AS ALL OF THOSE SYNONYMS WE COULD JUST PULL OUT OF A THESAURUS I GUESS . NO, NO, NO. I HAVE TWO QUESTIONS.

ONE, WHEN THE YES. THE FED YOU RAISE DO THIS THING USE A DIFFERENT THING GRIEVANCE AND COMPLAINT BUT NOT THE STATEMENT THEY HAVE LEFT. THEY HAVE A PROCESS FOR GRIEVANCE AND THEY HAVE A PROCESS FOR COMPLAINTS FORMIDABLE.

AND THOSE NEW CHANNEL TIES ARE NOT ENTITLED. THEY DON'T CALL.

THEY CALL IT A FORMAL COMPLAINT. THEY CALL IT ALL FORMAL COMPLAINT. PRETTY SURE THAT THAT'S RIGHT. WELL, THEY ARE STATE OF IT.

YOU WOULDN'T HAVE PUT THAT ON AN APPLE REALLY DIDN'T. YOU MAY NOT EVEN YOU ARE A GOOD STUDENT BUT WHAT THE DIFFERENT GRIEVANCE WHAT THE DIFFERENCES WERE? YES, THAT'S THAT'S ONE. WELL, MY QUESTION IS IS THAT I MEAN IF YOU MEAN THE SAME THING

THEN DEFINED THEN WE DON'T NEED A POLICY FORWARD. >> BUT IF IF COMPLAINTS AND WHICH IN MY MIND IS THE WAY WE ANALYZING IT IS LESS FORMAL THAN A GRIEVANCE, THEN WE NEED SOMETHING TO ADDRESS THAT DIRECTLY ALSO SO THAT IT IS NOT NILLY.

YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT I'M SAYING ? SOMEONE COMPLAINS THAT YOU SHOVE IT ALL BY THE ADMINISTRATOR SOMETHING SOMEONE ELSE BUILD PLANTS AND GET A DIFFERENT KIND RESPONSE THEN THAT LEADS WELL INEQUITIES. AND IN MY MIND IF YOU GOT ALL UNDER ONE GROUP LIKE THEY WERE SUGGESTING AND WE GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS WITH EVERYTHING

FINE. >> BUT IF COMPLAINTS ARE SUPPOSEDLY NOT AS SERIOUS THEN

WE NEED SOMETHING IN PLACE FOR HOW WE HANDLE LOADS. >> SO I AGREE.

AND SO MY SO IF YOU READ A A TWELVE TO A MICROCEPHALY IS THE BEST THING YOU CAN SAY BECAUSE WHEN YOU GET POINTED OUT THAT YOU WANT THE COMPLAINING STATE WATCH RERUNS ABOUT INTENSE SACRIFICES AND SAYS A FORMAL COMPLAINT ABOUT A FORMAL PLANE AND THOSE TITLE NINE.

>> SO WAS THAT UNDER A DEFINITION OF SAY A COMPLAINT OR GRIEVANCE IS A COMPLAINT? ISN'T THIS A POINT? IT'S A COMPLAINT OR GRIEVANCE. THOSE ARE THE TWO WORDS THAT ARE USED. AND IN THAT SAME SENTENCE YOU'VE GOT FEDERAL AND STATE LAW. SO ON. THAT'S WHAT I WAS THINKING.

AND JUST HAVE AN ALPHABETICAL C.V. NOTHING THAT MAKES SENSE TO ME.

[00:50:07]

>> I MOVE THAT WE ADD THE WORD COMPLAINT. I MOVE THAT WE ADD THE WORD THAT WE AMEND G C TWELVE TO A TWO TO THE WORD COMPLAINT SLASH GRIEVANCE A STANDARD THE WORD COMPLAINT SLASH GRIEVANCE IS A CLAIM BY ONE OR SO I'M JUST MOVING THAT WE ADD THE WORD COMPLAINT FROM DO WE HAVE A SEPARATE FACT, MR. WE HAVE A COMPLAINT LAST GRIEVANCE FOR THE BEGINNING OF IT EQUAL TO A MR. SMITH I'M SORRY YOU COULD YOU EXPLAIN THAT MOTION?

>> I'M MRS. MRS. RABBI. >> SIR, THERE'S JUST A QUESTION ABOUT TERMINOLOGY.

BUT THERE'S A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A COMPLAINT AND A GRIEVANCE AND BASED ON, YOU KNOW, FEDERAL REACTIONS ONE TERM STATE BRANCH USE ANOTHER TERM.

SO WE'RE JUST SAYING WE'RE GOING TO EXCLUDE BOTH THE CANDIDATES.

>> SORRY. SOUNDS LIKE WE ARE ENHANCING BOTH OF THOSE WORDS.

UNDERSTAND THAT WHAT YOU MEAN FOR ENHANCING THEM IF THE STATE HAS THE STATE YOU SAID THE STATE AS WELL AS WORDS TO TWO TO ONE DEGREE AND IN THE FEDERAL HOLD THE FEDERAL

STANDARDS HOLD ANOTHER WORD TO A DIFFERENT DEGREE. >> BASICALLY ARE WE JUST

CHOOSING TO COMBINE THEM TOGETHER AND MAKE THEM EQUAL? >> WE'RE BASICALLY SAYING THAT IF THERE IS A COMPLAINT OR GRIEVANCE FILED WE'RE GOING TO ADDRESS IT.

SO WE'RE GOING TO USE THE SAME PROCESS TO ADDRESS THIS. >> THAT'S NOT HOW I INTERPRET IT. THAT'S NOT HOW I INTERPRET THAT .

THAT'S THAT'S NOT HOW I INTERPRET THAT MOTION. >> THAT'S WHAT IT MEANS IS THAT THIS ARGUMENT SET FORTH BY WILL YOU I THINK BECAUSE BECAUSE THE FEDERAL AND THE STATE WORDS ARE DIFFERENT FOR WORDS OR COMMON COMPLAINTS OR GRIEVANCES AGAINST USING BOTH TIMES I

DON'T THINK YOU AN ELEVATOR ONE OVER THE OTHER. >> AND DANCING IS THE TERM YOU USE AND I DON'T WE'RE JUST TRYING TO ENCOMPASS BOTH STYLES .

>> MAYBE I WANT TO SAY CAN YOU SAY UP GET NAKED? I THINK IF WE SAY A FORMAL.

THAT'S WHAT THE THAT'S WHAT THAT TYPE OF LAW SAYS. IT SAYS A FORMAL COMPLAINT DOESN'T MAKE IT LOOK FOR A FORMAL SO YOU CAN AMEND YOUR NOTE.

>> CAN I JUST ADD THE WORD NO FORMAL COMPLAINT A FORMAL COMPLAINT THAT IMPLIES THAT THERE WAS SOME FOIL. THIS IS NOT SUPPOSEDLY BEFORE WE MAKE THE CHANGE I THINK THAT POSSIBLY IT IF WE WE CAN OR THAT COULD BE SENT TO THE BOARD .

I THINK THAT WOULD BE GOOD SO THAT WE COULD HAVE THE RIGHT TO FURTHER PROCESS THAT AND DO TO ACTUALLY TO ACTUALLY GET BETTER CLARIFICATION OF IT AND SAY LET ME JUST JUMP HERE, FANCHER.

>> I BELIEVE IF WE PUT THAT COMPLAINT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO DEFINE WHAT FORM IS EXACTLY 9 PERCENT THAT IS GOING TO BE A DISCRETION. ORDER IT IS AN E-MAIL FORM COMPLIANT OR YOU KNOW I THINK THAT'S GOING TO ADD A WHOLE LOT OF DEFINITIONAL WORK FOR US TO DO. WE NEED TO DO EITHER DO IT NOW OR TAKE FORM ALLOW UNLESS IT'S ALREADY DEFINED. WENDY IN THE FEDERAL IS ISN'T IT IN THE FEDERAL LAW OR TITLE 9 SEXUAL HARASSMENT I GET MY YOU I COULD USE MY CASE FOR CHALLENGES AHEAD OF THIS DISTRIBUTION POINT NUMBERS BETTER DEFINITIONS OR THINGS LIKE.

I KNOW THAT THOSE TITLE 9 RIGHT NOW THEY'RE VERY SPECIFIC. THEY HAVE THOSE THREE CRITERIA A FORMAL FILING NOTES ARE C OR A FORMAL COMPLAINT A SERIOUS ALLEGATION.

[00:55:02]

CIRCUMSTANCES. >> IT GETS US A SERIOUS SAFETY ISSUE.

>> THAT'S WHAT I'M CONCERNED ABOUT. RIGHT.

WE HAVE COMPLAINTS THAT COME THAT ARE NOT THAT SERIOUS OF A LEVEL THERE MIGHT BE A POLICY VIOLATION. SO IF WE DON'T IF WE DON'T DEFINE IT FORM OR REMOVE FORMAL ,IT'S IT'S I THINK GOING TO LEAD US INTO AN AREA OF A LOT OF DISAGREEMENT.

>> IT'S ANNOUNCED THAT I UNDERSTAND THAT CHANNEL BUT IN MY MIND IF WE DON'T LEAVE IT AS COMPLETE W OPENING UP FOR EVERYTHING TO BE VENTED IN THE SAME PROCESS AS MEETINGS WHICH MEANS THE SIMPLEST OF COMPLAINTS HAVE TO BE VENTED AS A GRIEVANCE.

BUT IF WE SEE A FORMAL COMPLAINT THERE'S A PERSON ASKED TO DO AN E-MAIL OR SUGGEST THAT THAT TOO THAT HE OR SHE WAS VIOLATED TO WRIGLEY WHERE THE POLICY IS WERE THEN BASED UPON HER RIGHT TO REFRESH UPON THE POLICY BREAKAGE AND THAT'S WHAT WE WANT THEM TO DO WHETHER THEY HAVE A COMPLAINT OF THEIR NATURE, WE WANT THEM TO SAY IT'S FORMAL OR ELSE IF

IT'S JUST A COMPLAINT WHO DEALS WITH IT? >> WELL, MY MY COMPLAINT CAN'T

BE THE SAME AS FORMAL COMPLAINT . >> SO IT SEEMS LIKE OUR KIND OF THE GENERAL CONSENSUS IS THAT WE FEEL LIKE THE DEFINITIONS NEED TO BE BETTER IN THIS SECTION. BUT IT SEEMS LIKE WE DON'T REALLY HAVE A I'M NOT SURE I SAY WHAT DID YOU SAY TO HER EXACT WE WANT THOSE WHAT THOSE DEFINITIONS ARE OR

INTERCHANGEABLE WORDS SHOULD BE. >> SO WE CAN HAVE A MOTION TO AMEND THE AMENDMENT AND JUST SAY MAYBE YOU CAN INVESTIGATE AND WE CAN REVISIT THIS OR OR WE NEED TO BUT USE UP OR DOWN BECAUSE THE WAY IT IS RIGHT NOW I MEAN IF YOU LOOK AT THE CURRENT DEFINITION IT SAYS ANY PROBLEM OR CONCERN AN EMPLOYEE MAY HAVE REGARDING POINT BASED UPON THING RACE, SEX, AGE OR OTHER DISCRIMINATORY REACTION A VIOLATION OF FEDERAL OR STATE LAW OR ANY PROBLEM CONCERNING SO VISCERAL LIKE WELL IF WE GO ON TO TO THROW A WRENCH INTO

THIS THERE IS A PROCEDURE OUTLINED FURTHER ON THIS. >> THIS THIS WHOLE.

AND IT SAYS IF AN EMPLOYEE WISHES TO FILE A GRIEVANCE THAT THEY HAVE TO COMPLETE A FORM.

SO YOU KNOW, IF AN EMPLOYEE WANTS TO FILE A GRIEVANCE SLASH COMPLAINT THEY NEED TO FILE FOR YOU KNOW, THEY NEED TO SPECIFY NEEDS TO BE IN WRITING. I DON'T THINK ANYTHING WOULD BE

FINES. >> YEAH, WELL THAT'S A COMPLETE 0 0 0 GRIEVANCE BUT IF YOU PUT SLASH WE GOT PLENTY OF BUSINESS AT THE SAME PLACE IN THAT POLICY THEN YOU'RE DEFINING IT AS THE SAME. I MADE UP MY MIND BECAUSE YOU'RE OUTLINING WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE. THAT'S COMING FROM THE SAME PROCESS HAS TO BE DONE WITH BOTH WORDS. YOU KNOW WE CAN WRITE TO AND YOU'LL NEED AGREEMENTS ON WHAT

WE HAVE. >> BUT I THINK IT'S AN EXCELLENT WORRY.

YEAH. I DON'T THINK WE NEED COMBINED TO BE, YOU KNOW, COMPLAINTS

OF COMPLAINTS AND GRIEVANCES GRIEVANCE. >> SO DIFFERENT ISSUES.

THAT'S RIGHT. CHAIR I MOVE THAT WE AMEND THIS MOTION TO REPLACE THE WORD FORMAL WITH WRITTEN SECOND THAT I THINK THAT'S HOW THIS SYSTEM WORKS WITH OUR INTENT AND THAT

. MR. SMITH, YOU GET THAT? >> I INTEND TO SEE THE SAME

WHERE MR. I SEE IT. >> I DOUBT IT. TWO DIFFERENT WORDS IN THE NAME WHEN THOSE WORDS HAVE TWO DIFFERENT MEANINGS AND I THINK THAT WE ARE NOT MAKE OUR OWN

DEFINITION OF THESE WORDS. ALL RIGHT. >> YOU CAN VOTE ON THE AMENDED

[01:00:05]

>> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR. I NEVSKY I. MR. SMITH.

I WILL ABSTAIN ON THIS. >> THE MOTION CARRIES 8 0 1 WITH INTEREST ABSTAINING.

>> SO NOW WE REALLY HAVE TO VOTE. SO REALLY WE REALLY SHOULD HAVE

THE WHOLE STATEMENT AND TO VOTE YES. >> WHICH IS WHAT WAS SO GO BACK TO YOUR MOM. THE SECOND AMENDMENT. AND NOW REMOVE THE WORD FORMAL AND REPLACE IT WITH WRITTEN AND WE SHOULD VOTE ON THAT

. >> EQUAL TO THE WORD WRITTEN COMPLAINTS AGAINST ALL THOSE.

>> ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? >> NO, IT DOESN'T. OKAY.

ALL IN FAVOR OF THIS MOTION ON THE MERITS THAT'S ON DISPLAY NOT TO A MAN.

WELL, TO A GOOD WORD WRITTEN COMPLAINT SLAPPED RAYMOND FOR ASK A QUESTION WAS ASKING RIGHT IS THIS NET OF STATE MOTION CARRIED A ZERO ONE THAT FIRST LET THEM STATING MY IT IS NOW.

>> YEAH. DO WE HAVE A POLICY? BOYS.

>> GC TWELVE TO BE ADDRESSING COMPLAINTS. >> NO.

>> YEAH. SOMEBODY. I'M JUST A BLANK.

>> I DON'T LIKE THE WAY THE DOG REVEAL SAID OKAY. I WHAT DO WE DO ABOUT THOSE THINGS. WE HAVE A POLICY OF THOUGHT. I MEAN I SEE A LIST OF THINGS.

THERE WOULD BE BUT IT DOESN'T SAY THAT THE THEY KNOW WHAT THEY ARE.

THEY SAY IT IS NOT GRIEVANCES I THINK IF THEY'RE NOT SUBJECT TO GRIEVANCES.

>> THEN THEY'RE NOT SUBJECT TO COMPLAINTS BECAUSE IT ALSO SAYS NUMBER SEVEN PLANES BURNING

COMPENSATION. >> THAT'S JUST ONE. >> YEAH.

I MEAN YOU CAN'T BUY USING THAT WORD NUMBER SEVEN. >> TO ME THAT MEANS ALL THOSE OTHER THINGS TO POSSIBLY COMPLETE ME AND THE THINGS THAT I COMPLAIN IS NOT A GRIEVANCE

COMPLAINT REGARDING COMPENSATION. >> I MEAN YOU CAN COMPLAIN ABOUT IT. WELL, YOU CAN'T GRIEVE IT LIKE THERE'S NO ACTION THAT CAN BE

TAKEN. >> AND I THINK THAT'S RIGHT. THAT'S RIGHT.

THAT'S WHAT WE NEED. CAN BE TAKEN AND FROM ONE STANDPOINT WILL BE TAKEN FROM A SYSTEM STANDPOINT AS A DISTRICT IS WHAT WE I THINK WE NEED TO ADDRESS NOW.

>> WELL, SOMEONE COMPLAINS HOW DO WE DEAL WITH UNDERNEATH THE CARPET AND SAY AH WELL I DON'T

KNOW. >> I THINK THESE BEST SEVEN THINGS THAT ARE LISTED HERE ARE

PRETTY SPECIFIC TO I DON'T KNOW TO EMPLOYMENT. >> THEY'RE KIND OF LIKE

EMPLOYMENT ISSUES. YEAH. >> AND THEN THE JUDGE SAYS THAT THERE ARE NO GRIEVANCES. IT DOESN'T SEEM TO ME HOW WE WOULD ADDRESS IT IF EMPLOYEES

COMPLAIN. >> I MEAN DO WE HAVE SOMEWHERE ELSE THEN THE POLICIES THAT

[01:05:06]

RELATE TO SOME TYPE OF POLICY OR REALLY I MIGHT. >> YOU CAN MOVE ON AND THAT'S

WHAT I THINK ALSO ADDRESSED THE ISSUE. >> ALL RIGHT.

ANY ANY PHYSICALLY WHERE YOU STARTED? >> I THINK.

SO IT LOOKS LIKE THE PUBLIC DISCUSSION ON THAT NOW WE'RE ON TO THIS.

>> OH. >> OH MY. MY QUESTION IS AT THE TOP IS IS SUPER DEAD OR BORING? WAS ALSO I'M STILL TRYING TO FIGURE SHOULD WE EVEN VIEWERS AGREE? WHAT SHOULD WE DO EVEN DEAL WITH GRIEVANCES THAT I'M STILL I MEAN I'M STILL WORRYING ABOUT THAT IS THE BOARD JOB TO EVEN DEAL WITH GRIEVANCES THAT I'M ALL ON BOARD MEMBERS ON FELLOW BOARD MEMBERS YOU CAN MAKE THEM NO, NO.

>> YOU CAN MAKE ELIMINATE THIS WHOLE POLICY, EARN THINGS ONE WAY YOU MAY NOT WANT THE FIGHT

GETS A BONUS A COMPLAINT. >> HELLO, AARON. >> IT'S MR. EARL CAM .

>> I SAID THAT WHEN FOR YOUR PUNISHMENT WHETHER IT BE A TEACHER PRINCIPAL OR ANY ONE CONDITION NEVER COMPLAINS I'M GOING TO GO ON AND THAT'S THE COMPLAINT SIDE AGREEMENTS HERE

. >> BUT I MEAN THAT'S NOT THE THE PRIZE OF THE BOARD AT THIS TIME THAT I THINK A BOARD BOARD MEMBERS ARE WHEN IT COMES TO CERTAIN THINGS I THINK WE STEP IN GRAY AREA. I MEAN THERE'S THERE'S CERTAIN THINGS THAT THE BOARD SHOULD NOT TAKE IN. IT'S JUST YOU KNOW, I DO I STAND WITH SOME OF WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, MR. CAMPBELL. BUT I SEE THAT THE BOARD THE BOARD AS BOARD THAT IS

SOMETIMES WE STEP GRAY AREAS LIKE BLAH BLAH BLAH PREVENTED. >> IT'S NOT A GREAT BOOK MAKE

WHICH WE SAID WE CAN'T AFFORD THIS. >> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

JUST TO ADDRESS WILL'S POINT, THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OPINION 20 19 SAID THAT THE FLAW WAS THAT WE DID NOT HAVE A POLICY FOR GRIEVANCES AGAINST BOARD MEMBERS OR THE SUPERINTENDENT.

THAT WAS THE FLAW THEY POINTED OUT THIS IS AN ATTEMPT TO RESOLVE THAT FOR SO I BELIEVE THAT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OPINION WOULD LEAD US TO BELIEVE THAT WE NEED TO DEAL WITH GRIEVANCES ON BOARD MEMBERS AND THE SUPERINTENDENT AND THAT IS THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THE COMMITTEE HAD WHEN WHEN THEY WENT THROUGH THIS ACTION THAT THEY HAD US AS A BOARD MEMBER AND THAT THE SUPERINTENDENT WE HAD ACCESS TO EMPLOYEE BUT NOBODY ELSE HAS

ACCESS TO A PRIVATE CITIZEN FROM. >> AND WE THINK WE HAVE DIFFERENT ACCESS TO THESE EMPLOYEES. AND SO I DO THINK AT THAT THERE HAS TO BE YOU KNOW, AND WAIT FOR AN EMPLOYEE TO BRING FORTH THE GRIEVANCE AND THAT'S WHAT THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OPINION WAS THAT WE NEED TO HAVE A POLICY NOT JUST KIND

OF IGNORING. >> ALL RIGHT. SO WE'RE READY TO MOVE ON THAT

MR. SMITH TWICE. >> THANK YOU. NOW WE'RE ON TO FORWARD

[01:10:04]

CURRENT POLICY A LITTLE MORE SAYING. >> NOW WE'RE ON TRACK TO MOVE ON TO THREE IF IT'S RIGHT FOR ME IF YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT ANYTHING I DO FOR IT'S BEEN ON

COME OUT OF THIS YEAR THAT YOU'RE NOT GETTING ONE. >> WHAT IS THE COMMITTEE'S ATTEMPT TO LINE THIS UP WITH COHERENT GOVERNANCE, REASONABLE INTERPRETATION A KEY PART

OF COHERENT GOVERNANCE. >> THAT'S WHY THAT NO ONE IS THERE.

SOUNDS GOOD. >> COMMITTEE? NO.

>> WELL THAT'S NOT DAVID. NO. MARILYN THE SUPERINTENDENT HAS TO REASONABLY INTERPRET OUR POLICIES OR WE GET TO THE OPERATIONAL EXPECTATIONS THAT WILL BECOME A LITTLE CLEARER. I THINK THAT WE GIVE GENERAL EXPECTATIONS THE SUPERINTENDENT THAT INTERPRETS THEM AND COMES BACK TO US AND TELLS US WHAT HIS INTERPRETATION IS.

AND WE AND WE AGREE THAT HIS INTERPRETATION IS CORRECT OR OR WE TO TELL THE SUPERINTENDENT THAT IS NOT CORRECT. AND THEY SAID THE SAME IS TRUE WITH WITH POLICY.

IF WE FEEL THAT IT'S AN UNREASONABLE INTERPRETATION THEN WE WE INFORM THE SUPERINTENDENT OF THAT BECAUSE WE ARE THE FINAL WORD POLICIES .

>> I'M NOT SURE I CLEARED THAT UP. AND HOW DOES THAT DIFFER FROM NUMBER ONE UNDERSTANDING OF UNION CONTROL AND OKATIE? YEAH.

YES, I THINK WE'LL BE BOTH. SUPERINTENDENT PLACE STUDENTS I MEAN INSTRUCT OBVIOUSLY THAT WE CAN DO IT INFORMALLY THE WE JOB WE COULD THAT WE DIRECTOR SUPERINTENDENT THROUGH POLICY BUT HE HAS TO LIKE HE OR SHE HAS TO MAKE A REASONABLE INTERPRETATION POLICY THAT WE

CAN. >> WE ALWAYS HAVE THE OPTION OF SAYING THAT'S NOT A REASONABLE INTERPRETATION OF THAT POLICY. RIGHT.

I MEAN GOING TAX MONEY BACK SOME OF THE DISCUSSIONS WE'VE HAD, YOU KNOW, WENT WHEN COHERENT GOVERNANCE ALLOWS TO STEP IN AND WHEN IT DOESN'T. IF WE FEEL IT'S AN UNREASONABLE INTERPRETED THEN WE ALWAYS HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO STEP IN AND SAY SO WE MUST BE CLEAR ABOUT THAT ALLOWS THE SUPERINTENDENT TO GO BEFORE WE STEP IN AND HOW WE STEP IN AS OUR AUTHORITY AS A CERTAINLY AS REASONABLE AS OPEN AND THAT'S THE ARGUMENT WITHOUT A VOTE.

THE BOARD HAS TO MOVE TO WIN THE ARGUMENT. I WAS SUPERINTENDENT INSISTING ON DOING WHAT HE WANTS TO DO BECAUSE HE IS INTERPRETING IT ONE WAY AND YOU INSIST THAT HE IS MISINTERPRETING IT. WE FORMALLY VOTE THAT PROCESS DOWN.

WHICH I DON'T SEE ANY OF US DISCUSSED AND THEREFORE OUR TEAM AND MY MIND AS I SAY.

YES. BUT LET'S GO THROUGH ALL OF THE PARTS PROCESS.

>> PITRODA I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY IF YOU LOOK AT NUMBER FOUR IN THE SAME SECTION IT SAYS THE BOARD MUST IMPROVE SYSTEMIC CHANGES OR REVISIONS TO DISTRICT POLICY.

>> AND AGAIN TO BE RIGHT WITH DAVID SAID WHY DO WE GET THE OH HE'S THE FIRST JOB OF THE

[01:15:04]

AND SUGGESTS WAYS TO MEASURE THEM AND THEN WE AS A BOARD DECIDE WHETHER THAT'S A

REASONABLE INTERPRETATION OR NOT. >> WHETHER WE ACCEPT THAT OR

NOT AND I FEEL LIKE WE CAN ALWAYS CHANGE THAT. >> YOU WHEN I'M SAYING IS NOT MANDATED. IT ISN'T NOW THIS IS REASONABLE AND YOU SAY THOSE NOT

REASONABLE OTHER THAN THE VALUE AT THE END OF THE YEAR. >> THE COURT DID STATES THAT AT

ANY TIME LOW YOU HAVE TO GET ON IT. >> SO ONE THING ALREADY COVERED THE VOTING PART OF IT WHEN THERE IS A DISCERNMENT MY MIND.

WE CAN GO AGAIN. IT'S JUST NOT REALM OF COVERING IT LIKE IS MR. SMITH.

>> SO MY QUESTION STILL IS THAT COULD YOU PLEASE MR. CAMPBELL'S TO GET A TICKET FOR RIGHT DOORS LIKE HE MUST. I SWEAR WE'RE TAKING ON THE SAME PAGE.

TO ME THE QUESTION IS NOT ONLY STILL BUT ANSWERED. I MEAN HOW I MEAN HOW HOW WE DO TIME DO WE COME TO A COMMON GROUND THAT WE ARE ALL ON THE SAME PAGE WITH THAT? BECAUSE ACTUALLY I THINK IT'S KIND OF CONTRADICTORY BECAUSE THE BOARD I BELIEVE THE BOARD SETS THE TONE THEN THE BOARD MAKES THE DECISION THAT THE SUPERINTENDENT'S JOB TO CARRY OUT. SO WHEN YOU SAY THAT HE HAS TO AGREE THAT I THINK THAT THAT SPEAKS A LITTLE SPEAKS A LITTLE DIFFERENT TO TO WHAT THIS POLICY IS STATING A LITTLE BIT.

I DID THERE THE DAY THAT THERE'S THAT THERE'S I WON'T SAY WIGGLE ROOM THAT THERE'S JUST ROOM TO KIND TO KIND OF UP TO LEAVE LIKE THAT THAT THERE'S ROOM FOR TRIAL AND ERROR REASON

THIS IS IN HERE. >> HE'S THE SUPERINTENDENT MAKES THE DAY TO DAY DECISIONS.

HE CANNOT SAY GEE, I WONDER WHAT THE BOARD IS GOING TO SAY ABOUT THIS.

HE'S GOT TO MAKE REASONABLE ASSUMPTIONS AND THAT'S WHY THIS IS HERE BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT HIM CONTACTING ALL OF US EVERY DAY SAYING WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT HOW I SHOULD INTERPRET THIS? HE MAKES REASONABLE INTERPRETATIONS AND THEN WE HAVE THE RIGHT AT SOME POINT TO COME BACK AND SAY OH NO, YOU SCREWED THAT ONE LEAVING AND A MAJORITY VOTES TO SAY NO, DON'T DO THAT AGAIN OR HE DID A GOOD JOB.

>> I WOULD LIKE YOUR INTERPRETATION IF WE FEEL LIKE WE HAVE TO DO THAT MOST OF TIME WE'RE NOT. THAT'S JUST NOT TO EVEN COME TO OUR LEVEL OF ATTENTION.

>> YOU KNOW, ON THIS I DIDN'T DO SO GET UP. NO, NO, NO.

METHOD OF GOVERNING THAT. RIGHT. BECAUSE HAPPENS OVER AND OVER AND OVER. ABSOLUTELY. SO YOU KNOW, THAT'S A GIVEN IN

MY MIND IT IS GREAT UNLESS IT'S NOT DONE RIGHT. >> THEN WE VOTE DEPUTY LUKE.

>> AND THE ACTOR THAT ONCE WE KNOW THAT SUPERINTENDENT SINCE HIS OR HER HER SINGLE EMPLOYEE HE'S DR. DON'T YOU KNOW HE'S OBLIGATED TO FOLLOW LIKE HOW WE VOTE? HE DOESN'T. THAT WOULD BE INSUBORDINATION. SO YEAH, I GUESS THAT'S JUST A STATEMENT TO SAY HE'S GOT THE ENERGY WE ALLOW MORE. WHY IS THAT? BECAUSE THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS CAMPBELL IS ASKING. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

YEAH, I'M KIND OF ON THE SAME KINDS OF MILES DISCUSSING. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT I'M CLEAR ON MY INTERPRETATION OF EVERYTHING BECAUSE I THINK THROUGHOUT ESPECIALLY THIS YEAR WITH A LOT OF THE THINGS THAT HAVE COME DOWN AND DECISIONS THAT HAVE HAD BEEN MADE THAT ARE VERY LARGE DECISIONS, I PERSONALLY SEE THOSE FALLING IN OR NOT NECESSARILY IN THE DAY TO DAY OPERATION BECAUSE NOBODY COULD HAVE FORESEEN COPIED OR I YOU TO CHANGE THOSE THINGS THE WAY THAT WE DID. SO I JUST WANT TO BE SURE THAT I'M CLEAR ON THE INTENT OF OF ALL THE AUTHORITIES GIVEN AND THINGS LIKE THAT BECAUSE I KNOW THERE'S BEEN DISCUSSION HAD IN THE PUBLIC THAT THE BOARD DOESN'T HAVE AUTHORITY TO OVERTURN AND DECISION OR TO CHALLENGE A DECISION OR YOU KNOW WHAT NOT. SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I'M CLEAR ON THAT. WE DO HAVE AUTHORITY BOARD AUTHORITY AS A GROUP TO IF

[01:20:04]

>> SO IF I COULD GET SOME PRIVATE INPUT ON THE BOARD MEMBERS ON THAT, I WOULD BE

WELL I'LL I'LL JUST RESPOND. >> I AGREE WITH YOU 100 PERCENT.

YES, WE CAN. I THINK A LOT OF MISINFORMATION HAS BEEN SPREAD TO THE PUBLIC BUT ON REGARDING THE SCOPE OF YOUR GOVERNANCE. BUT SO THE WHOLE IDEA OF IT IS THAT, YOU KNOW, PROVIDE THE SUPERINTENDENT A FRAMEWORK WITHIN WHICH HE MAKES DECISIONS AND BE YOU KNOW, HIS PERFORMANCE BASED ON HOW HE'S MAKING THOSE DECISIONS WITHIN THAT FRAMEWORK. AND IF WE FEEL THAT HE'S MADE A VERY POOR DECISION.

ABSOLUTELY. WE CAN SAY GEE, WE DON'T AGREE WITH THAT DECISION.

CAN YOU ACTUALLY SPEAK TO THE SOLUTIONS AND BRING THOSE FORWARD TO THE BOARD? I KNOW WE CAN VOTE NO. IT'S TYPICALLY HOW IT WOULD BE AS OPPOSED TO SAY WE DON'T LIKE YOUR DECISION. THIS IS OUR DECISION. YOU KNOW, WE REALLY WANT HIM TO BE MANAGING THE DISTRICT BUT WE WANT TO OVERSEE THAT MANAGEMENT .

WE WANT TO BE GOVERNING THAT MANAGEMENT AS OPPOSED TO BE DOING THAT.

EACH INDIVIDUAL STEP THEY GO TO MR. GUY. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

JUST FOR AN EXAMPLE, LET'S BRING THE SUPERINTENDENT MADE A DECISION TO CHANGE THE GRADUATION. ANY BOARD MEMBER COULD HAVE MADE A MOTION TO SAY WE DO NOT WANT TO HAVE THE GRADUATION CHANGED AND THEN WE HAVE A VOTE.

AND SIX OF US SAID YOU'RE GOING TO CHANGE IT. IT'S GOING TO BE CHANGED.

SO YOU KNOW WHAT THE WHAT THE PUBLIC DOESN'T UNDERSTAND IS HOW COHERENT GOVERNANCE WORKS.

WE ARE THE ULTIMATE AUTHORITY. WE AS LONG AS SIX OF US SAY THAT'S WHAT'S GOING TO CHANGE.

>> SO NOW ALL THESE PEOPLE OUT THERE IF YOU THINK THAT WE DON'T HAVE A VOICE, YOU'RE WRONG. YOU'RE JUST WRONG. I DON'T KNOW HOW TO MAKE IT ANY CLEARER THAN THAT. ALTHOUGH I DO THINK WE CAN DO. MR. SMITH PETE, I HEAR WHAT

SOME OF SOME SOME MEMBERS ARE SAYING. >> OUR FIRST HIMSELF WITH THIS WAS OH MY QUESTION IS TO IT BECAUSE MAKES HIM BEGIN I SUPPOSE THAT SOME OF THIS HAD TO DO WITH THE CONTRACT OF THE SUPERINTENDENT AS WELL WERE IN TERMS OF THE DECISION IN TERMS

OF THINGS THAT WE HAVE TO AGREE WITH. >> YOU KNOW, SOME OF THIS STUFF I BE AS I'M LISTENING I BEGAN TO ASK MYSELF DOES THIS HAS TO DO WITH WHAT THIS WHAT THE SUPERINTENDENT'S CONTRACT AS WELL AS THE FIRST ONE THING AND THIS AND THE SECOND THING? THE QUESTION IS EVERYONE I MEAN PEOPLE SAID THAT YES, WE CAN CHANGE IT BUT ONCE WE CHANGE IT THEN WE OWN IT. SO ONCE WE MAKE ONCE WE MAKE IT A CHANGE IN SOMETHING THE SUPERINTENDENT HAS MADE AND WE TAKE THE OWNERSHIP THAT WE'RE GOING TO CHANGE IT THAT THAT BECOMES ARE THEN THAT BECOMES I HAVEN'T COMES ON OUR MOVEMENT. AND ALSO I BELIEVE IN THE TERMS OF THE EVALUATION THEN THAT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE OWN. AND IF IT WAS THEN THERE THEN NOW THAT'S SOMETHING THAT COULD BE TAKEN OUT OR IF I WISH THAT THAT CHANGE THE WHOLE EVALUATION SYSTEM. SO FOR INSTANCE, IF WE OVER TURN OVER WE'D ONLY LOOK AT THREE THINGS A SUPERINTENDENT DID IN ONE YEAR THEN THAT WILL MAKE IT HARD FOR US TO VALUE IT'S POSSIBLE TO EVALUATE THEM. IF IF WE'RE DOING DIFFERENT THINGS WE'RE DOING THERE THINGS ARE ALWAYS GETTING INVOLVED IN THE DAY TO DAY OPERATION. AND WHEN UNDER THIS GOVERNANCE THE SUPERINTENDENT HAS AND I REPUBLICAN I MEAN IT THAT HE HAS PRETTY MUCH BEEN THE ALL THE ULTIMATE SAY SO YOU KNOW WE BASICALLY HAVE FIVE AND THAT'S WHAT IF WE OVERTURN THINGS.

SO THERE GOES MEAN SO SO I SAW I STRONGLY I STRONGLY SAY THAT THE SUPERINTENDENT HAS CONTROL

[01:25:03]

WHEN IT COMES TO THAT. >> AND IF YOU DO THAT AND IF YOU WANT TO QUESTION THEM, WE CAN GO BACK TO WHEN WHEN THE WHEN THE WHEN THE SOCKEYE ASSOCIATION WAS GIVE WAS IT WAS I WAS TOLD GAVE US AND THAT'S THE MEMO THAT WE SHOULD GIVE THE CHAIR AND THE SUPERINTENDENT THE AUTHORITY PRETTY MUCH PRETTY MUCH IS ALMOST THE SAME EXCEPT THAT IT TAKES OUT THE CHAIR AND THE SUPERINTENDENT BASICALLY HAS THE THEY DID THE DAY TO DAY OR THE AUTHORITY IS JUST THAT HE DOES HE DOESN'T HAVE THE CHAIR AND HAVE HE NOT.

SO IT IS BASICALLY ADVICE ABOUT THE SAME. SO I'M AL HIJAZI BUT TO ME

THAT'S HOW I SEE. THANK YOU, JEFF. >> THANK YOU, MA'AM.

SHERIFF, SOME MORE POINTS FOR EVEN COVERED I THINK COLONEL DYER WAS MUCH MORE SUCCINCT

THAN I WOULD HAVE BEEN. >> I THINK COHERE THAT THE CONVERSATION OCCURRING IN THE PUBLIC RIBAUT COHERENT GOVERNANCE BEING THE BOARD'S ABDICATION OF AUTHORITY WAS BOGUS. IT'S A BOGUS NARRATIVE PROMOTED BY SOME BOARD MEMBERS.

WE CAN STEP IN AT ANY TIME. WE STEP IN AT ANY TIME AND MAKE A MOTION AND SAY NO, THAT'S A WRONG INTERPRETATION OF OUR OF WHAT WE WANT. SO WE'RE NOT ADVOCATING ANYTHING. WHAT WE'RE DOING IS EXACTLY WHAT COLONEL DYER SAID.

WE'RE ALLOWING HIM TO MAKE DAY TO DAY DECISIONS. SO I CONSIDER THAT WHOLE NARRATIVE TO BE BOGUS ALTHOUGH IT'S BEEN PROMOTED BY SOME BOARD MEMBERS JUST THERE'S IT'S

IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH COHERENT GOVERNANCE. >> SO I I'D LIKE TO GET US BACK HERE TO NUMBER ONE INTERPRETATION REASONABLE INTERPRETATION.

NEW UNEMPLOYMENT IS I THINK THERE ARE NO CAMPBELL AMENDMENTS THAT ARE OUT YET.

THEY WOULD NOT AGREE WITH YOU IN RIGHT. AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHY A REASONABLE INTERPRETATION IS AN ISSUE AND THAT KNOW THE PUBLIC CAN ASSUME THAT THE SUPERINTENDENT HAVE BEEN IN THIS COURT WITH THE BOARD AND THE BOARD HAD TO STEP DOWN.

>> BUT OBVIOUSLY WE WENT ALONG WITH IT SO WE AGREED THAT THERE WAS REASONABLE INTERPRETATION OF WHAT WE WANTED. BUT THAT THE MINORITY MEMBERSHIP WANTED A CHANGE.

COULD HAVE EASILY INTRODUCED THE MOTION FOR CHANGE AND PROBABLY GOT VOTED DOWN.

AND THEN THE PUBLIC WOULD BE ASSURED THAT WE WERE IN THE PROCESS BUT INSTEAD WILL GO GREAT IN THE NARRATIVE THAT WE CAN'T DO THAT WHICH IS THE WHICH IS THE PROBLEM.

KNOW I AGREE. I UNDERSTAND. NO ONE'S ACCEPT STATEMENT AND I AGREE THAT THAT'S THE SUPERDOME ROAD. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'VE ALREADY COVERED THAT WE CAN STEP IN AS MUCH AS THAT WAS MY POINT AND ONCE WE HAVE COVERED THAT AND THEY DON'T NEED TO TO ADDRESS THIS IF THEY'RE.

I WAS ABOUT TO SAY DAVID, I'M GLAD YOU SAID THAT WAS THE SAME ON THE REASON WHY SOME IN THE PUBLIC NOT NOT THE PUBLIC SOME IN THE PUBLIC SAYING THAT IS BECAUSE OF SEVERAL BOARD MEMBERS WHO WENT OUT THERE BECAUSE THEY DON'T LIKE THE POLICY THAT'S WE SHOULD WE

SHOULD NEVER ONCE THE VOTE IS TAKEN LEAVE IT ALONE. >> YOU MAY NOT AGREE HAPPENED THAT WAY BUT I CAN'T GO BACK A CHANGE LIKE THAT. I JUST WANT TO SAY ONE COMMENT ABOUT THE GOVERNANCE THING. IT IS CERTAINLY MY UNDERSTANDING AND I THINK THOSE SPECIFICS ROOM THAT AS A BOARD WE CAN VOTE TO OVERTURN ANYTHING AT THIS TACTIC THUS IF I WILL REMIND YOU THAT WE AS A BOARD VOTED ONCE TO SUPPORT WHAT HE HAD DONE SO WE COULD TELL THE PUBLIC THAT WE ARE IN SUPPORT BACK AND BE A FREE PROUD.

>> AND WE TRIED TO DO IT AGAIN AND THEN THERE WAS THE WHOLE WE WERE MET WITH RESISTANCE BY SOME OTHER BOARD MEMBERS SAYING THAT WAS CONTRAIRE TO COME HERE.

AND IT REALLY IS NOT CONTRAIRE COHERENT GOVERNANCE AS A BOARD WE MAY EXPRESS OUR APPROVAL AT

ANY TIME. >> THAT IS OUR PREROGATIVE TO DO THAT.

[01:30:03]

IT. >> MR. SMITH, I'M LISTENING TO WHAT SOME OF YOU SAID.

MY QUESTION IS WHILE GOES WELL, HOW MANY TIMES HAVE THE BOARD QUESTION OR OVERTURN AND THEN THE SUPERINTENDENT HAS DONE BECAUSE I'VE I RECALL THAT WE HAVE.

>> AND I ALSO TOLD THAT THAT THAT WOULD THAT THAT SOME PEOPLE THAT THAT'S BOARDROOMS WOULD SEE IT TO BE INAPPROPRIATE PUBLICLY FORCED TO DO THAT OR SOMEONE MEMBERS MAY MAY FEEL THAT. SO I DON'T SEE THAT AS BAD THAT THIS BOARD RIGHT HERE WOULD WE WOULD WOULD DO THAT. SO YEAH, THE THE POSSIBILITY IS THERE BUT I DON'T SEE WHERE IT WHERE MEMBERS ON THIS BOARD HERE THEY WOULD BE WILLING TO OR WOULD BEGIN TO STEP THERE

AND TO OPEN UP THAT CONVERSATION. >> AND SECONDLY, I DON'T THINK THAT I SEE AS ONE WHEN WHEN WHEN WE ARE BASICALLY SUPPORTING OR DISAPPROVING A MOTION THAT IS NO DIFFERENT FROM FROM US SAYING EVEN WE SUPPORT A OR OR WE WANT TO OVERTURN IT IN THE LATIN LATIN OF THE LAST TIME I REMEMBER IT WASN'T SO MUCH AS TO REFER BACK TO WOMEN'S ROBUST. IT WASN'T PUSHED BACK KNOW THAT THE BOARD WAS DIVIDED AND SOMEBODY WE ON MY SHOW THEIR HANDS. SO THEREFORE WHEN I REMEMBER MRS. MRS. SHAQ AND PARTICULARLY ASKING WELL WE TOOK A VOTE LAST TIME TO SUPPORT.

WE'RE NOT GOING TO ONE THIS TIME TO NOT SUPPORT OR TO SUPPORT OUR MEMBERS.

THE BOARD WAS QUIET. YOU CAN HEAR RAP PIECE BY PIECE ON CARL.

SO I DISAGREE. NO, NO, NO. NO ONE WANTED TO SHOW THEIR HANDS SO THAT THEREFORE IT WAS NO ONE NO ONE MAN. NO ONE MADE A MOTION.

SO A LOT OF WHAT WE'RE WHAT WE'RE SHARING HERE IS KIND OF JUST TO SOME DEGREE AT THE NIGHT AND IN AN HOUR OR TWO THAT WE'RE MAKING IT OFF AND I'LL LEAVE IT THERE.

>> ALL RIGHT. LET'S FOCUS ON OUR FIRST VIDEO HERE THAT IS REVIEWING ITS POLICY OR GETTING A LITTLE I DOCTOR WAS ASKING I'LL PUT MY HAND DOWN.

>> I WAS JUST GOING TO THANK EVERYBODY FOR THEIR CANDOR AND THEIR FEEDBACK ON THAT QUESTION. I THINK IT WAS AN IMPORTANT CONVERSATION TO HAVE.

THANK YOU. >> YOU'RE WELCOME. WHY DON'T WE DO THE NEXT ONE OR SUPERRICH? NUMBER FIVE, LET'S TAKE MAYBE A FIVE MINUTE BREAK AFTER THAT.

WE'VE ALREADY HAD OVER AN HOUR AND THAT'S A GOOD IDEA BECAUSE THEN WE'RE GOING TO POLICE.

>> THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT. SO ANYBODY HAVE ANY COMMENTS ON THIS SECTION BOARD

SUPERINTENDENT RELATION FINE. >> THERE IS IS THERE STILL IN OUR UNIT?

>> IS THERE STILL WHAT SIR? IS THERE STILL TWO MARINES ON THIS, CORRECT?

>> YES, OK. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. BALANCE SIR.

I WOULD JUST LIKE TO POINT OUT POINT NUMBER FIVE IF YOU JUST LOOK AT NUMBER FIVE AT KIND OF GOES ALONG WITH THE CONVERSATION WE FOUND I MEAN FOR THE PUBLIC THE BOY WILL MAKE THE FINAL DETERMINATION AS TO WHETHER SUPERINTENDENT INTERPRETATION IS REASONABLE WHEN THE PRINCIPAL IS IN COMPLIANCE AND WHETHER REASONABLE PROGRESS HAS BEEN MADE IN DOING SO, THE BOARD WILL BUY THE WELL REASONABLE PERSON UNQUOTE STANDARD.

>> THANK YOU. >> ALL RIGHT. SO RIGHT NOW THE TIME IS THIS

POINT THIRTY FOUR THIRTY FOUR. >> LET'S HAVE A MINUTE BECAUSE I'M TALKING TO EVERYBODY.

WE'LL COME BACK AT 445 COMPLETE AND WE'LL GET MAX THE TERMS CAN ON ON ONLY ONE

DISTRIBUTOR. >> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. AS WE GO INTO THIS SECTION TO TWO POINTS I'D LIKE TO JUST MAKE TO FRAME THIS UP. THE COMMITTEE TOOK ALL OF THE

[01:35:02]

SO WE DIDN'T LOSE ANY AND THERE WERE SOME THAT WE AGREED TO IN THAT WORK SESSION LONG AGO FROM FROM THE WORRY COUNTY TEMPLATE . I THINK THAT WE HAD AGREED TO RETAIN. SO WE DIDN'T ELIMINATE ANYTHING.

THE OTHER POINT I'D LIKE TO MAKE IS THESE ARE HIGH LEVEL EXPECTATIONS.

THE NEXT STEP IS THAT WE HAND THESE OVER TO THE SUPERINTENDENT.

THE SUPERINTENDENT COMES BACK WITH HIS INTERPRETATION AND MEASUREMENTS AND THEN WE APPROVE THOSE OR SUGGEST CHANGES SO THAT THAT'S THE NEXT STEP SECTION OF THE POLICY MANUAL IN YOU KNOW, BETTER COMMENTS ON OPERATIONAL HAVE BEEN TAKEN.

1 YOU I THINK THE GREATER GOOD OF IF YOU WANT TO BE FULLY BRIEFED BEFORE I WAS ASKING MY APOLOGIES MADAM CHAIR THIS IS IN REGARD TO THE 8 2 I WAS THINKING ON THE AREA WHERE IT SAYS NON-EMERGENCY PLANNING AND I KNOW THAT RECENTLY AT A BOARD MEETING WE DISCUSSED THOSE NEW

POSITIONS I BELIEVE. >> I CANNOT REMEMBER THE TITLE OFF THE TOP MY HEAD AND I DON'T HAVE MY NOTES HERE BUT I BELIEVE THEY WOULD ALSO BE KEY POSITION PERHAPS DR. RODRIGUEZ

COULD DO SO. >> SO THOSE THOSE POSITIONS DR. WISNIEWSKI, I THINK YOU'RE SPEAKING ABOUT THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR ELEMENTARY AND THEN AN EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR SECONDARY SCHOOLS. YES, SIR. OK.

AND SO YOUR QUESTION IS WOULD THEY FIT IN THIS LISTING HERE? YES, SIR.

YEP. I MEAN WE HAVE DISTRICT PRINCIPALS THERE SO SO THEY WOULD THEY WOULD IF WE HAVE DISTRICT PRINCIPALS THERE, THOSE TWO POSITIONS WOULD

PROBABLY FIT THERE AS WELL. THEN I HEAD OF THAT. >> SO MADAM CHAIR, I'D LIKE TO MOVE THAT WE ADD THOSE POSITIONS INTO THE KEY POSITIONS OF 0 8 2 NUMERICAL TO SOME LET'S JUST SAY I'M EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY NOTHING SECOND

WOULD BUY MR. EARL CAMPBELL. >> ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION CHUCK ? THANK YOU. THANK YOU. THIS IS A MOTION, PLEASE.

>> THAT'S NOT UP YET.

THE FINANCE DIRECTOR. WHAT DOES DOG WAS ASKING? >> YOU SEE IT ON YOUR SCREEN MOTION TO ADD THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY TO O E TO NUMBER TWO.

>> YEAH. THAT'S FINE. ALL RIGHT.

WHAT DO YOU MEAN? MR. SMITH? YES, MY QUESTION.

THANK YOU. THIS IS BELINDA. >> THANK YOU.

[01:40:03]

TRUE POSITIONS, NOT ONE. >> REPEAT THE WORD EXACTLY AFTER OF .

ARE YOU ALL RIGHT? NOT TO ME. YES, MA'AM.

>> RIBAUT PEOPLE LOVE THAT QUESTION. ADDING KNOWS THAT WE ARE A TEAM

THAT BUILDS POSITIONS WILL BE FILLED. >> YOU GOT A QUESTION FOR ME,

MR. CAMPBELL? >> SURE. WITH ALL THE PROGRESSIVE TWITTER BOARD BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE THE I DON'T THINK. OH, THAT'S YOUR QUESTION.

GO AHEAD. YEAH. THAT'S A QUESTION FOR YOU.

SO THOSE POSITIONS WILL BE FILLED? >> OH YES.

I DON'T WANT A FLAT THERE AND THERE'S NOTHING. JUST GO FOR.

>> OK. >> ALL RIGHT. THERAPY NOTES FOR THE TOP PICKER VOTE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR. I.

EVERYONE IN THE ROOM. THERE'S JUST NOT LADIES HERE. YES.

MR. SMITH, YOU DID WELL. >> OH, I'M WARDS OF STATE VOTING CARRIES A GENERAL ONE

ABSTAINING. >> ALL RIGHT. THROUGH HERE WE GOT TO OR WE OR

SHE WILL BE BY ONLY SIX. >> LET EM

. >> OH, I'M SORRY, MRS. PRYOR. >> FINANCE COMMITTEE HAVE BROUGHT TO THE BOARD THE BOARD APPROVED A 8 PERCENT CEILING OF I BELIEVE IT WAS.

REMEMBER WHAT IT WAS? ROBIN, I THINK IT'S JUST CAMPBELL'S AVERAGE ASSESSED VALUE. YES. YES, 50 PERCENT OF ASSESSED

VALUE CAP FOR 8 PERCENT CAPACITY. >> WHEN WAS THAT BROUGHT

FORWARD? THIS IS AT THE LAST MEETING. >> I YOU SAID THAT IT REMINDED ME HONORARY CAPTAIN OK. SO THERE NEEDS TO BE AND TO BE WE NEED TO ADD THAT WE WANTED TO TAKE A MOTION TO ADD IT. I KNOW THAT WE HAD THE AND YOU HAVE TO FILL IN THE ACT AMOUNTS OF WHATEVER LANGUAGE IN THE MOTION AND WE HAD THE 8 PERCENT MINIMUM PAST.

>> MR. CAMPBELL SECOND I HEAR THAT NEVER SAY RICH. >> WHERE DOES THAT GO?

YOU CAN JUST PUT IT. >> NEW NUMBER NO CURRENT 17. NUMBER 18.

OK. SO I'M JUST MOTION TO HAVE 2 0 6 10 I AM SURE VERSION 10 PERCENT OF INSURED VALUE ASKING IN EVERYBODY'S MOTION TO ADD 10 PERCENT SAY THAT AGAIN.

>> MOTION WELL I MEAN I THINK IT WAS I THINK I BELIEVE THAT UCSD MAINTAIN A 10 PERCENT

[01:45:03]

>> RIGHT. I HAVE MOTION TO END MOTION TO END THE MOTION.

THAT WAS TAKEN ON NOVEMBER 10 TO SAY STATING THAT WE MAINTAIN THAT WE MAINTAIN A 10 PERCENT

INSURED VALUE CAPACITY 80 PERCENT. >> NOW THAT WAS BEGINNING IN FISCAL YEAR 2010 TO THOUGH WE SHOULD HAVE THAT ALSO FIGURE OUT THERE TO PASSIVE CASCADES INTO THAT WE MAINTAIN A 10 PERCENT OF INSURED CAPACITY INSURED VALUE WHICH SHOULD VALUE CAPACITY SURPASSED ITEM 80 PERCENT FUNDS THAT TO BE NUMBER SIX.

>> MY COMMENT WOULD BE TO MAKE IT CONSISTENT WITH THE REST OF THIS POLICY, HAVE THAT DEBATE IN THERE ABOUT WHAT THAT MOTION PASSED. WE HAVE DONE THAT WITH THE OTHER POLICY JUST SO THAT WE WOULD GO BACK AND WELL. OKAY.

WELL ACTUALLY WHAT DOES THAT MEAN OR WHAT WAS SAID OR WHATEVER I'LL MAKE IT EASY WILL SECOND THE MOTION. VERBAL THE MAYBE BECAUSE THAT WOULD CONTINUE.

MR. MARTIN CHANGING THE WORDS YOUR BEST TO GIVE OFFICIAL SUPPORT THE MOTION.

>> I STAND BY WHAT I GET IN THE POLICY. I PUT THE MOTION IN THE DATE PLANT SEEDS TO MEMORIALIZE IT. SO DID ANYBODY HAVE ANY FURTHER COMMENTS OR ARE WE READY TO

VOTE? ALL IN FAVOR RELATED? >> IT'S.

I. MR. SMITH. IF IS NO NEED TO RAISE HELMUT SCHMIDT WAS THAT I WAS TRYING TO ASK THE QUESTION BEFORE THE VOTE WAS TAKEN BUT THAT'S WHY

YOU STARTED. >> YES. NO OR ABSTENTION? YES. THANK YOU. THE MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUS 9

0. >> ALL RIGHT. THAT'S ALL UNDER AGE 5.

ALL RIGHT. >> IT'S ONLY SIX WHEN I SAY THAT WAS ALREADY SIX AND WE WERE CORRECT. OH YEAH. I'M SORRY.

SO WE'RE NOT AFTER THE RIGHT. NO, IT'S GOT TO BE. YES.

THE EXAMPLE MOTIONS EIGHT NINE TEN. SWEAR 1 7 1 0 0 8 7 ASSET PROTECTION MR. SCAVENGER. THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR. I MOVE THAT WE REMOVE 0 FROM 0 7. THE SUPERINTENDENT SHALL NOT. NUMBER 5 TAKE ANY ACTION THAT DAMAGES THE DISTRICT'S PUBLIC IMAGE OR CREDIBILITY. I THINK THAT'S REDUNDANT TO FIRST DEGREE AND I DON'T THINK IT BELONGS HERE. NASA PROTECTION FROM I'M SENDING YOU BACK UNDER THE SUPERINTENDENT SHALL NOT. NUMBER FIVE.

YEAH. YES, MA'AM. THANK YOU.

COMPANY SHARES STATED VERY FIRM. >> YEAH I MAKE ONE THAT PAYS 50. NO, IT'S NOT A LITTLE OUT OF ORDER.

I THOUGHT HE WON. PAGE 51. SO THE MOTION TO REMOVE FROM 0

7 UNDER THE SUPERINTENDENT SHALL NOT. >> NUMBER FIVE.

FOREVER. >> AND I'M SORRY THE SECOND PETITION I GIVE THIS WAS GOING

TO GET HARD. >> I JUST THINK THAT'S REDUNDANT TO EVERYONE SO DON'T

TAKE MY HAND. >> I'M SORRY. YEAH, THAT'S WHY I ASK YOU ALSO

DOESN'T SEEM LIKE IT EVEN BELONGS IN SECTION ANY. >> THERE NO THERE BEING NO PUT

[01:50:10]

YOUR HANDS UP FOR ANY PRODUCT OR DISPLAY EMOTIONS. >> ALWAYS SEVEN PEOPLE FROM

ONLY SEVEN AND UNDER THE SUPERINTENDENT SHALL NOT. >> BLAH BLAH BLAH.

ITEM NUMBER FIVE. ALL RIGHT. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR RIBAUT DOCTORS. NANCY I. DAVID.

I DISMISSED. I GUESS. I THANK YOU.

MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY, RIGHT? NOW ONLY EIGHT.

>> ALL RIGHT, KELLY NINE CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT TO 0 8 10 REGARDING COMMUNICATING WITH

THE BOARD. >> ONLY 11 I HAVE A QUESTION HERE.

>> SO ON ONLY 11. NUMBER TWO, AN ANNUAL PROGRESS REPORT TO THE PUBLIC IS OUT A

REPORT CARD ON WHAT EXACTLY IS THAT? >> I THINK IT WAS VIEWED AS A

REPORT CARD ABOUT THE REST OF THE COMMITTEE'S CONCERNS. >> WELL, I THINK IT WAS LIKE IN

THE PAST ALTHOUGH I HAVE TRIED FOR ALTOGETHER VALUE CREATION. >> THANK YOU.

I COULD FIND OUT A LONG TIME AGO. ALL RIGHT.

ONLY 12 OH 13. >> THIS ONE OH A 40 DEMANDING ENVIRONMENT A STUDENT'S AND

THROWING OR LOOKS LIKE IT'S NEW . >> YOU WANT TO MAKE ANY COMMENTS ABOUT THAT? DAVID OR YOUR COMMITTEE? I THINK DR. RICE STARTS GIVING PROBABLY MORE ELOQUENTLY THAN I. BUT THIS YOU KNOW THAT FIRST SENTENCE SAYS WHERE IT'S COMING FROM. YEAH.

YES, MA'AM. THAT FIRST PARAGRAPH KIND OF DESCRIBE WHERE THESE EXPECTATIONS STEM FROM. AND IT GIVES THEM OVERVIEW OF WHERE THAT CAME FROM AND HOW IT CAME ABOUT. AND IF ANYBODY WANTED TO OBTAIN MORE INFORMATION ON THAT AND

[01:55:05]

PRACTICES THAT THEY HAVE DISSEMINATED. >> SOUNDS PERFECT.

YOU KNOW, FOR COMMENTS REGARDING NOT FOR MANY FOR NO. ALL RIGHT.

WE'RE ON TO THE FOIL WHICH IS ALWAYS 60. >> I HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT

THAT. >> OK, DAVID, YOU GO FIRST. I KNOW I WAS ON TO THE NEXT ONE

. I'M SORRY. >> SO AS I MENTIONED THE A FEW MINUTES AGO I LOOKED AT THIS MANUAL A WHILE AGO AND SOME SEVERAL PAGES OF NOTES.

SO UNDER PAULA I GUESS I LOOKED UNDER THE SAME STACK OF THIRTY FOUR NINETY AND SO WE'RE DOING

THINGS A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY. >> LIKE FOR EXAMPLE I JUST READ WHAT'S THE STATUTE?

>> SO THE MEETING MINUTES FOR THE PRECEDING SIX MONTHS HAD TO BE MADE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC. THE MINUTES OF THE MEETINGS OF THE PUBLIC BODIES THE MINUTES SHALL INCLUDE BUT NOT BE LIMITED TO ONE DATE TIME PLACE OF MEETING TO THE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC BODY REPORTED AS IN THE PRESENCE OR ABSENCE. THREE THE SUBSTANCE OF ALL MATTERS PROPOSED, DISCUSSED OR DECIDED. AND AT THE REQUEST OF ANY MEMBER A RECORD BY AN INDIVIDUAL MEMBER OF ANY VOTES TAKEN IN NUMBER FOR ANY OTHER INFORMATION ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC BODY REQUESTED, INCLUDED OR REFLECTED IN THE MINUTES SO I GUESS WE'RE JUST THAT'S SORT OF A BLANKET STATEMENT THAT'S INCLUDED I HAVE TO BE GETTING

THERE. >> I TELL YOU IT. BUT THE COMMITTEE PUT THAT SENTENCE SO THAT IF THOSE REQUIREMENTS CHANGE WE DON'T HAVE TO CHANGE THIS POLICY.

MY SECOND THING IS WE ARE ALSO TO GET THE BOY REPORT QUARTERLY PER BOARD ACTION AND THAT WAS A I'M SORRY. COLICCHIO WE DON'T KNOW. AND WORK SESSION.

NOW SUPPOSED TO GET A A POINT AND THIS SAYS THAT THEY'RE TRAPPED BY THE CALENDAR YEAR REPORTED IN THE FIRST QUARTER. SO THIS DOESN'T MENTION REPORTING A QUARTERLY NUMBER

THAT MAYBE EATEN. >> YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. AND IN FACT WE SHOULD TRY MOVES THAT WE CHANGE OKATIE 16 NUMBER TO REPORT TO REPORTED QUARTERLY AND STRIKE IN THE FIRST QUARTER

AFTER THE YEAR END SECOND. >> OK. SO THE WITH.

SO DAVID MADE THE MOTION UNDERSTAND PRESSURE SECONDED AND SO THIS WOULD BE UNDER ONLY

SIX WEEKS. >> WE ALWAYS EXCEED NUMBER TWO. I JUST SAY WE GIVE DAVID MOTION TO CHANGE IN 16. NUMBER TWO TO REPORT QUARTERLY STRIKE AFTER YOUR AGENCY RIGHT

IN THE FIRST QUARTER AFTER HEARING YES. >> FROM COUNTING YOUR REPORTED QUARTERLY. AGAIN, I JUST WANTED TO MENTION THAT WHAT HAPPENED IN THE PAST IS THAT WE'RE IN THE FIRST QUARTER AFTER YOUR MAN THAT'S LIKE YOUR ANNUAL REPORT ON

SUMMARY AND HOPE YOU'RE RIGHT. >> BUT WE DO HAVE BOARD ACTION A FEW YEARS AGO QUARTERLY JULY BUT I DID NOT RULE OUT ANY FIRM LIKE THAT WITH REPORT THAT WAS GIVEN IN THE FIRST QUARTER

OF NEXT YEAR. >> JUST THE WHOLE CALENDAR YEAR.

RIGHT. SO IT'S NOT LIKE JUST A QUARTERLY REPORT.

IT'S A REPORT, RIGHT? YES. I MEAN LOOK WHAT WE'VE BEEN DOING IT POINTED OUT THAT YOU'RE CLARIFYING THAT. AND THEN WITH REGARD TO THE MINUTES GET SOME MORE WORK. YEAH, BUT WHAT I'VE COVERED THAT WITH MY FIRST STATEMENT IS AN EXTREME I MEAN THE SUPERINTENDENT'S POWERS SOMETHING.

[02:00:07]

IT ISN'T. >> SO WE REALLY WANT TO STRIKE IN THE FIRST QUARTER AFTER YEAR

END AND REPLACE WITH QUARTERLY AROUND SPAM SPAM. >> AND JUST AS A COMMENT I WOULD HOPE THAT WHEN DR. RODRIGUES INTERPRETS THIS OH HE HE WOULD ADD AN ANNUAL REPORT TO A FOURTH QUARTER WOULD BE AN ANNUAL REPORT THAT WOULD BE A GOOD INTERPRETATION.

BUT THE RESIDENTS WELL AT I THINK YOU HAVE A MOTION ON THERE SO I'LL WAIT TILL AFTER BECAUSE MINE ACTUALLY. MY QUESTION FOR THE BOARD IS ACTUALLY AROUND 1.

NUMBER ONE. OK. >> SO I WOULD SAY RELATIVE GOOD CHANGE. ALWAYS GOOD TO SEE NUMBER TWO. PERIOD STRIKE FIRST QUARTER AFTER YEAR IN THE FIRST QUARTER AFTER YEAR END AND REPLACE PLACE WITH NO BETTER STRIKE TO REPORT QUARTERLY IN THE WRONG TRACK FOR A STRIKE AFTER FIRST QUARTER.

>> SO MOST OF THE CHANGE THAT WE SEEK TO SEE NUMBER TWO PERIOD IS THAT YOU CAN PUT STRUCT RIGHT AFTER IT AND THEN YOU SHOULD WRITE IN THE QUOTATION YOU COULD ADD IN THE FOURTH QUARTER AFTER YOUR END AND REPLACE WITH AND PUT A QUOTATIONS QUARTERLY NO IN THERE THAT YOU CAN'T TOUCH THAT ONE IN THAT SENSE BECAUSE OF HOW IT COULD BE INTERPRETED

. >> I THINK IT'S LIKE WHEN THEY STATED THAT THIS HAS TO BE A YEAR OF CALENDAR YEAR REPORT AND TIME IS GOING TO BE REPORTED.

IT IS AT THE END OF WHAT WE WANT. FINALLY WE TRIED TO MAKE A NUMBER SUBSEQUENT POLICY AND COVER THAT. WELL WE GIVE YOU DID ALREADY MAKE A POLICY THAT IMPACTED THE FOURTH POINT HAD TO COME TO THE FOURTH QUARTER BUT THAT SHOULD BE ANOTHER. WELL THEN THAT SHOULD BE ANOTHER POLICY, NOT THIS THESE

ARE NOT DATED. >> YES, BUT IT SAYS TRACK BY CALENDAR YEAR.

SO EACH QUARTER WOULD BE CUMULATIVE ANNUALLY AND PUT IN THE LARGER ORDER.

RIGHT. YOU WANT TO DO THAT? NO.

WELL AMENDED TO SAY REPORTED ANNUALLY AND EACH QUARTER EACH QUARTER AND ANNUALLY BECAUSE I MEAN DR. REID JUST DOESN'T INTERPRET LIKE YOU NEED AN ANNUAL REPORT.

YOU NEVER GET AN ANNUAL REPORT WHICH IS I THINK THE SPIRIT OF THE LAW THAT YOU NEED TO GIVE IN AND MOTOR WHATSAPP WHEN YOU'RE MAKING ABOUT A MOTION TO MAKE NOISE AND I READ AMENDED

TO SAY REPORTED QUARTERLY AND WITH AN ANNUAL REPORT. >> SO MAYBE EVERYTHING STRIKE AFTER IN THE FIRST QUARTER AFTER YOU HEAR IT AND REPLACE WITH QUARTERLY AN ANNUAL REPORT WILL LET YOU GET THAT AND THEN MAKE ABOUT THE SECOND SECOND THAT YOU KNOW ABOUT DAVID

NELSON YOU WANT. >> WELL IF YOU WANT THE WORD QUARTERLY ANNUALLY OR IF YOU WANT QUARTERLY AND THEN ANNUAL YOU KNOW A SUMMARY HAD YOU WHENEVER YOU WANT.

ONE CHUNK OF ANNUAL REPORTS ALTHOUGH WE MIGHT BE GETTING GOOD NOTE FOR QUARTERLY REPORTS WE WANT ONE SHOW AND SAY WHAT THE LITERAL WAS FOR THE WHOLE DEAL.

SUMMARIZE. >> YES. SO.

[02:05:01]

>> NO, NOBODY'S HANDS UP FOR THIS AWARD NUMBER. RIGHT.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR I NEVSKY I THINK EVERY YEAR I SPENT I SAW THE MOTION CARRIES A ZERO.

MR. GUY IT'S A MEETING. ALL RIGHT. SO NOW THAT THE ORIGINAL MOTION GOES AWAY BECAUSE IT'S WHAT'S INCLUDED THE ORIGINAL MOTION PLUS AN ADDITIONAL STATEMENT

RIGHT NOW, DR. ROBI, IT'S YOU'RE READY. >> SPEAK.

YES. CAN I. CAN I SEE THAT SECTION AGAIN NUMBER ONE? OKAY. I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE REASON OR WHAT. THERE MUST BE A REASON BUT I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT ON NUMBER 1 G THAT THAT IS STILL THE WILL AND THE INTENT OF THE BOARD.

>> I KNOW I MET DAVID AND EARL MAYBE SO I DON'T THINK THE BOARD EVER VOTED ON THAT.

>> I THINK ON DR. MOSS YES. STARTED DOING THAT AND I KNOW I MEAN IN THE INTEREST TRANSPARENCY YOU HAD EVERYTHING POSTED TO THE DOWNSIDE AND THE PERSON THAT ACTUALLY REQUESTED IT IS THE ONE ENDS UP PAYING MONEY AND EVERYBODY ELSE GET IT FOR FREE.

SO YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH THAT BECOMES AN ISSUE OR NOT.

DAVID RAPTURE. >> I DON'T KNOW HOW THIS GOT TO BE BUT I THINK IT'S A GOOD

THING. >> I THINK I THINK EVERYONE SHOULD SEE THE RESPONSES.

DR. RODRIGUEZ NO, I'M FINE. >> WITH IT. I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT PIECE BECAUSE I HAD HEARD VARIOUS THINGS AROUND IT. I DON'T KNOW THAT IT'S SOMETHING THAT OTHER DISTRICTS ARE DOING. I HAVEN'T HEARD MUCH IN THE WAY OF COMPLAINT AROUND IT. YOU KNOW, IN TERMS OF THOSE THAT PAY AND THOSE THAT THAT DON'T PAY I KNOW THERE WERE SOME BEFORE THAT. MR. FOSTER IT SHARED WITH ME BUT I HAVEN'T HEARD ANYTHING, YOU KNOW, RECENTLY OR AROUND IT AND I DON'T KNOW.

I DIDN'T KNOW THE INTENT BEHIND IT'S FINE. I WAS JUST CLARIFYING FOR MYSELF WHETHER THAT'S A PRACTICE WHAT WOULD BE A POLICY NOW SO THAT SO THAT'S A POLICY

THAT THAT IS WHAT'S INTENDED. THAT'S YEAH. >> I'M GOING TO MAKE IT CLEAR EVERYBODY LISTENING OR WATCHING THIS IS A DIFFERENT PERSON READING ON POLICIES AND THEY DON'T BECOME EFFECTIVE UNTIL YOU HAD FREE. ALL RIGHT.

NOW RON RESULTS JUST YES. I CAN JUST I'M ONLY 16 IN REFERENCE TO DR. RODRIGUEZ JUST

SAID LETTER JANE. >> DO WE HAVE TO SAYS POST ALL RESPONSES? DO I HAVE TO SAY PER PURPLE LAWS OR DO WE HAVE TO CLARIFY ANYTHING? NO, WE DON'T POST ALL OF ESPECIALLY A THEY HAVE ANY PRIVATE INFORMATION AND SO

SHOULD WE PUT SOMETHING THERE THAT SAYS ONE? >> COULD YOU HELP ME WITH THIS? YOU KNOW, I'M SAYING YES BECAUSE IT SAYS ALL RESPONSIVE. RIGHT.

BECAUSE WHAT HAPPENS IS ON A CHART IT WILL DISPLAY AND I THINK JENNIFER WAS GOING TO MAKE A FURTHER CLARIFICATION AFTER ONE OF THOSE REPORTS THAT WERE GIVEN.

IN OTHER WORDS, THAT RESPONSE IS EXACTLY 5 HER. I THE PUBLIC KNOWS IT'S NOT THERE OR HIDING IT GIVES IT TO INTO EDUCATION RECORD OF THE STUDENT.

SO EXEMPT UNDER FIRM THAT I POSTED YOU KNOW, POST RESPONSES BUT THERE'S BOUND TO BE EXAMINED I REFERRED ABOUT DOWN UNDER THE SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION.

YOU'RE RIGHT ABOUT THAT. ANY INFORMATION THAT IS PRIVATE? THAT'S A GOOD POINT. AND IT IS A GOOD POINT. YOU CAN'T PUT EVERYTHING RIGHT.

SO JUST TO BE TOTALLY ACCURATE POLICIES. >> YES.

GIVEN HER COLOR ABOUT HER QUALITY RESULTS. NO.

BECAUSE THE REFORMS THAT WILL BE POSTED WILL BE LIKE WHEN YOU SAY EXAM PAPER FOR EXAMPLE, JENNIFER. SO THERE WILL BE RESPONSE THERE.

GO. RAFI, BEFORE WE GO ON TO RESULTS I HAVEN'T READ A WORD

[02:10:04]

I DON'T THINK I DON'T HAVE THOSE WITH ME. AND I MEAN I'M AVAILABLE FOR A

SECOND. >> WHEN YOU GO THROUGH YOUR SECOND THIRD BECAUSE WE'LL HAVE TO INCORPORATE IN A NUMBER AND STUFF ON THIS. DO YOU WANT TO JUST SEND IT OUT FOR YOU ALL TO READ? I MEAN WE HAD IT AT WE SEND IT TO YOU.

WELL, HOW DO YOU WANT ME TO IF WE TAKE ANY ACTION ON THE WAY IT WAS PRESENTED TO US, IT SAID

WAIT AND BRING IT BACK TO THE POLICY COMMITTEE. >> I JUST MENTIONED THAT.

DO YOU GUYS WANT TO DO YOU WANT TO GO OUT AND GIVE A RECOMMENDATION FOR THE BOARD

FOR DAVID? >> THANK YOU. I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE HAVE THE POLICY REALLY IS GOING TO HAVE TO MEET TO CLEAN ALL THIS UP ALL THE CHANGES THAT HAVE BEEN MADE BEFORE THE SECOND READING AND I AND WE'VE WE'VE ENDEAVORED TO ALWAYS INCLUDE ANY MOTIONS WITH A SITE SO I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE DO THAT TO PREPARE FOR THE SECOND READING AS PART OF THE POLICY COMMITTEE'S MANDATE. I JUST FIGURED THIS OUT BEFORE

I CAME BACK. I JUST I GET GOOD MEMORY. >> ALL RIGHT.

NOW DAVID, YOU WANTED TO SPEAK ON THE RESULTS THAT I WAS JUST GOING TO POINT OUT WHERE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PASS RATE IS GONNA HAVE TO UPDATE THIS BECAUSE THIS IS A LITTLE DATED

NOW. >> BUT THE INTENT WAS THAT ALL OF THE RUBRICS THAT WE USED FOR THE SUPERINTENDENT'S EVALUATION WILL BE DISPLAYED IN IN THIS SECTION.

THOSE ARE THE RESULTS. THE SAME RESULTS WE HOLD THE SUPERINTENDENT TOO WOULD BE THE RESULTS THAT WOULD BE IN THIS SECTION. SO WE JUST NEED TO UPDATE IT

BEFORE THE SECOND READING. >> DAVID, WHEN YOU SAID THE TWO MEN YOU ALSO GOT A BLAND SOMETHING ABOUT IT WAS THAT ALREADY SPENT EARLY SO THAT YOU KNOW PEOPLE WHO ARE LOOKING AT THIS STAGE KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THESE WHAT WHAT ARE THESE? WHAT ARE RESULTS EXPECTED IN

POLICY TYPE RESULTS THAT YOU GUYS PLANNED SOMETHING ABOUT? >> I THINK THAT'S A GREAT SUGGESTION. I THINK THE COMMITTEE WHEN WE GET TOGETHER FIRST BEFORE THE SECOND READING WE SHOULD PUT SOME KIND OF AN EXPLANATION AHEAD OF THIS SO THAT IT'S MORE UNDERSTAND. I COULD SEE REALLY GOOD SUGGESTION.

DAVID FARM AND OTHER BOARD MEMBERS. >> SO WE OBVIOUSLY NEED A WE'LL JUST FINISHED READING ONE AND NOBODY IS GOING TO BE COMPLETE BEFORE WE CAN GET A SECOND READING AND WE'RE GETTING OBVIOUSLY INTO THE HOLIDAY. DO YOU THINK IT'S REALISTIC TO THAT WE WOULD HAVE A SECOND MEETING PROBABLY IN JANUARY AS OPPOSED TO LATER THIS MONTH BECAUSE A LOT OF PEOPLE PROBABLY ARE GOING TO HAVE OTHER COMMITMENTS.

WAIT, WHAT? WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS? >> WELL, MY THOUGHTS ARE THAT THE SECOND READING SHOULD INCLUDE THE NEW BOARD MEMBERS. SO THAT WE SHOULD DO IT IN

JANUARY. >> ANYBODY OPPOSED TO THAT? ALL RIGHT.

SO THEN YOU AND YOUR COMMITTEE CAN RECONVENE AND THEN AFTER THAT WE'LL SET A DATE FOR THE SECOND READING OR ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS REGARDING THE WHAT

WE'VE COVERED TODAY. >> IMPRESSIVE GUYS. >> RELATION THAT I THROUGH I'M GOING TO PASS THE GAVEL TO MY VISE CHAIR VISE CHAIR BECAUSE SCHUMER ON TO THE ACTION ITEM

[Nomination of the SCSBA Champions for Public Education Award ]

>> I KNEW THAT THE DUPAGE COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION SUPPORT THE NOMINATION OF CATHERINE DONALDSON FOR THE SOUTH CAROLINA SCHOOL BOARD ASSOCIATION CHAMPIONS FOR

[02:15:04]

PUBLIC EDUCATION AWARD. >> SECOND, MR. EARL CAMPBELL SECONDED.

ANY DISCUSSION? YES, MADAM VISE RIDES. I HAVE NOMINATED CATHERINE DONALDSON FOR THIS AWARD BECAUSE I THINK SHE HAS CONTRIBUTED A GREAT DEAL TO PUBLIC EDUCATION FOR OUR CHILDREN FOR COUNTY AND MANY OF YOU KNOW THIS BUT SOME DOUBT. SO I JUST GOING TO READ PART OF THE DOCUMENT THAT I'M SUBMITTING OR THAT THE BOARD WILL SUBMIT TO THE SOUTH CAROLINA SCHOOL BOARD FOR THIS NOMINATION. THE REAL CATHERINE DONALDSON RECOGNIZED THAT THE BEAUFORT COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT'S YOUNGEST STUDENTS STUDENTS IN PREKINDERGARTEN THROUGH SECOND GRADE WERE SENT HOME WITHOUT TECHNOLOGY DEVICES TO USE FOR REMOTE LEARNING.

I MADE THE CORONA VIRUS PANDEMIC. DONALDSON ORGANIZED A FUNDRAISER ONLINE CALLED KINDLES FOR KIDS A GRASSROOTS GO ON ME EFFORT TO RAISE FUNDS TO PURCHASE AND DISTRIBUTE AN AMAZON FIRE SEVEN 16 GIGABYTE KINDLE THAT EVERY YOUNG STUDENT IN NEED AT TWELVE ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS COUNTYWIDE THE DEVICES COST APPROXIMATELY FIFTY FIVE DOLLARS EACH WITH TAX SHIPPING . SINCE THAT INITIATIVE RAISED TWENTY EIGHT THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED TWENTY NINE DOLLARS THROUGH THE END OF NOVEMBER TWENTY TWENTY HUNDREDS OF DEVICES HAVE BEEN DISTRIBUTED THROUGH THE SCHOOL PRINCIPALS AT EVERY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL CHILD ONLINE. IN ADDITION, A LOCAL INTERNET PROVIDER COMMITTED TO PROVIDE FREE INTERNET THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY FOR EVERY STUDENT BY DONALDSON RECOGNIZE EVERY STUDENT IN THE FEE COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS DESERVES THE OPPORTUNITY FOR QUALITY EDUCATION AND HER EFFORTS HAVE MADE A DIFFERENCE FOR MANY

YOUNG STUDENTS AND THE ENTIRE SCHOOL DISTRICT. >> BEAUFORT COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT IS NOW PROVIDING DEVICES FOR ALL STUDENTS IN KINDERGARTEN THROUGH 12TH

GRADE. >> NO FURTHER PROMISE ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? MR. SMITH MY QUESTION WAS DO WE KNOW ARE THERE ANY OTHER PEOPLE IN A DISTRICT THAT HAD DONE

SOME MAYBE SIMILAR SIMILAR ACTS BEFORE WE VOTE ON THIS TONIGHT? >> CARLA, I I DON'T SEE ANYBODY

RAISING YOUR HAND TO FIND THAT MISTAKE YET. >> I MEAN WE'VE GOT OUR EYE READERS CAN TELL US THAT. WELL. I THINK I WAS RECOGNIZED.

SO MR. SMITH, I KNOW THAT WE WERE SENT AN E-MAIL THAT SAID ANY ONE OF US COULD NOMINATE ANYBODY THAT WE CHOSE. SO I FEEL THIS IS OF A POSITIVE NOMINATION.

IT WAS A RESPONSE TO AN URGENT NEED. WAS AN OVERWHELMING TIRE TIRE.

COUNTY RESPONSE AND SO. SO I SUPPORT THIS WISNIEWSKI THANK YOU, MADAM VISE CHAIR.

>> YEAH, I JUST I KNOW I RESPONDED TO THAT EMAIL ABOUT CATHERINE DONALDSON'S NOMINATION BUT I JUST WANTED TO ECHO MY SUPPORT OF THE NOMINATION.

KATHERINE IS A TREMENDOUS SUPPORTER. THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS HAS A GREAT HEART AND REALLY STEPPED UP IMMEDIATELY WHEN SHE RECOGNIZED THAT THERE WAS A NEED AND SOMETHING THAT NEEDED TO BE DONE. AND SHE REALLY HIT THE GROUND RUNNING. AND IT WAS WONDERFUL TO SEE IT PLAY OUT ON SOCIAL MEDIA AND THINGS LIKE THAT TO SEE THOSE HAPPY KIDS GETTING THEIR DEVICES.

SO I DEFINITELY WHOLEHEARTEDLY SUPPORT THE NOMINATION. >> THANK YOU.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS AT THIS POINT? I THINK WE'RE READY TO VOTE.

I MAY END UP JUST CAME BACK AFTER WILLIAM, OK. I MEAN JUST TO ADDRESS MRS. FLETCHER WAS I MEAN I NEVER PROMISED A POINT. I WOULD JUST LIKE I SAID, I WAS JUST WONDERING WHAT THEY DID. THEY WOULD LOOK AT ANY AND ANY OTHER ONE IN THE DISTRICT.

YES. THIS IS IT IS A GREAT ATTRIBUTE.

AND SHE DID SHE DID DO A LOT AND I WAS JUST ONE WAS THEY WERE THE ANY ONE EYES WERE THEY ANY SIMILAR LIKE IT THAT MAYBE THE SENIOR STAFF ME KNEW ABOUT ORDERS TO CONTINUE MAY KNOW ABOUT THAT THEY WANT TO INFORM US OF THAT. THAT WAS ON THE QUESTION AND OUR QUESTION WAS WHICH TOWARD DOCTOR REALLY DIRECTED TO DR. RODRIGUEZ?

[02:20:01]

,THIS HAS BEEN A REMARKABLE EFFORT. >> THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. MY SON IN LAW STATES I KNOW THAT IF YOU FOUR COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION SUPPORT THE NOMINATION OF KATHERINE DONALDSON FOR THE SC SBA CHAMPIONS FOR PUBLIC EDUCATION FOR VOTING IS OPEN RIGHT.

WHY IS THE THE MOTION CARRIES A YES 8 ZERO. >> THANK YOU.

SO I'M GOING TO AS A NEXT STEPS. THIS HAS TO BE SUBMITTED BY SEPTEMBER DECEMBER FOR ELECTRONICALLY THE SOUTH CAROLINA FOOTBALL ASSOCIATION.

SO I WILL SUBMIT THE DOCUMENTS THAT YOU'VE BEEN GIVEN AND YOUR DOCS AND THEN IN ADDITION I'M GOING TO ADD THE PROMOTION WHAT THE MOTION WAS AND OTHER IT HERE UNANIMOUSLY 8 0 WITH THREE MEMBERS ABSENT. SO THEY HAVE ALL THAT INFORMATION.

ANYBODY HAVE ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS OR REGARDING THE SUBMISSION?

THANK YOU. >> OH, YOU'RE VERY WELCOME. I THINK IT'S A WELL-DESERVED AWARD AND I THINK WE NEED TO RECOGNIZE SOME POSITIVE THINGS IN OUR DISTRICT.

THERE WAS A GREAT, GREAT THING THAT THOMPSON DID. SO WE HAVE A MOTION TO AGREE TO CAMPBELL SECOND STEP A SECOND. OK. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR.

I

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.