School Committee - March 04, 2023
School Committee, 3/4/23 - Meeting Summary
Date: 3/4/23
Type: School Committee
Source: https://tv.sharontv.com/internetchannel/show/14102?site=2
Generated: September 13, 2025 at 09:50 PM
AI Model: Perplexity
- Meeting Metadata
- Date: March 4, 2025
- Committee: Sharon School Committee
- Members Present: Avi Shemtov (Chair), Dan Newman (Vice Chair), Allan Motenko (Secretary), Jeremy Kay, Georgeann Lewis, Julie Rowe, Adam Shain
- Superintendent Present: Dr. Peter Botelho
- Meeting Focus: FY25 Operating Budget discussions with emphasis on meeting a 3.12% budget increase cap amid constrained funding[1][2].
- Agenda Overview
- Presentation of FY25 budget context and options by Dr. Botelho.
- Discussion of instructional and administrative personnel cuts to meet budget targets.
- Examination of reinstating kindergarten fees and possible new activity/club fees.
- Public comments from teachers and community stakeholders.
- Deliberations on balancing educational priorities and financial constraints.
- Motion to enter executive session for collective bargaining discussion at meeting end[1][2].
- Major Discussions
| Topic | Avi | Alan | Julie | Jeremy | Georgeann | Adam | Dan |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Budget Challenges and Cuts Overview | Emphasized sensitivity, urged mindful tone | Asked about AP class impacts | Supported reinstating full K fees and balancing instructional/support positions | Prioritized counselors, APs, instructional staff | Stressed coordinator importance, wary of full K fee reinstatement | Advocated cutting admin deeply, preserving teachers and counselors | Focused on balancing manageable caseloads and admin support |
| Combining Administrative Positions | Urged concrete proposals, stressed tough choices | Clarified cuts impacting AP courses | Proposed flexibility in coaching vs wellness | Supported student support roles | Noted complexity of administrative sharing | Favored reorganizing coordinators to teach with stipends | Asked about options mixing guidance cuts and coverage |
| Cutting Assistant Principals and Coordinators | Opened discussion on job impacts | Concerned about elementary AP and math specialists’ cuts | Advocated retaining coordinators and phased K fee reinstatement | Emphasized maintaining these support roles | Supported coordinators as instructional leaders | Proposed partial restorations funded by fees | Expressed tradeoffs in retaining admin roles vs workloads |
| Preserving Counselors and Student Support | Highlighted counselor caseload concerns | - | Supported counselors strongly | Emphasized minimizing harm to students | Supported maintaining counselors | Advocated protecting counselors from cuts | Concurred on high counselor caseload challenges |
| Arts, Music, and Librarian Positions | Opposed heavy cuts to arts/music | - | Supported preserving instrumental music | Aligned with preserving instructional staff | Pushed back against removing arts/music/librarians | Highlighted importance for well-rounded education | - |
| Kindergarten Fee Reinstatement | Noted contentious but necessary | - | Supported reinstating full fee, questioned state funding impact | - | Wary of raising fees too high | Supported full K fee reinstatement and fee-based restorations | Discussed fee structure and tradeoffs |
| General Budget Balancing Philosophy | Urged decisive budget vote soon | Sought clarity on impacts | Proposed budget spreadsheets to visualize trade-offs | Focused on educator-first perspective | Called for caution and balance | Emphasized honest trade-offs with minimal student impact | Highlighted challenges of balancing caseloads and admin |
- Non-contributing members in topical discussions: Allan Motenko (Secretary)[1][2].
- Votes
- Motion to enter executive session pursuant to Massachusetts General Law for collective bargaining strategy: Passed unanimously 7-0 (Julie Rowe, Dan Newman, Veronica—unnamed in summary, Adam Shain, Avi Shemtov, and two others)[2].
- Presentations
- Dr. Peter Botelho: Provided FY25 budget context, outlined enrollment and contractual cost pressures, proposed budget increase options from 5.97% level service to 3.12% target cuts totaling $1.5 million; discussed personnel reductions in administration and instruction; emphasized difficulty and necessity of cuts; explained proposed kindergarten fee reinstatement as partial, temporary; discussed possible funding “addbacks” dependent on town/state support[1][2].
- Teacher speakers (Mary Belinky, Tina Kelly, Nicole Carroll, Shana Max, Jennifer McCullough): Highlighted critical role of coordinators, counselors; warned against heavy cuts; expressed workload and student impact concerns; opposed full K fee reinstatement though acknowledged fiscal challenges[2].
- Community members (Philip King, Charlotte Hogan, Victor Dubinsky): Voiced concerns on assistant principal and counselor cuts; discussed impact on special education and mental health supports; some endorsed reinstating K fees to preserve staff[2].
- Action Items
- Committee to finalize a manageable 3.12% baseline FY25 budget incorporating agreed cuts across administration and instruction.
- Explore partial restorations (“addbacks”) contingent on additional town or state funding.
- Further develop budget worksheets visualizing fee reinstatement trade-offs and staffing impacts.
- Consider fee structures including kindergarten and extracurricular clubs to improve fiscal flexibility.
- Maintain robust monitoring of special education metrics and counselor caseloads.
- Prepare for upcoming budget vote and finalize collective bargaining negotiations in executive session[1][2].
- Deferred Items
- Specific detailed fee structures for clubs and activities under further review; ongoing discussions anticipated post-May Town Meeting.
- Final decisions on exact staffing and coordinator role configurations pending further analysis and input.
- Detailed AP course impact clarifications to be addressed in subsequent budget discussions[2][7].
- Appendices
- Full voting record on executive session motion: 7-0 unanimous.
- Sample direct quotes from committee and speakers:
- Avi Shemtov: “This is the hard part. You are all going to make a choice to either push a cut that Dr. Botelho doesn’t believe in or back a cut that he does… this is what we got to do.”
- Mary Belinky: “We are losing that expertise… We should think about maybe… making sure we could keep this teacher around by maybe finding a new position for her.”
- Dan Newman: “If it’s between administrative layers and our teachers, I prioritize teachers first.”
- Emily Mark (teacher): “If there’s a counselor cut… they would go over their contractual number… already an extremely large number… extremely concerning.”
- Shana Max: “I argue for the coordinators… because it allows me to better benefit my students.”[2]
Document Metadata
- Original Transcript Length: 208,429 characters
- Summary Word Count: 950 words
- Compression Ratio: 27.6:1
- Transcript File:
School-Committee_3-4-23_aeaf1692.wav
Transcript and Video
Welcome to the March 4th meeting of the Sharon School Committee.
This meeting will be conducted remotely over Zoom. Attendance by Board and Commission members. Remote attendance shall count towards a quorum.
The meeting will be broadcast live and recorded by Sharon TV.
If you would like to enable your webcam, your image, and background, broadcast with or without sound.
Tonight we are here specifically to discuss the FY25 operating budget.
Included in that we'll discuss the FY25 district fees.
There will be an open forum opportunity for the public following our discussion.
That allows us to hear from the public after this discussion.
And then again Wednesday before our discussion prior to a vote, hopefully, that would take place on Wednesday.
Before I turn it over to Dr. Botello to begin presenting and sort of start off the discussion around the budget with the committee, I do just want to ask that the committee keep this in mind and certainly the public as well during the portion of the meeting where the public can speak.
That, you know, the spot the district finds itself in obviously has us discussing cuts that all of us would rather not make. And some of these cuts have jobs that are associated with them.
And those jobs have people that are associated with them.
Also, some expenses that we discuss in our district are expenses that affect students in our district, some more than others. And so I would just like to remind people to please, well, I can't control what people do or say, certainly with the public and also with the elected members of the school committee.
So I would just ask that we all be very mindful in the rhetoric that we use, as well as the tone that these are deeply sensitive subjects and it's our responsibility to discuss them and to come to a conclusion.
But it is, I think, just really important that we keep in mind that some of these cuts are extremely painful for people whose livelihood and job are affected and also for students whose services, education, you know, sometimes, you know, quality of school life are affected.
And so let's just make sure that we're understanding that and keeping that in mind.
Fair to say. Fair to say. All right.
All right.
With that, I'll turn it over to you, Dr. Patel. Thank you, Avi.
I just want to start off with just a little bit of a intro and about the process.
So we came into this budget seat season with a current understanding that increase in state funds for education was going to be much less so than they has been in the last several years.
And that many towns, 88, approximately, including ourselves, were put into a, were designated as minimum aid districts.
Again, really lessening the state aid funds that we have been getting over the last several years.
In addition, over the last two years, there's been a 20%, approximately a 20% increase in private out of district tuitions rates.
So even the same kids getting the same services in the same schools is costing 20% more than previous years because of a dramatic increase of 14% last year, which we still feel every year.
And then an additional almost 5% increase this year. In addition, we settled a fair but significant SDA contract, knowing that our teachers, who are the backbone of our system, you know, went without significant raises for a period of time.
And that there was a push from throughout the state to make sure that we could compensate them competitively and fairly. And we avoided, we went through a good collaborative process for that and settled on an agreement, avoiding some of the horrible strikes and discourse that have gone on throughout the state and settling for a 10.5% over three years, which is less than these districts that have gone through all that, you know, that situation.
And so, you know, that is part of the picture we are.
So we are in the same boat as many districts in the state. I've been talking to colleagues throughout the region about, you know, a tough budget year for sure. So I started off, you know, by, as we continue to look to see if additional state funds would be coming in.
I began by proposing a 5.97% increase in order to reach a really a level service, as well as fulfill a couple of mandated special education positions that are necessary based upon the IEPs of our students.
Knowing that, you know, knowing that, you know, that wasn't going to be, be able to be fully supported by the town as much as they might like to, I put forth what was, what was in the best interest of the district.
Last week, you know, as we look to prepare for our FinCon meeting, I put forth a list of potential cuts to instructional staff that, if taken in its entirety, would be able to reach that 3.12.
In no way did I see that as the end of the process.
That's, this is a process that I've gone through in other districts as well, but it was showing, you know, the depth of cuts and the types of cuts that would be necessary.
As, you know, as I expected to do and as directed by the committee, I'm coming back today with a subset of those cuts that still should be or need to be considered if we stay at the 3.12 level, but also a series of pretty, very deep non-teaching administration cuts in other like positions in order to give us some options for how we reach a 3.12%
increase for this year.
I'm still hopeful that, you know, over the course of the next several weeks and months, that we will have some improvements in, you know, the funding that we're looking to, because I do believe that any combination of cuts to reach 3.12 are really going to put the district in a very, very difficult place to provide the type of service that we want for our kids.
But so this is what we'll be looking at today is, again, first of all, looking at some of those administration cuts and how much they would result in savings, then looking at several, a couple of options for a combination of administration and teaching cuts, and then allowing the committee and the community to discuss.
And then we may begin some discussions today based on if we were able to add certain positions back, you know, talking about which positions I would recommend, as well as which positions the committee would like to discuss.
So I'll move on to present those, Javi, is that?
Yes, please.
Jane, are you able to?
Yes, I should be. It's probably not going to be an Excel.
It will be a Google Sheet, but I think it's everything you needed.
So let me just screen share, and you tell me if I'm on the right thing, Peter.
I'm assuming I'm sharing the right thing. Yeah, we can start with the budget summary part.
Okay.
Did I see that?
I mean, actually, want me to do it, Jane? Yeah.
Yeah. Let me see.
Because I'm not sure we're talking about the same. Okay.
SPEAKER_UNKNOWN: Okay. SPEAKER_UNKNOWN: Okay.
Right.
Okay.
So, again, as we discussed, is everyone seeing that fine?
Yep.
I'm seeing it. Okay. Okay.
As we discussed, the FY24 approved budget was a little over $52 million.
My recommended budget was at $55,525,000.
This was $1,493,000 above the priorities target budget.
So next, as we look at a kind of a menu of potential reductions that include a subset of the cuts that were, the teaching cuts that were gone over last week, as well as a range of administration potential cuts.
I'm going to first just scroll down a little bit.
Sorry.
Peter, would you mind making that just a little bit bigger to read?
Yep. Thank you.
Is that good or bigger?
If you don't mind a little bit bigger, that would be great.
Right.
Yeah.
All right. So below here is a subset of the teaching cuts that I went over on last Wednesday.
So some of them, based upon our discussions, have been taken out, but then a majority of them, or about half of them, are there for consideration as we piece together a way to bridge that $1.5 million gap. Some of the reductions, as we look, we really kind of, you know, had to look at every possible area in administration.
And I would say that there's no way that all of these cuts happening at once would be in the interest of the district, just like there's no way that the full range of instructional cuts that I went over would be in the interest of the district, even in a worst case scenario.
So I think a combination is definitely necessary with the hope that we will get to increase funding over the next several weeks and months.
So one is to go back to our model of having a position at the high school that is part athletic director and part assistant principal.
So that would include, you know, reducing an assistant principal and an athletic director and hiring someone as a part-time athletic director, part-time assistant principal.
The second is, again, kind of a way to combine positions and save funds in order to meet the gap.
It would be to reduce the assistant superintendent position of equity engagement, as well as RIF, the director of curriculum instruction position, and fill that with a position that was very similar to one that we've had in the past year, an assistant superintendent of either teaching and learning or curriculum and administration that would have a combination of curriculum instruction leadership, as well as other assistant superintendent administration position responsibilities.
The next one is to add a supervisor of buildings and grounds and reduce our director of facilities position, as well as a maintenance position for a savings of approximately $84,000.
Another one is a couple of possibilities to reduce in the area of counseling and academic affairs.
One is to reduce the dean of academic affairs and fill it with a head of school counseling for a considerable savings.
The other one is to reduce the guidance admin assistant position that is currently vacant, reduce the school's counselor, and partially reduce an administrative assistant at the high school in order to come up again with some considerable savings in that area while maintaining the dean of academic affairs position.
Next one is to consider going from three to two elementary assistant principals slash special education administrators.
And so that would be that we would share two of those across three buildings.
We would also look to add some stipends for teachers so that if both the principal and assistant principal slash special education administrator was out, they could step up in and help provide leadership in those cases. The next positions, as I talked about before, which are really, really critical to our district, are savings that would be would be would occur by savings and funds that would occur by reducing element coordinator positions, both at the elementary and secondary level.
And then so those are all of the admin type positions.
Then again, the instructional positions include a high school special education lead teacher, which we actually did find out through some changes in enrollment that this actually is possible without hurting services.
So this is one you will see that will definitely be on my list because because of enrollment numbers, it is able to be done and not hurt students at all next year. It might need to be added in the future, but we can do without it for next year.
But then also looking at social studies, science, Spanish, as well as a partial wellness, reading and math specialists at the middle school level and elementary math specialists, partial librarians, instrumental music at the in the upper elementary grades, visual arts and ELA and math at the high school.
And so all those positions for consideration, too.
So this combination of teaching and administration positions are, you know, a combination of these are what will be necessary in order to bridge the gap with that the priorities committee is set.
Whenever whichever way we take it, it's going to be challenging for the district.
And so we'll be looking to hope for additional funding.
And in the interim, put forth a proposal that the school committee can then turn into its final proposal that will have the least negative impact while knowing that any situation is going to be detrimental for the following year.
So I can pause there.
If I don't know if you want me to continue on or if you want me to questions here.
I think we can stop and take.
Questions and comments, ideas from the table.
So to the members of the committee, the and again, just a reminder to the members of the public, the opportunity to speak is going to be after the committee's discussion tonight as it's agended.
So members of the committee, there's a menu of reductions here. I think, you know, this is a very important part of the or an important time in the timeline of our budget discussions.
This is an opportunity for all of us to sort of. Not sort of to do the work here tonight to weigh in, to take some control.
And I think we're going to be able to talk to the committee members of the committee members. And so I do want to encourage the committee members to offer suggestions to express their feelings, to express what they're hearing from people in the public. So Sean, I'll call you first.
I think you.
I'm sorry.
I'm just working on two screens today.
Uh, can you hear me?
We can hear you. You can.
Okay.
All right. I'm just working on two screens. So pardon me for a second.
Can, can you elaborate a little bit more, Dr. Patello regarding the, so my understanding is we have three positions right now, two that you've listed, the assistant superintendent of, uh, equity and engagement, the director of curriculum and instruction, right?
Two of those positions you would combine to add, to create a new position called the assistant superintendent of teaching and learning.
Is that, is that correct?
Yeah.
Yes.
Or, or it might be an assistant superintendent of curriculum and instruction administration, but it's something along those lines. Yes.
So, so then where does the director of equity and inclusion fall within that? I feel like those three kind of prongs are very similar and have a lot of overlap.
So is the director of equity and inclusion part of this conversation?
Or are we just talking about the assistant superintendent of equity and engagement director of curriculum instruction?
Is there any thought to add, um, um, that third prong and really look at how else we can encompass, um, equity work within the superintendents, um, assistant superintendent of teaching and learning or curriculum and instruction?
I guess.
I guess I, I see the equity, um, the director of equity, diversity, equity, inclusion, kind of being overarching and, um, connecting with all of our departments.
Um, and that the, the, the, the, the, the, the typical assistant superintendent for, you know, teaching and learning or curriculum instruction, um, really is overseeing curriculum instruction, but also is doing some of the, you know, kind of major, um, you know, kind of administration work, um, including, um, that's, that's critical.
So that's the reason I saw the, the, those, those, those two as kind of combined is, um, along with, you know, with the position above the athletic director and assistant principal combining it's supposed to, um, so this is, this would be my, you know, recommendation on a combination that I think would best serve the district if, if necessary.
Okay.
Thank you. Thank you. And then my second question, and I have a bit, um, of reserve on this one is the elimination of the elementary assistant principal, special ed admin, knowing that our special ed, the half of the job that's being done right now, special ed wise. And I'd love to hear from Jessica Murphy, if at all possible, knowing that they're taking care of IEPs and 504s and compliance, um, and circuit and circuit breaker and funding and all of that. Um, I, I, I, I'm concerned about the course, the, the workload, um, special ed wise, if we were to take away one of those positions, let alone, um, the current nature of the needs of our kids in elementary schools, um, behaviorally, socially, and emotionally, um, to have a 0.5 assistant principal is already a stretch.
Um, and many, many districts are moving away from that and hiring full-time assistant principals and really looking to, um, split that special ed admin job across schools.
I, I have concern, great concern, um, about taking one away, um, and sharing it between our three schools, which have very, very unique needs, um, in regards to their populations, um, and just school culture.
So I kind of wanted to.
So I can kind of speak first just about the general picture.
And then, um, if anyone else wants to elaborate to Jessica or someone, they, they can.
I think, um, the, you know, obviously, yeah, this is not a cut that we would, uh, want to do in, in, in normal times.
Um, uh, the way we would see this is, is really that, that person, um, in, in, you know, potentially.
You know, being shared, uh, uh, primarily, uh, across our two smaller schools of cottage and, um, east would really serve, you know, strictly as a special education administrator.
Um, you know, um, you know, chipping in, you know, as far as going to, you know, performances and, and, you know, maybe, you know, uh, popping into the lunchroom and, and other things as well as being a core part of the, uh, leadership at faculty meetings and such. But their primary responsibility would be, uh, you know, special education.
We know that, that really, um, there'd be a kind of a principal and, uh, you know, uh, you know, a special education administrator, uh, type leadership.
Um, if we had to stretch this way, as well as, you know, looking to have, uh, teachers, um, you know, we have some teachers who are interested in administration and, and even doing, um, internships and such. And so, um, you know, that they would, we'd be, we'd be helping, uh, as well, but it's not an ideal position.
Um, and, um, we also know that, you know, if necessary, and I know Jessica Murphy is always jumping in, uh, to support our schools.
Jessica and, um, our out of district coordinator, Mariel would be, you know, supporting as necessary as well.
Um, and it would be, you know, if we gained additional funding thing, it would be one of, certainly one of the, um, earlier positions under consideration.
For, um, reinstating.
It's interesting.
Like your, your view of it is more of the special ed lens is that they would take over. And, and for me as perhaps somebody who has been in the trenches, um, at the elementary school level, um, and, and knowing the, the capacity that's needed of an assistant principal, you know, they're, they're far more than somebody just covering the lunchroom.
Um, I mean, they really are co-running the school. So I, I guess like I, um, in this menu of reductions that, um, that really stood out to me. And I just wanted to kind of put that out there as a, uh, as a starting conversation.
Yeah, no, and I certainly understand. I mean, with these cuts we're proposing are not taken lightly. I, I was an assistant principal teacher at a pre K through eight school. So I understand they do a heck of a lot more. It's just when we're trying to make difficult decisions, um, you know, we're trying to weigh those.
Thank you.
Can I just address one?
It's Jessica Murphy. I'm sorry. Um, I wanted to add, uh, or just address, um, the piece, um, Shannon, that you said about circuit breaker and all that record stuff.
I actually do all of that. That's not done at the building level.
Um, so all the state reporting, all that, that mandated piece is all done.
I'm actually doing a short and early relief this week.
Um, so it's something that I do. That is not a piece of what any of our special ed administrators do. Okay.
But they are, they are your 504 compliance officers.
They are not.
They are not the, um, the, well, they are in conjunction with their, um, their school adjustment counselor.
The school adjustment counselor at each elementary school is responsible for the 504s.
Okay.
In conjunction with, okay.
But they still oversee that, right?
Um, each school does it a little bit differently.
Um, but ultimately 504s go through the school adjustment counselor and or nurse or whoever else it needs to.
And, um, I over, I'm the, the district wide 504 compliance officer.
And of course, but just like any other building or any other piece it's, it's done as a collective effort.
Okay. SPEAKER_UNKNOWN: Okay.
Um, and then while I, sorry, Avi, if I can, only just cause I have her on, um, the leap teacher, uh, looking at the leap teacher, there was conversation that per, um, per enrollment that could be riffed for next year.
Is that, uh. That's accurate.
Um, at the high school level, looking at the numbers of students in each grade, um, there is a grade that has, um, students in it right now.
And the students that are in it are all transitioning out of the leap program, leaving that next grade empty.
Okay.
Thank you.
You're welcome.
Thank you both so much.
Uh, Julie.
Um, so I have two.
Um, so I have two questions and, um, the first one, I'll give them both.
Um, the first one is, um, so with the ELA coordinators, if I'm reading this correctly, um, instead of having the ELA coordinator, we will have an elementary position with a facilitator stipend.
Right.
And then, um, somebody gets bumped out of those positions and that's what that bottom line means. Am I reading that correctly?
Um, yeah, what you're seeing is, so if the, if, uh, if a coordinator, say the elementary coordinator was riffed, we would save 110,000 approximately.
Um, we would then have, that person would then move to an elementary position if they stayed in the district.
Um, so there, um, no, we would save 121,000.
I'm sorry, because we would save their, um, the coordinators have a stipend as well. Um, then they would move to an elementary position if they elected to stay in the district, which would, um, would, you know, pay them their regular salary of, say, 110,000.
Um, they would, uh, we would, uh, we would ask them to be a facilitator.
So they would receive a facilitator stipend.
Um, but then because they would now be teaching instead of being acting as a coordinator, um, there would be a riff of another, um, elementary, uh, position.
So that's where that's 70,000.
So the overall savings from all those dominoes falling is 77,461.
Okay.
Thank you. And I guess I didn't ask both my questions.
Sorry.
Um, um, so yeah, this is, this is essentially what happened a few years ago.
Um, so that makes a lot of sense to me.
Um, I also wanted to say that I appreciated the discussion that Shauna brought up because that was good.
Um, I'm looking at that.
Um, I have like kind of a crazy idea, but I'm looking at that 30,000 for the half of the gym teacher.
And I'm wondering, because we're increasing like the wellness availability, can we save that 30,000 for the wellness PE teacher?
Can we save that and, um, allow juniors and seniors or somebody to count their first sport towards that requirement?
Um, I'm sure we, I mean, there's all kinds of different ways we could do it. Um, that would, you know, be fair, but it's possible we could even subsidize a little bit of the first fee that, um, that we have for that.
Um, so that more people could participate.
Um, you know, there's, there's a, uh, librarian that's about the same amount, I guess. There's the guidance administrator.
I think the guidance administrator would, um, you know, enable the other guidance counselors to interact, um, better with the kids. So I think that, you know, it would be something that we could look at too.
Yeah.
When we look at the, um, the, the possible 0.5 wellness cut, um, that would, yeah, result in, um, either kids, um, yeah, utilizing, you know, their athletics in 11th and 12th grade to, um, earn credit, uh, reducing some of the numbers.
Um, that, that, um, that situation is a little bit risky because, um, the state is, as kind of in their audit as indicated that they don't prefer that method.
And, and there, they haven't been completely definitive on whether or not they will outright reject it, but they kind of told us to, to kind of change that. Um, but we do know that there are other districts in the state that do that. And as long as you provide a, uh, free option in 11th and 12th grade, then it seems like we could consider that. It also might, depending upon numbers, result in, um, looking at 11th and 12th grade wellness instead of having two sections in a cycle, just having one section in a cycle. Because the, the, the amount of, you know, wellness that you need to give in 11th, 12th grade, it's very, very flexible, but you have to provide some level of it. So there might, there's a bunch of different creative ways that we might go about that if we had to reduce that.
And we might, we might even get more in fees if we like are able to lower the price. We might get more people involved in, in our sports, um, which I think, especially for the girls sports, um, at the high school would be really important.
Thanks.
Yep.
Thanks, Julie. There's no.
Uh, thank you, Avi. So, um, thanks for setting the tone, uh, to this conversation.
I think these are really hard cuts and this is a really difficult conversation to be having. Um, Dr. Patel, I just actually wanted to say, I think that, um, this feels a lot more responsive.
Um, I, and I appreciated Julie's question about the coordinators.
That was a question that I had to clarify some things for me there.
Uh, and I think that is a, um, helpful adjustment you made there.
Um, and really, I just wanted to say again, despite.
The difficulty within these cuts. Um, I think the, the elegant solution of merging the superintendent positions, um, as well as the proposals you made. To kind of put up the, uh, Dean of academic affairs, um, is helpful.
I think that, uh, anytime we're talking about, um, making cuts here, we definitely need to be making sure we're having conversations about adjustments made to the administration.
Before we start talking about instructional positions, as you've heard from the committee and from the public. So really just wanted to comment on that, um, as we continue to dialogue.
Thank you.
Thanks, Chris. Now, uh, and I see you scrolling there, Dr. Ritella. I did want to clarify there also.
I think Prisnell.
Thought the same thing that I thought that that reads, but I thought you had said something differently.
Um, that shows.
As a cut to the academic, to the Dean of, or sorry, a riff to the Dean of academic affairs.
Correct. Couldn't tell if you had said.
It shows a couple different options to reduce in that area.
One is a reduction in the Dean of academic affairs, uh, and adding of the school head of school counseling, which is a savings of approximately, you know, $33,000.
Um, the other is reducing in some other areas of, um, of, of, of, of that department without reducing the Dean of academic affairs, which, which would have, would result in a, in savings as well.
Um, but a slightly different level of savings.
Okay.
We tried to provide all the different, you know, possibilities for reductions.
Um, yeah, makes sense.
Shauna.
Thank you. Um, I might just need.
For Patel for you to explain to me the coordinator, the thinking of the coordinator reduction, um, at the secondary level.
So.
Can I.
I just want to.
Way in here.
Shauna. Cause I, I was looking and I didn't feel like I saw any reduction to the coordinators on the secondary level on Dr. Botello's options.
And my Dr. Botello, are you proposing.
Riffing.
We haven't got to, to my options yet, but I, I, um, I, I have one of my options.
Um, I think it was able to eliminate that.
I was trying to eliminate it. Um, but I think it had one coordinator, um, or potentially, you know, uh, two half coordinators reduction.
So.
I guess my question is, and you have, you have this, um, you have this format for both ELA, uh, for elementary and secondary.
I guess I'm just not wrapping my head around it. So we're saying that.
On line 21 of your menu of reductions, an ELA coordinator is costing us. A hundred and, um, $21,000 roughly.
Right.
And then we're taking away the $3,600 stipend.
And we're moving them to an elementary teacher.
Is that correct?
Yes.
Uh, our, our, in most of our coordinates, we would expect to, um, to jump into an, another elementary teacher position, either because of a retirement or because of bumping rates.
Okay.
And then that's the elementary.
Sorry.
I, I'm just not understanding the math. So Sean, so Sean, what, what Dr. Botel is showing is the reduction of the actual position and then the add back, sorry.
And then the add back of the Delta and then the reduction really of the position that they would bump. So in other words, you cut $110,000 employee, but they have bumping rights to a 70. You really don't save the one. Yeah. All right. Cool. Sorry.
I, I'm, I've been looking at it and it's, it's the same going over and over.
And I just, I just wanted to, but however, however, what happens if, whoa, whoa.
Are you there?
I'm here.
Okay.
Um, what happens if there is no teacher to bump?
So say an elementary math, say we don't have any elementary teachers, then what?
Would they just be riffed?
If, if they have, if they have professional status and, um, they have seniority, they would bump someone else.
Okay.
Got it.
All right. Thank you.
Thank you.
Veronica.
Thank you. Thanks, Dr. Botello. Um, I know as we get more deeply into, um, options for how we might think through these things and, and we're weighing, you know, pluses and minuses.
And I want to share, uh, you know, the comments that I've heard from my co-committee members as just how painful this is.
Um, these are all, many of these things, these lines represent people.
And I'm thinking about the people right now. So it is quite emotional and, and, and difficult.
And I appreciate your, uh, you know, bringing it to us, but it's very hard to, to see the list. But I want to comment for a second on having new curriculum coming in for elementary literacy and secondary, you know, middle school, I think, and also high school math and science.
I'm just really mindful of the importance of the role of the coordinator in particular in a year when we're going to be investing, you know, over a quarter of a million dollars, maybe closer to a half a million dollars. We're hoping, right. Something, something in the area of over $300,000.
I think the number was in capital money to, to invest in curriculum.
And I'm just sort of mindful of that, um, as a, as a goal for the coming year. And I'm very worried about the curricular curriculum coordinators, uh, roles being, um, diminished. So I just want to put that out there as, you know, sort of my, my sort of frontline reaction to this list.
Um, and, and I'm reacting to all of the positions, as I said, but that sort of jumps out to me, this sort of deep concern about those coordinator positions.
And so I just wanted to, to share that at this moment, just at this point, that's, that's where I'm the most, um, feeling the most trepidation.
Thanks.
Yeah.
And I, I mean, again, I think all of these positions are really important.
They would not have been part of the initial budget that I proposed.
Um, I spoke passionately about the coordinator positions at the last meeting, just knowing from my experience and my research, how critical they are. And also knowing from my work here and Sharon, how, how, how much value they bring to, um, students and teachers in the work that we do.
Um, but I, I know we have difficult choices to make because all of these positions are, are, um, are important.
I did receive over 25 letters from teachers and parents, not coordinators themselves about, um, them, you know, recognizing the value of those positions, which I don't know.
It seems like those are the ones where perhaps were CC to me. I know you all received tons of letters as well, but the ones that were CC to me seem to, to come in that realm predominantly.
Yeah. Um, before I call you Shauna, I just, I have some thoughts to share too. Um, the, on the coordinators, I would say we certainly received a ton of emails and phone calls and outreach from educators in the district, um, who advocate strongly for the coordinator positions on the secondary level in particular.
Uh, that being said, um, it's hard because all of these cuts come with painful, painful costs.
And what I haven't been able to discern is the value of those coordinators relative to the teachers.
And I haven't received any communication, whether by outreach from, from a phone call or email from parents as I, as you have Dr. Mattel advocating for the coordinators, rather the outreach that I receive from parents is advocating for keeping the teachers even at the expense.
And it's a great expense to, to cut the coordinators.
Um, so for me, I struggled with that for sure, especially having spoken to educators who explain the role that the coordinators play and the value that they play. And in particular, Dr. Botello, after having spoken to you privately and listening to you at these meetings, advocate very strongly for just how valuable and how necessary those coordinators are in the role, uh, to the education that you believe the students this district deserve.
Um, and so for me, I do think that's a, that's a difficult, that's, that's perhaps one of the most difficult decisions here because it's weighing the, the need being asked of us from the public versus the expertise of our educational leaders and our educators.
Uh, looking through this list, there are some things for me that I see on the cuts, um, that I can't, um, in good conscience support for me. I shouldn't say a good conscience to be clear. They don't align with my priorities.
I don't think that they are unconscionable cuts. I think that they are difficult cuts like all of them. Um, so I don't want to exaggerate that or use language that's meant to signify something other than it is for me, for example, the librarian positions.
Um, I I've said the same thing about the town library is that for me, I just believe that libraries are places that set tones for children about, uh, the thirst for knowledge.
Uh, I also think within our elementary schools, they serve the purpose of a safe space for kids uh, and so I think that there is a social emotional cost to, uh, cutting any amount of librarian.
Uh, you know, I don't love seeing instrumental music on there, uh, but again, we've got to make hard choices. And so personally, I would push harder on the librarian position than I would on the instrumental music, the visual arts, uh, that, that I find problematic.
Again, these are things that elementary school students, especially as education has changed over the years. And I think we're all surprised when we go to our first kindergarten conference to learn that our kids aren't there to draw anymore. Like we were, they're there to learn and, and they're doing real work as early as five years old. And I think that's amazing. And I think that's important and rigor. It's crucial.
I do want to instill the love of these things.
So I can't tell is the visual arts teacher.
Is that an elementary?
Yeah, I'm sorry if I didn't add that.
Those three visual arts, ELA and math are all high school.
Okay.
I have less of a problem with that.
Um, for me, I definitely believe in, uh, cutting some of the more expensive administration positions, such as the Dean of, uh, academic affairs and keeping some of the other, the other option in there. Uh, I think it provides more hands up on kids.
Uh, I think in a situation where we have to unfortunately make really hard FTE cuts that maintaining, uh, more adults in the building and educators in the building, uh, counselors, I think is very important.
And so I think in places where we have ways to cut a higher salary and maintain more bodies, that's something I support strongly.
And it matters to me, um, a lot.
Uh, like I said, on the coordinate, there's thing I'm, I'm undecided personally and hearing loudly from the public that educators in front of our kids is, is there that that aligns with their value. Again, I recognize that the educators themselves telling us very strongly that the coordinate coordinators are probably the priority.
Uh, Shauna's next, then Adam, then Wendy and Julie. Go ahead, Shauna. All right.
I have to really go. All right.
Sorry guys. Um, one more thing.
Um, Dr. Patel, can you please clarify the, uh, school counselor position?
Is that a guidance?
Is that a guidance? Is that a guidance? Is that a guidance counselor?
Is that a guidance counselor?
That is what, what, what, what would have been in the past called a high school guidance counselor? Yes.
Okay. And how many high school guidance counselors do we currently have? And what would the increase to the caseload be? We have, um, six currently at a caseload of approximately a hundred and I hope I'm getting this right. I know the caseload is approximately 191, I think six to 191. Uh, and it would go to five, um, at approximately 229, uh, but also, um, expecting that the, um, Dean of the, Dean of the, Dean of the, Dean of the, Dean of the, Dean of the, Dean of the head of counseling would take some of that, uh, caseload.
So the, so currently the Dean of academic affairs does not carry a caseload?
A small caseload, but not, not a large one.
Okay. So then their caseload would increase a bit and then that offset the, okay.
All right. Thank you.
Adam.
Thank you, Dr. Patel. I echo what a lot of people say, uh, or what a lot of committee members have said so far in terms of, you know, appreciating seeing everything, um, really laid out and the, the difficulty of the entire process, um, you know, these are, uh, I keep in my head coming back to the word hard, like it's just hard.
Um, you know, it's not like we have a lot of, um, kind of excess that we are, um, able to, to strip away. Like every, every cut that we're making hurts.
Um, and I think we see that pretty clearly here.
Um, just a couple of pieces of, of clarification.
When you were talking about the kind of different options within the guidance department or the counseling department, um, are those either or in your opinion, or is there kind of, is there an option to say, look, we want to, um, you know, uh, kind of down level from the dean of academic fair to the head of school counseling. And we could keep a counselor, um, but maybe lose some of the, uh, administrative, uh, administrative assistance or something like that. Like, is it, is it kind of top two rows or bottom three rows, or is there the ability to kind of mix and match within there?
What it's, if, if, um, if we, um, maintain a dean of academic affairs, we would need to cut, um, a guidance, um, a guidance, admin assistant, um, to, um, you know, to get that same degree of savings. If we, um, if, if a dean of academic affairs was reduced, um, we would, um, you know, um, add a, add a, add a head of school counseling and, um, look to, you know, maintain, you know, a, a guidance, admin assistant, um, and, and, and, and, um, um, yeah, and, and, but then we would have cuts of the, um, um, school counselor, um, as well.
I guess my, my question is, is it viable to kind of move to the head of school counseling and retain the school counselor, um, even if we didn't necessarily retain the, the administrative assistance?
Um, like, is that viable or, or is there something about that that doesn't work functionally?
I'm just trying to understand the options within that office.
Adam, I think if we move to the head of school counseling, keeping the school counselor is necessary is what Dr. Mattel is saying, right?
Dr. Mattel?
Yes.
Not reducing that is necessary.
Is that, is the same true though, for the guidance, administrative assistant and the administrative assistant? Um, I would need, I need to crunch the numbers on, on that.
I don't know if Ellen, if you can kind of crunch those while we're, while they're working about what, you know, what, I think I have the numbers crunched with maintaining the Dean of Academic Affairs, but reducing, um, you know, some others, which would result in a, uh, things of, um, 125.
Right. Well, to clarify, I'm, I'm less concerned with the, with the, the finances at this point. Like I can, I can work on the math, but I'm just trying to understand within the role of, you know, the, the Dean of Academic Affairs, you know, how much admin is done there. And if, if you're saying, Hey, if that is reduced to the head of school counseling, then we need to keep these, um, admin positions.
I think if, if we, um, reduce the Dean of Academic Affairs, we would minimally need a head of school counseling and, um, a guide, a guidance admin assistant.
Okay.
Um, so thank you. So that's, that's helpful. And then the other question I have, and, and I think I've heard a lot of feedback as well. That's probably similar to, to what Avi's heard with regards to the coordinators.
There's obviously a lot that they do in their roles. And we've heard from, uh, an incredible number of, of teachers and folks within the district, um, by email kind of speaking to the value of the, the coordinators.
And so my question is, what would happen, right?
Like, I don't think if the, the coordinator positions aren't there, that we can't do things the same way that we've been doing before. We need to take those responsibilities, um, and shift them both in terms of the kind of facilitator roles, but also in terms of, um, different mentorship opportunities, different types of professional development, different types of, um, curricular development.
Whether within departments themselves or within kind of the, the new, um, you know, a new administrative position like you proposed.
Um, so if you could just walk me through how that would work, right?
Like in a world where there aren't curriculum coordinators, how are those roles and responsibilities distributed?
Uh, maybe not quite as well as, as if we had dedicated curriculum coordinators, but, um, kind of, you know, how would we, how would we seek to, to make that work?
Yeah. I think that the, the challenge is, I think the key aspects of the roles are not really replicated.
I think that the fact is, yes, teachers, we have lots of great teachers in our district and they would continue to teach.
Um, they would, um, you know, we provide opportunities for collaboration and, um, some departments might collaborate very closely and try to able, to be able to keep some of the consistency, um, that we strive for, um, as well as share some of the improvements.
Um, but the, the, the key of the coordinator is coordinating is really making sure that they, um, they ensure that there's collaboration among all members of the department that they with all members of the department are setting goals for improvement and supporting those goals for improvement, um, in a way that someone who's working full-time cannot do. Um, that they, um, you know, provide supervision, um, and support, especially to young educators to an extent that a principal or a, um, mentor who works full-time is not able.
Um, so I, I think that the idea that there will be, um, great teaching going on, um, there will be collaboration, um, but some of the work to make sure that they're not able to do. That that continues to move forward, that we continue to have consistency.
Uh, one of the things, one of the, the major, um, you know, kind of challenges and concerns that you hear expressed in schools by kids and parents is, you know, the, the, you know, whether one teacher is the same as another.
Um, and we can't make all teachers the same. All teachers have different, um, different, uh, personalities and different ways of operating, but we can develop some common skill sets as well as make sure that the curriculum, um, and some of the key assessments are consistent.
And we can look at those assessments together to see if one, um, you know, one class is struggling a bit to help the support and make changes, uh, and provide additional support when that occurs.
Um, so those things are really, it's just not, we don't have the bandwidth with, you know, um, you know, principals who are, who are, um, you know, who, who have instructional leadership on their minds and really enjoy that, but also, um, you know, are not able to provide that type of hands-on instructional leadership, um, in support of all the meetings of the departments, um, and professional development departments that coordinators do. So things would occur, but it wouldn't be, it's just, it's not, it's not really a replicable.
And we've, we've done facilitators in the past, and that certainly is better than nothing.
Um, but we've, what we typically, what we've had in the last several years is great difficulty filling this facilitator role because, um, people are not, uh, able to do it well.
And therefore, um, they're not, you know, they're having difficulty, you know, jumping into that position when, um, there's just so little they can do relative to a more robust, um, you know, leadership position.
Yeah. It sounds, it sounds like it would be, it would be hard. Um, and I'm hearing a lot of, you know, wouldn't, wouldn't be possible, but I think, you know, if, if we move in that direction really sounds like we'll have to adopt a growth mindset and find ways to, uh, maybe different ways than we have in the past.
Um, but to try to, to make up for some of that loss. Um, and again, not, not in the same way, cause I don't think you can in the same way that, uh, a dedicated resource can, but, um, you know, try to, try to find ways to, to make that happen and, uh, really be innovative in the space.
Yeah, we, we, we certainly would do everything in our power. Um, and again, the, the research that was the grounding of my doctorate and, and my master's, you know, shows that one of the innovative ways that you go about these massive improvements in schools is these types of positions. So it's, you know, it's going to be a challenge, um, but we would, we would certainly do everything in our power to, you know, to foster collaboration and foster growth and, and fill the gap the best we could.
Thank you. Um, by the way, Dr. Botello, I think you just said something I'm about to call in.
Um, I think you just said something I haven't heard you say before. And that was, that, that feels like it would be really impactful, uh, to be honest with my feelings. So maybe we can revisit that.
Um, you know, we've, we've invested quite a bit of time, energy, money in your role. And I think you just sort of introduced.
Uh, you just made a comment about sort of your philosophy and what your vision is. Um, again, that I hadn't quite heard the same way. So maybe we can come back to that. Go ahead, Wynne.
Um, yeah. So I think I had a similar question as Adam did looking at that, um, that counseling section is that maybe there was a possibility to combine the two things, um, to install the head of school counseling to keep the school counselor.
But there's two admin assistant positions.
And I wasn't clear if those were both absolutely necessary.
Um, but I know you're checking on that.
Um, the other question I had on the topic of coordinators is I know that we have coordinators divided by department essentially, um, is it possible that we could do some sort of consolidation there as we have with some of the other administrative positions where perhaps we would have a coordinator who covers both ELA and social studies versus two people, um, taking those separate departments.
I, I don't know if that's too much of a stretch, but at this point, I kind of feel like someone who's dedicated to this position that has more coverage is still better than not having any coverage.
Um, and, and I know that this is, this is a list of all the feasible cuts and you haven't actually presented to us the ones that you have prioritized yet. So I won't speak too much to that, but I will say that philosophically, um, I will have a very difficult time voting for a budget that cuts library, art, music, and language.
Um, fundamentally, I don't believe that these are nice to haves. I think they are essential to a very well-rounded education.
Um, and that's, you know, I, I know we haven't heard your specific cuts, but that's kind of where I stand.
Um, I don't think, I imagine that some of these classes are absolute favorites of many students.
Um, I'm sure the visual arts classes are very popular. Uh, they speak to, they speak to a myriad of myriad of students who have lots of different passions. And I fundamentally, uh, don't agree that they are essential or non-essentials to, um, to our district.
Thanks.
Well, put when you and I are aligned there, and I think that's, as we start to start to straw poll these decisions and build through the night, I think it's important for us to sort of be keeping in count.
There's at least two of us, uh, there when, uh, go ahead, Julie.
SPEAKER_UNKNOWN: Thanks. Thanks.
And I just want to say thanks to Wen. Um, I, I believe there's a lot of different things that make school worthwhile for different kids. And I'm undoubtedly music and art is, is that for some people, um, when it comes to the co, the coordinator positions.
Um, I first want to thank all of the teachers for taking the time to write in. Um, there were lots and lots and lots of letters, um, explaining the coordinator position.
And I think we don't have like a department head per se. I think the coordinators sort of fill that role a little bit.
Um, I'm not sure we need to look at them all together.
Um, like all or nothing.
Um, I think maybe we could look at, um, like for example, the ELA coordinator in elementary, if we're going to be buying new curriculum, that's higher quality than what we've been doing right now, maybe, maybe that's a priority, um, out of all of the coordinators.
Um, I also know in the high school, um, the math department is prepared, is piloting right now, three different textbooks for ninth grade, because they, they don't have even enough textbooks and the textbooks aren't very good.
Um, and so somebody can be leading that as well.
So maybe, maybe we can, I, I mean, I wish I could say what I would, I would trade off, but I think, you know, we don't have to look at the coordinators as all or nothing is what I was going to say.
That's a good point, Julie.
Um, all right, Dr. Martella, do you want to proceed with your options?
Yeah. So these are, um, you know, again, I, I, the, the decisions are incredibly difficult.
But these are two options that balance, um, you know, are heavily weighted towards administrative, non-instructional position cuts, but do include, um, some cuts to instructional staff, um, that I think we could, um, manage, um, with the, the least amount of impact.
So Jane, can you go to the options AB 3.12?
Oh, I'm, I have it. You're screen sharing, Peter. Sorry.
Yeah. Yeah. Sorry.
I'll go to, I'm going to go and do one at a time.
Um, so let's.
All right.
So we're going to look at the option A, um, and I'm going to go down it. So this includes that first cut of creating a, um, a position that is, you know, part athletic director and part assistant principal.
It also includes a position that's an assistant superintendent for curriculum and administration.
Um, it also includes, um, uh, a position that's a, a supervisor of buildings and grounds.
Again, all of those have, um, reductions in, um, other positions, um, and being filled by a position that's, um, you know, either, uh, combining two or less expensive.
Um, this has, um, maintaining our dean of academic affairs position, um, and reducing, um, a guidance secretary, a school counselor, and, um, a 0.5 admin assistant at the high school.
If this includes, um, reducing one of our elementary assistant principal special education, um, administrators, and adding a stipend, uh, for teacher leaders.
So that's a 6.5 per, um, um, in, in total, um, when you, when you subtract the addition, or you, yes, you subtract the additions and take all of the, um, reductions at 6.5 FTE reduction in, um, in administration positions for almost $600,000.
Um, then these are the, um, instructional cuts.
The, um, the first one, uh, if we had, uh, if our enrollment, like, had changed prior to the last couple days and weeks, this would have been, like, the grade five, um, cut that we put forth that we, we have a reduction in numbers that, so this is a no-brainer, that first one for this year. We don't have kids to go into that class, so that is an easy one, the LEAP teacher.
Um, then we have a retirement in social studies, and, um, based on, uh, numbers we believe we can absorb, um, you know, those classes and still maintain, um, you know, class sizes in the, you know, the kind of the low to mid-20s, um, in social studies.
Um, the wellness we talked about would, um, would, it would force us to get creative, um, on how we do wellness in 11th and 12th grade, um, but we believe that we could, um, manage that. Um, this next one, we'd have to look at, um, like, class sizes in enrollments, um, but we believe that we could, um, absorb either, um, you know, one science or Spanish position, um, into our current sections.
We, again, we might need to get creative of, um, you know, and look at if there's, you know, enrollments, very small enrollments in some classes. We might not be able to run them, or we might be able to look to, um, you know, you know, combine, you know, say, uh, um, a college prep class and an honors class if we have, like, 10 in each but don't have enough to run them separately, things like that. But, um, we believe we could absorb that if necessary, but we're not sure until we actually run the schedule to know where it would be least, uh, detrimental.
Um, and then, um, a middle school reading specialist.
Um, so we had, we'd be able to keep one reading special at the middle school, but reduce one, um, reduce the, um, our only math specialist at the, um, at the middle school and reduce, um, the fourth of our, um, four elementary math specialists.
So we would no longer have a floater, um, at the elementary, uh, level as a math specialist.
Um, and then this also shows that if we were staying at that 3.12 level, that we would, um, reduce, reduce or eliminate instrumental music in the upper elementary grades and look to provide it during either an after school or before school program, um, that was, um, more of a, a fee-based program, um, for kids. Um, so those are the instructional costs.
Then in this very, um, you know, kind of difficult, um, situation, as much as I did not want to go down this route, in addition to, um, increasing early childhood fees by, uh, 10%, um, we would be proposing to reinstate, um, a fee for full day kindergarten.
This would be half the fee that it was, uh, several years ago, but it would still be a fee to parents.
Uh, we would do everything in our power to make sure that we support folks who cannot afford that fee.
And we would expect that the great, great majority and hopefully all, uh, kids would still enroll in full day kindergarten, but we would have a half day option. And Dr. Patel, sorry.
Yep.
Dr. Patel, can I just provide some background and context on that?
Yep. Um, as somebody who fought really hard for the, uh, free-fold AK, um, I do just want to point out, and as somebody who came to you with the suggestion of that fee compromise, I just want to say that for historical, and it's, it's a brief, it's not very long history.
It's, it's just two years ago, um, at priorities, uh, the finance committee select board, and then the voting members of the school committee at the time were Tanya Lewis and myself, um, reached an arrangement and an agreement to chop away at kindergarten one year at a time over four years, um, understanding that it might take five years with a plan of eliminating that fee. Last year, uh, as it's been discussed as not ad nauseum, uh, at the last few meetings, we understand we took, we, we thought we had a chapter 70 situation.
Unfortunately, the state, we don't need to get more into that than we have already, except to say that the chapter 70 formula did not work out in our favor.
I, I believe it's important for people to understand this is not a, this is a recognition that that plan didn't work and a compromise to reinstate what the, where the fee would have been.
Had we, had we not made that play, uh, it's still in line with the plan that that priorities group set forth on, uh, to eliminate this fee within five years and hopefully within four. Uh, so I do think it's important for people to know that.
And I think it's important for people to understand that that's where that number's arrived at. And then it's super important for people to understand that the plan is still, uh, you know, hopefully to continue to have the resources to chop away at that fee, um, in order to get free full day K in this district.
And hopefully in a year where chapter 70 will come through for us. Is that fair to say, Dr. Mattel?
Yes.
Yes. Yes.
Um, so, uh, option B is a little bit different, but not greatly, but I'll just show you, um, Can I just, can I, can I go through and how people feel about option A and try to get started our straw polling here?
Uh, go ahead, Julie. Oh, I don't, I want to see the second presentation before I say something, but, um, um, we were just talking about the kindergarten fee and I, I share in your disappointment about that. Um, the only question I have is, um, if we reinstate the fee, that means we're going back to offering a free half day.
And I'm wondering how you anticipate that would affect our chapter 70 funding in the future because we will be getting less money per kid. If, if we maintain as a minimum aid district, uh, for every student that, that is reduced, it'll be $30 per year.
So I don't think it will be a, an amount that, um, is something that will be, it'll be negligible.
Uh, if they, if they increase, if they come out of that.
Yep.
Oh, so I, I, I apologize.
I, I certainly don't want anybody to hear my following comment in, in any, I mean, we work collaboratively here and, uh, people, I think oversimplify chapter seven, like something superintendent in the state is completely knowledgeable that, that there's like five people in the state that fully understand it. I certainly not one of them. I just want to correct you on that by saying that actually we wouldn't lose anything if we were in a minimum aid state, because we still receive our minimum aid.
I'm sorry. And if that's what you said, then I apologize.
I thought you were saying it wouldn't hurt that bad. We might lose the 30.
What I was saying is when you're a minimum aid district, if you're in, if you're enrollment decreases, not just for kindergarten, but for any number of students in the following year, they give you a $30 per student, um, increase based upon the change in enrollment.
So, um, so if you're, if you're, um, yeah, so I guess actually they're not going to, they never decrease you. So I guess that is true. They never decrease you, but if you're, if your enrollment would have gone up more because you had more, you know, um, you know, kiddos, including kindergarten kiddos, then you'll see less of an increase, but it's only by a $30 per student increment instead of the, you know, whatever it was, it was like a thousand dollars per student that we saw, you know, or more than that, um, you know, before we were determined to be admitted.
I believe that it's risky in the sense that if the chapter 70 formula, if the, if the, if the inflation number were to be higher, we will miss out on our opportunity.
However, I think we'll just have to keep eyes on, I mean, it's, it's likely we're told, at least as what I'm told by our state rep and other folks, um, Julie, I think you passed along the Jake Ockenkos had indicated to you that it's likely we're going to, we're in for a few rough state budgets.
And so I think the, I think in good conscience, we have to acknowledge that the risk is low in that sense, but certainly, yes, if the number were to increase tremendously, like the, if the factor, the inflation factor were to be high, we would make exactly what we tried to do the first time.
Um, I'm with Dr. Botello and believing that that factor doesn't, uh, doesn't impact anything for next year.
Okay.
Thank you for making that clear.
Any more on option A? So I, I'll, I'll just, for me, I know Julie said you want to see option B first.
I'm going to call on Veronica and when I think it might be easier for us to keep our thoughts organized going one by one, but, um, certainly people don't have to share their thoughts when, when they don't want to.
Um, Veronica.
Thank you. Um, well, Dr. Botello, seeing this, I'm appreciating that I'm not seeing instructional, uh, cuts in the same way I was expecting.
And also the curriculum coordinators aren't on the list, but can you just scroll down and read underneath?
There's a phrase that says something about coordinators.
And I just wanted you to, can you elaborate on this?
Coordinators instruct additional sections and interventions as needed.
Can you tell me what that means?
Thanks. I think that that would need to be something that we, um, kind of negotiate.
Um, but the, if, if we were to not reduce coordinators and as we did some of those cuts at the high school in particular, um, and say we were short a section, um, or two, there'd be the understanding that, um, you know, coordinators would help to fulfill those sections by doing, um, additional instruction.
Currently coordinators in their contract, um, are, um, can be, um, required to teach, uh, one section.
Um, but that, um, based upon agreements, um, in special circumstances, um, could agree to teach more than that in a certain, uh, year.
So that'd be something that, um, you know, we would be having discussions with the coordinators and the union about.
Very helpful.
Thank you.
And at the elementary level, if we lost some specialists, even middle school, they already provide some interventions, but they would, they would be, you know, they already do that. If, if, if some interventions needed to be in place, uh, that were made more difficult because we lost a, one of the, one of the elementary math specialists, the, you know, Tita Kemp, who does interventions already would, uh, look up to pick up more as necessary.
All right.
When?
Um, yeah.
So just looking at this list, I am nervous about riffing a school counselor.
Their caseload is already quite high. They have quite a lot of impact on the students.
Um, that makes me nervous.
I agree with Shauna that going from three to two on the elementary assistant principals, just feasibility alone seems kind of wonky to me.
Um, so that one, I, I don't know that I'm really on board with.
Um, and then I think you said that we were going down from, uh, this with the specialists, we were going down from two to one for reading from one to zero for math, which seems alarming.
Um, and then the floater, I think I'm okay with, but you know, the reduction down to zero math specialists.
Can you, can you justify that for me?
Yeah.
These, these math and reading specialists predominantly provide, um, interventions for struggling students outside of class. Uh, but students who are not part of our special education programs predominantly.
Um, and so we would be looking to, uh, provide, which we already do, um, greater, you know, supports and interventions within the classroom setting.
Um, so these are served by a, you know, a, a, a, um, serve a, a small group of students that are important. They sometimes push into the classroom to support and sometimes they pull out. Um, but we would be looking to provide those, um, again, in the classroom or through, you know, other programming as well.
Like afterschool support and stuff like that.
Oh, and sorry, one more. You said that, um, since instrumental music is up there, you said that you would want to convert it to a before afterschool program with fees or that's TBD.
Yeah. It would need to have some kind of fee in order to, uh, support it. Um, but I would, yeah, I would want to, if we had to reduce that for, you know, uh, temporarily for a year or, or whatever, I would want to still, uh, you know, I, I know some kids get, you know, a lot of, uh, instrumental, um, access, you know, through, you know, private lessons and stuff, but I would certainly want to, uh, have a, uh, a low cost mechanism for those kids as well as kids who do not, um, you know, you know, probably, you know, before school, um, at the elementary level.
Um, but some kind of mechanism to provide that, but more as an extracurricular.
Okay.
Okay.
Cause I do think that even if you're charging a minimum fee, there is, and you're right. There are a lot of kids that go do have private lessons. Um, but you know, I think that is a bit of an equity issue as well. Yeah, no, I don't, and please know, I don't want any of these cuts, but I'm trying to put up with options that we can consider.
Absolutely.
Thank you. Sean.
SPEAKER_UNKNOWN: Thank you. Um, so I think, I think we know how I feel about assistant principals, um, and their role, um, and necessity in the elementary school level. Um, I have a very hard time in this first proposal, um, cutting a 0.5 wellness when that was part of our review.
And that's what we're trying to build up to me. That doesn't make sense.
Um, I am having a very hard time with cutting our only math specialist.
Um, knowing that math, especially as we hit middle school is an area where we see kids start to really flounder.
Um, and I worry about increased eligibility for special education and identification over identification with math disabilities.
Should there not be a math specialist?
Also, how is that in line with MTSS?
Um, the floating elementary math specialist.
Um, I have less of a hard time with knowing that that's our fourth. Um, and then I echo the sentiments of other members regarding library, instrumental music and visual arts. Um, I do notice here that the, um, Dean of Academic Affairs, head of school counseling, isn't on, um, on, um, um, on here.
Um, so I would like to kind of put that back on us, uh, put that back on you. Um, I think that I really liked how you were trying to play within that budget, um, within that department, sorry.
Um, and I think that unfortunately, you know, the reality is, is that we are where we are with full day K.
Um, it's unfortunate, but we need to kind of swallow our pride and move on, um, and, and keep on working towards next year. I do like the fact that we have increased our EEC fee.
Um, I saw, I saw it written and while it is a 10% additional adjustment, hold on, buddy.
Um, it doesn't look as scary as, um, one would think.
So I think it is bringing us more in line to kind of industry, but also we have to realize that, um, hold on one second, sweetie.
Yes. After I'm done. Um, after we look at, um, half day K, um, you know, we also have to be proportional to, um, preschool.
So that's kind of where I'm sitting at after the first, um, round of this last, last question.
And I looked ahead.
The guidance secretary here is 30,000 and on B it's listed as 15,000.
I don't know if that would. No, it's because one is a full reduction and one is a 0.5 reduction.
Got it. Thank you.
Um, so one thing I just want to mention, um, yeah, we, like, again, we look at some middle school math specialists. We certainly understand the need for that. Again, none of these reductions are on a level service budget.
We also, you know, with, with, with, in that is, um, goes against our, uh, multi-tiered systems of support efforts.
Um, what goes against it even more is a unified core curriculum is teachers in the classroom, being able to provide a strong, guaranteed, rigorous, viable curriculum, which has a multi-layers of supports in and itself. Um, and that prevents the need for tier two interventions.
Those, I think, impact such a great, like all of our students.
Uh, that's, that's one of the reasons, you know, kind of some of, for some of the trade-offs.
It's not that we don't think a math specialist is important.
We, it's not that it's not tied to our, uh, goal around supporting struggling students in, uh, a tiered intervention.
It's a trade-off with, um, other, um, areas that have greater impact towards those efforts.
All right. Thank you. Um, for me on the first, on option A, um, I have a, a strong reaction to the instrumental music.
Uh, for me, I think that's impactful and important.
And I, I don't want, I also think that there's equity stuff there as when touched on. Uh, so for me, that would be something I would, I would certainly struggle.
And maybe even I can go as far as say, I can't support.
Um, I think like Shauna, the, uh, uh, math specialist.
And I think for the same reason, probably philosophically, the assistant principal at the elementary level, uh, especially given the special ed time.
And for me would be cuts that would come, uh, after coordinators.
Um, not because I don't value those coordinators.
And I think you actually just made a case there that makes sense to me, Dr. But for me, I just can't get past the idea of removing, uh, removing educators that directly help students, uh, versus educators that help educators helps students.
I think they're both incredibly valuable for me.
That's philosophically where I'm feeling I'm at at this moment. Um, and on the academic, uh, on the Dean of Academic Affairs, I think, as I mentioned, when we've looked at the menu, I can't support an option that cuts the counselor rather than the academic affairs Dean.
Um, for me, again, we're in a tough position here, but we have to prioritize cutting the higher salaried administrators and maintaining, uh, case loads as low as we can and direct impact on students.
Um, we just have to protect it as much as we can.
So for me, those were my three biggest reactions, uh, to this list of cuts.
Go ahead, Julie.
Oh, Julie, you got your hand up.
I have a remark, um, going forward.
Um, Peter, would you mind scrolling down a little bit, please to the kindergarten figure?
So, um, this is going to be half of the previous fee that we had.
Um, and Avi, you spoke about introducing it over four to five years. What if, what if we did the K fee three quarters of the tuition from two years ago and then tried to move forward after that? So instead of people paying one half, they would be paying three quarters.
And I think that would give us maybe another 150.
So that would be two more teachers or specialists.
Yeah, we could, we could certainly look at the fee structure.
It could say. I'm so sorry.
So I just, I'll go ahead.
I want to see your hands up.
So actually, um, how I've calculated the, um, the kindergarten fee was I took the cost, total cost that comes out of the operating budget for full day K. Um, multiply that by 0.25.
I also factored in, um, how much we would need to pay the, the town for the health insurance benefits that would be charged to that account.
Um, and that's how I came up with the total amount.
And then I divided that by, you know, a number of students that we are anticipating that we would have, that would be paying. And it actually comes up with the fee that I'm proposing is actually, um, only is, you know, 28% less than what, um, what was charged two years ago.
SPEAKER_UNKNOWN: Okay.
So the fee is, so the fee isn't half.
No, it's not. It's, it's 28% less.
Okay. Um, well, maybe we could, I hate, I mean, this kills me to say it, but maybe we could bump that up some more for this year.
What I can do is I can, uh, right now run it, um, based on what the fee was, um, two years ago.
Oh, I appreciate that. With slight reduction.
Give me a minute and I'll take care of that.
Thank you so much.
And that was just my, that was, that's.
All right. On to option B. It looks like Dr. Mitella. There's one thing before I go through that I want to iterate, um, that there, you know, and I, I don't want to be a broken record, but there is a breaking point of, um, you know, reductions in administration and teacher leadership that does, does impact, you know, students and student learning tremendously. And I think we, I think we need to, in this year, do everything we can to focus on those who provide direct service. But, um, also keep in mind that breaking point as we make tough decisions.
Um, okay.
Okay.
So this is again, very similar at the top. Um, all the, the top is the same.
Uh, the only change is that it, um, has an additional, um, 77,461 of increases in non-structural positions in the form of, uh, either one of our coordinators or potentially two, um, coordinators that would, um, spend, you know, half of their time, um, uh, you know, more of the teaching relevant half as, um, semi-coordinators.
They wouldn't be full coordinators, but they would have, you know, they wouldn't have a full teaching load.
Um, the instructional positions are, um, again, that leap is a no-brainer, doesn't, no hurt, uh, for this year. Um, and other than that, what we see is, um, what's the difference?
We don't see the wellness, um, any more in that.
And, um, what else don't we see?
And we don't see the, um, another reduction.
Um, let me see.
Oh, the guidance secretary was, was in half instead of, no, wait, what's, no, we had that already. I'm sorry. Um, yeah, the guidance secretary was reduced in half instead of fully, um, and then, um, we have, uh, we no longer see one of our, um, yeah, wellness teacher and the guidance secretary are reduced, um, from the cut list.
They're quite similar.
Um, thank you. SPEAKER_UNKNOWN: Um, just a question.
Um, just a question.
Um, if we were to go to the, um, 0.5
FTE of a coordinator, would we have to go back to the STA to, is that something that is negotiated in terms of how much is going to be? How much is going to be taught versus how much is going to be like given in a stipend?
Is that, does that become stipended or is that a halftime FTE, halftime teacher?
Um, it would likely become stipended at a prorated rate. So depending upon the amount of, um, yeah, so it, it, yeah, it'd be, it would be a special agreement with the SCA. Yes.
Okay.
So if that's, if that's the case, why couldn't we look at creating that across the board for our coordinators?
So still having coordinators, but having them in a, in a halftime capacity is not losing them fully and not choosing two over any others, but reducing them in a halftime and then hopefully looking to, to getting them back. Uh, we, we could look at that again.
I don't recommend that, but we could look at that.
Uh, we, it might, uh, if we, if we looked at, uh, it would be more of a department.
I put one point in or 2.5. I'm not sure.
Haven't like thought through the 2.5 exactly with, uh, especially at the high school level where they now would be teaching one out of five classes and, um, you know, there's five classes. So, um, you know, it might need to be, you know, uh, you know, say a 0.4.
So they teach, you know, um, so it'd be point or 0.6 where they teach three classes or, or two classes or something like that. So it might need 0.6 split where they they're teaching two classes and they have administrative responsibilities for 0.6 and whether or not we're compensating them per person that they're evaluating or how big their department is, you know, we can get into the nitty gritty of that. But I mean, it, it moves them less out of a coordinator and more of a, you know, department head, but it still allows for them to have that administrative time. That's not direct teaching time and allows you to have evaluations.
I don't know, just again, thinking outside of the box, but, you know, preserving, preserving it, but shifting.
Yeah, we could, we could certainly look at, um, if we increase a coordinator's teaching load by a class or by two, um, how much savings that that would incur and, and, um, and how much time they would have for the coordination of grades six through 12.
I mean, six through 12 may be a bit harder, um, just by virtue of six to 12, right?
So you might want to look at two because you're trying to get into two different buildings and, and the reality of, of getting into two, two different buildings with two different times and just that is, is difficult in and of itself.
Um, what do you mean by look at two?
Like if, if our coordinators are all six to 12, right?
Like get looking at two classes versus three, right?
Because on the rotation, three classes makes it harder to get into two different buildings.
Yeah. So if we, if, yeah, if, if each coordinator, um, again, not ideal.
Yeah.
But each coordinator taught one additional class, that would be a savings of one FTE. That'd be five classes.
Right.
Again, not ideal, but it could preserve that instrumental music teacher.
I like what you're thinking, Sean.
Um, Julie.
Um, first of all, I, I like this a lot better.
I'm hoping that we could add back the instrumental music if we raise the full decay cost.
I have a question about the coordinator position because it was listed as 110,000 and now it's 77,000.
So did I miss something?
Yeah. When you went back to that, that whole coordinator, those four boxes.
Okay.
Oh, this is not. You, you know, add, uh, take away a, um, uh, uh, a teacher that's kind of at a lower rate.
You have the coordinator bump into a teaching spot and you add a facilitator stipend.
Then you get 77,000, 461 as the savings.
Um, I think, I think I like this overall better than the other options.
Um, because the, uh, like I, like I was saying that I think the math coordinator in the high school is at a critical point. And I think the ELA and the elementary school is also critical point with the new curriculum.
Um, is the, um, the, the Dean of students on this list at all?
No, the Dean of academic affairs is not.
I'm sorry. Um, my suggestion for, uh, cutting back in that area.
Okay.
Adam.
Adam. I can go.
I know Ellen put her hand up. I don't know.
Oh, do you want me to go? I'm, I'm happy to go, but I silence.
And if you'd like to go before Adam, you're always welcome to chime in. You don't have to raise your hand. Oh, we need, you've got something you need.
If we left the fees at what they were two years ago, um, at $2,726 per student, we would raise an additional $144,738.
If we only decreased the fee from two years ago by 20% to $2,181 per student, we would raise another $41,150.
So if we went completely, I'm, oh, I'm so sorry.
I didn't get recognized.
I just want to make sure I wrote this down.
Since I asked for it. Sorry, Adam, but I know this is important.
Go ahead, Jill.
Oh, I, I just want to make sure I wrote that down. Right. So you're saying that if we, if we only increased it to 2181, which you said was 20% decreased, so that renders 41K.
But if we totally reinstate, which is, which is what I'd asked for. So if we, we just do, uh, like four fifths of the original fee that gives us 41,000.
But if we go all the way back to two years ago, that's 144 K. And that looks a lot more promising editorializing because that's like two teacher positions that we're, we're looking into. So it looks like, it looks like that might be something to consider very seriously.
And I also would consider the Dean of academic, sorry.
Oh, sorry, Julie. I wasn't trying to know Julie finish your thought.
I'm like, I'm so sorry, Adam. I was just going to say the Dean of, I'm on a roll. Um, the Dean of, um, academic affairs is not on this, but maybe we could claw back a little bit more by doing what was on the previous page. So then I think, I think that would get us closer to what I think everybody's talking about is their priorities, which is being as close to the students as possible.
Agreed.
Um, just for context, before I go to you, Adam, again, I just, I'm not saying I support this, but I am just saying that the number Ellen just provided at the reinstated fee is for the record, still the first quarter reduction, because that was, that was the fee two years ago, which is the reduction of one quarter from the, what the fee had traditionally been.
Um, so again, I do just want us all to understand that $2,700 fee is not what kindergarten had cost for, for years.
It was the first step agreed to at priorities.
Go ahead, Adam.
Yeah.
Yeah.
Thank you, Avi. And, um, I'm on board with what you're saying there in terms of the, the kindergarten fee. Um, uh, you know, so I think as other people have stated, I, I would like to minimize the impact to students to the greatest extent possible.
Um, and I agree with the statement that Avi made in terms of, um, you know, prioritizing, uh, kind of educators helping educators as opposed to educators helping, um, students.
And so I almost think like, I would like to, to flip this on its head a little bit and start from the perspective of minimizing impact to students and then building back into administration what we can.
Um, and so I think if you, you know, when, when, when you look at that menu of reductions, if we end up and I totally recognize this is, this is remarkably painful, this is gutting, uh, administration.
Um, but if we accept kind of all of the, um, options effectively to either consolidate administrative positions or down level administrative positions, um, and it, when, when I was doing my math, I, I also eliminated the, the guidance administrative assistant and the administrative assistant.
So I don't know if that's viable, but putting that aside, you know, what you can effectively do is consolidate down level, remove the coordinators.
You can retain the assistant, um, the assistant principal, and then you can effectively retain every single teacher on this list.
Um, I did it with the exception of the, the wellness PE teacher, cause maybe we can get, um, kind of creative there as described, but I would love to say that is actually the starting point where we retain every single teacher, every single program, instrumental music, all of the arts.
Um, and then from there, if we have the ability to say that, you know, curriculum coordinators can teach, uh, additional classes, then maybe that allows us to kind of trade off, um, from, uh, a different educator in a way that isn't impacting students because kind of the, the, it, it's all even in the classroom. Um, or if we have additional funds, then we can look to, uh, reinstate a curriculum coordinator, um, or pieces of different curriculum coordinators through raising fees, or if there's different money from the town. But I think that's a much easier starting point, at least for me to understand.
And I understand that it is very difficult from a, from an administrative perspective, but if it's going to be hard, I want it to be hard for like, for us, for the adults, for the administration, um, and to, to really minimize the extent to which that is hard for the students.
I, I, I, I respect what you're saying, Adam.
I, I, I want to iterate again.
If you go that deep, you are, you are definitely going against my recommendation as an educational leader. I, I believe a hundred percent that we should do everything to protect the impact on students.
Um, but I also adamantly believe there is a breaking point of when you do not have enough support above the teacher level that has greater impact on students than some of the cuts.
I don't support any of these cuts, but if, if, if we go too full-fledged towards reducing all administration, though it adds up in numbers, I, I, I, I wouldn't, I couldn't in good conscience do that without making clear that, um, that I believe very, very strongly that the impact on students both now and for the future will be much greater in that a middle ground is in my determination by my 30 years of experience in research, something that in a difficult time like this, um, needs to be considered.
And I, I completely, I respect your opinion.
I'm not trying to, to discount it at all.
Um, I'm saying for me that I think this is, that's the starting point that I'd like to, to build off of, you know, and then if we're able to, you know, offset, you know, I like an option B kind of trying to offset some of the, the coordinator role so that they're doing more teaching, um, you know, those are the trade-offs that I think we can, we can speak about. Then we can say, oh, you know, what happens if we raise these, you know, if we, if we took kindergarten, um, from the, the kind of the, in, in the spreadsheet to what Ellen just described, you know, that would allow us to put back, you know, X percent, right?
Like I, I think the full fee would be, you know, two coordinators.
Great. Then we can bring back two coordinators.
Um, then if we're able to, like, I just want to see that as the starting point. Um, and I find it very difficult to, to take as the starting point.
Um, you know, here's how we're going to, you know, directly impact the, the education that we're delivering in the classroom. Um, there's no, uh, thanks, Avi.
Oh, I just, uh, wanted to echo the earlier sentiments.
Uh, I think it was by Julie around, um, a sort of preferring this option B, um, B adding to this list, the Dean of Academic Affairs.
And, and I guess, um, Dr. Mattel, I'd love to understand.
I'm sorry if you clarified this, but can you walk me through again, just your thought process around the reductions to the Dean of Academic Affairs, but then this kind of head of, what is it called?
Head of school counseling, like just kind of how that works, because I think that is a difference, a significant difference from that role versus kind of the savings that's, that that's affected when you add the, the sort of secondary role. So just, I'm trying to understand that piece a little bit better.
I don't think I grasped that.
Can you, can you ask that one more time? What?
So you had on the preview, on the menu sheet, you had the Dean of Academic Affairs reduced, but then add for head of school counseling.
So I think I'm trying to understand what's happening there and what that secondary role is in terms of the value you have.
Yeah.
So if, if, if the Dean of Academic Affairs was, was reduced, you would need to add a head of counseling, which would be, you know, approximately a $33,000 savings.
And then also need to reduce the guidance, admin assistant partially in the school counselor.
And so what you would have in effect, you would, you would have, actually, no, you would maintain the guidance, admin assistant, I'm sorry.
So you would have, you basically, instead of reducing the school counselor, the guidance, admin assistant, and, and a guidance, and admin assistant, as well as a partial admin assistant at the high school, you would keep a guidance, admin assistant, and a hat, at a head of counseling.
Those positions together, as well as other administrators, would pick up the responsibilities of the Dean of Academics, as well as a school counselor.
SPEAKER_UNKNOWN: Okay.
Thank you for that.
I've just one more question. Actually, is it out of balance for me to kind of go back to something we talked about in the last meeting?
No, go ahead.
So I think we left the, or I feel like we left the last meeting, which is kind of like open discrepancy, disagreement around the four versus five sections.
So not to like blow this conversation up, but that feels like a piece that matters here in this conversation to me. So I just wanted to come back to that and kind of like understand, as we're talking about all these numbers here, sort of where we're landing with that piece, because it did feel like many members on the school committee, myself being on the negotiation team as well, have a certain perspective.
And Dr. Mattel, you articulated a certain perspective and us being in alignment on that perspective, but also ensuring that the numbers you are putting forward account for the right perspective is important.
This is math here. So I just wanted to come back to that.
Yeah. So the, what, what, what will occur with the addition of the fifth class we talked about is not because it's also tied to reductions in class size and overall maintenance of approximately less than a hundred students per caseload.
It will not result in the ability to reduce the size of our staff in any significant way at the high school. That was very, very clearly part of the negotiations that there was an expectation that, you know, that we wouldn't be using that additional fifth class as a way to reduce our staff.
Now, there might be some economy that's gained by that. And once we run the schedule with all of students' choices, there might be some where, again, one of the reasons that the social studies position at the high school is one of the first positions listed is we have a retirement there.
Our class sizes currently are decent and could be bumped up a little bit more combined with the iteration of the fifth class.
We might be able to, we believe we'll be able to handle a reduction of one teacher in social studies and still stay under that hundred limit and still provide, you know, all the offerings that are, you know, that are kind of well enrolled, might have to make a couple of decisions about classes that are really have low enrollment.
And so, yeah, there might be some and we'll learn more in a month or a little, you know, less than a month when we run the schedule.
But we do not expect that there'll be significant, you know, abilities to have less staff with the change in five.
Because, again, as we discussed, you know, very, and we went through that whole thing about adding the fifth class, but also the class sizes, the overall number of kids that teachers teach will stay, you know, relatively the same.
There might be some areas, though, where they weren't teaching, you know, close to 100. And now they're teaching more classes and that might provide some, you know, so some of those areas where teachers had lower enrollment in some of their classes, that might provide some opportunities for some savings. But we won't understand that fully until, you know, all course selections are made and the schedule is run for the first time.
Got it.
Thank you.
Dr. Mattel, before we move on to any other options, I want to touch on this one. So, you know, again, like I think I've said a handful of times now and I've heard others say my preference is still the same in the category of counseling.
The my commitment to instrumental music at elementary is still something I want to reiterate.
I do want to say that.
In the time that I've.
Known you and that you've been our superintendent, I've.
You know, really respected and appreciated about the way that you go about these conversations and the way that you interact with this committee to share your views and your opinions.
And guide us. But ultimately work really collaboratively and respectfully with us. And so, you know, in the same tone, I've I don't think unless there was unless I've missed it in the three years that we've worked together and in the two years that you and I have worked closely together in my role as chair that I've ever heard you say something as strongly in your conviction, as you said a few minutes ago in an answer to Adam. And so I do want you to know that I heard that.
And ultimately for me, and I'm speaking as as just my role in my vote, there are things in this budget that matter deeply to me. And there are certain things that I there are certain hills I have to die on because the people who elect me are strong in the case of any of them. But there is really no appetite on my part to try to overrule or supersede your view as our educational leader, especially on the things that you would go so far out as to make a claim like you did a few moments ago. So, you know, well, well, I think all of us respect your opinions.
I think also I and I don't say this like the others don't.
I just don't want to speak for everybody. I respect your expertise.
And so I'm not saying that just as an attaboy or a pat on the back.
I heard what you said.
And I want you to know that it wasn't missed on my part, at least the difference in the way that you normally make your points versus the way that you said that.
Yeah, well, yeah, I appreciate that. And, you know, I know you guys are trying to make the decision that's best for the district.
And I just when I speak strongly, it's just because I would I would hate for you not to hear the conviction.
And I was appreciated.
No, it's very much appreciated.
I think it's when you especially when you go about things the way you normally do and then speak that way. I think it helps, at least for me, it helps me to understand the level to which you believe in that conviction.
All right, moving forward. Do we want to walk through the addbacks or do we want to I guess this is a question for the committee?
We want to walk through the addbacks or do we want to kick some of these comments we've made and feelings we have about the 312 or as when reminded me earlier today, the 3127 budget and sort of try to get to a place where we can give Dr. Botello a strong indication of a budget he could bring us and pass.
Looks like with hands raised, there's some discussion here. Veronica. Thanks, Avi.
Personally, for me, I think it would be more productive if we could go through.
I know, you know, having reviewed this prior to us coming together, those options A and B in this deck, just because I feel like some of the conversation might be resolved if people got to see those. So it just might be more efficient.
And I'm speaking for myself now. I think it would be more efficient for me to see kind of the rest of the presentation to know what might be on those addback versions of these budgets.
So my vote would be to go through just to so we everyone has the full info.
Veronica, I have no problem.
Go ahead. I think one little value of that, even like going over it quickly, I think it does show what I'm saying.
Like I believe that there's a breaking point and then you'll see me attacking those, the remaining mangers of the instructional positions pretty hardly, as well as looking at that elementary, that elementary administrator as well.
So even just looking at it quickly might just kind of give a little preview of if we are able to work with the town to raise our, our, you know, our, our budget a little bit, what the opportunities, what opportunities exist.
So Veronica, I just have slightly different view on you than you on that only in the sense that I think it's really important for the committee here to understand and be prepared.
To vote a 3-1-2-7 budget that we can bring to Finna.
And so to me, I think the ad backs are crucial and I think the ad backs and the values that Dr. Botello and this committee can put forward as to what we would do with any additional allocation is important.
But I do think for me, I struggle with the idea of taking what those ad backs are into consideration when voting a 3-1-2-7 budget, because for me, it feels like we're then banking on additional allocation, which I think the priorities committee and then again, this committee has indicated we are not advocating for it. Or to say not advocating for, I think it's the wrong way. I think we all would like, we all believe we're going to make, to make such deep cuts that if there is a way for this town to limit those cuts, we certainly believe that that's the right thing to do, I think.
But I think we, we, with any integrity, have to be prepared to, to vote a budget at 3-1-2-7 that we can live with and stomach.
So for me personally, the other pages, which don't change the information, except for what we would do at higher allocations are irrelevant, at least in trying to get to the 3-1-2-7.
That's my view.
I see Sean has her hand up.
I just want to say, I appreciate you explaining that because I, I didn't understand that you, that was what you wanted from us. And I fully understand where you're coming from. So thanks for explaining that.
Yeah. And to be clear, I'm one member of this committee.
I believe that we should be prepared to see and vote on Wednesday, a 3-1-2-7 budget.
That, that is my belief.
This committee has the right, if four, if there are four people that don't feel that way, then certainly I can be in the minority in feeling that way. I can't in good conscience vote a budget that is above that allocation.
I can support ad backs.
I can advocate for them when we, when we look at additional possible revenues and when we work with the rest of the town. But I, I need a budget personally in order for me to vote yes on Wednesday on something. I need a budget at 3-1-2-7 that I can believe could move our district, not forward in the sense that, but that we will survive that, that that's what I personally need just in my role, not in my role as chair, just in my role as one member of seven voters.
Shauna.
So just, just to clarify and summarize, we're really not looking then past this workbook of option a option B. because your goal right now is to get us at a 3.127.
Should we have the, I'll call it a luxury after meeting with priorities and FinCom to then be allocated more money.
We could go back then and look at option a at 3.75,
say for instance, is that, is that my understanding?
Well, so I, so just the, they, I mean, generally, generally, I think, I think you understand my point generally, but I do want to clarify that.
I just want to clarify for like the greater public of the 400 something people that are like here.
Just so everybody kind of understands the.
Sure. The only two things, the only two, two pieces I want to clarify that I think are important there for you and for anybody paying attention is again, I happen to chair the meeting.
And so, because I have to call on people and whatnot, it might feel like my voice carries a little bit, but the reality is I'm one of seven members.
So that's obvious preference.
We don't have to go in that direction.
People can speak up.
And then also the second thing is, I believe it's the responsible thing to do to when we vote a budget, also vote support for Dr.
Botello.
To, as a group with Dr. Botello approve an agreed upon set of ad backs.
So that if those allocations change above a three, one, two, seven, Dr. Botello has already said.
And what, what would happen at three, five at three, seven at four, rather than come back and rehash.
So I think inappropriate.
My, my view is an appropriate thing to do is get to a budget at three, one, two, seven.
That we can vote on and hopefully pass. Pass and also agree to what the ad back schedule looks like.
When go ahead.
Yeah.
So I, I will agree that I think we have to get to a 3.127
as these two options stand a and B I would vote neither of them.
There are some things that I feel I have reactions to. They're not a hard no for me. And there are a couple items on both of these that are hard notes for me.
So for example, I am a pretty hard no on the instrumental music.
I am queasy about some of the specialist cuts.
I'm also queasy about the elementary assistant principal and the school counselor.
If that's helpful.
But I do think that before we talk about ad backs, we have to fundamentally agree on the bottom line and we don't, well, actually I don't agree on the bottom line. As it's presented here.
I'm not entirely convinced of either option.
Okay.
Yeah.
I was just going to jump in and say, I do think there is a value to us coming to some agreement on the 3.12
or the final option before we move forward. We can have the ad backs conversation, but that feels like, like a luxury.
So I guess that's the question.
Like, is there a consensus around us spending some time workshopping what we all agree on?
And then what are the pieces we kind of need to figure out? We need to plug in.
Adam.
Yeah. So I, I 100% support what prison was saying.
And I think beyond that, until we know what we're cutting, how do we know what we're adding back?
Right. So I would start with here's, here's what's in and here's what's out. And then from that list of what's out, we can prioritize.
Here's what would come back. If we had additional allocation.
That's a great point, right? Because the ad back schedule changes.
If we eliminate something that otherwise would have been in already.
Go ahead, Julie. Thank you.
Can I make a, like, I don't know, proposal or a suggestion that we're doing here.
So, okay.
So if we bring back the old fees for free full day, okay, that's $144.
According to the other page, if we replace the Dean of academic affairs and we replace that with a head of school counseling, that's $33,000.
So then that gives us $177,000.
So if we bring back the guidance, administrative assistant, that's $30,000.
Please forgive me if I'm using the wrong numbers. If we bring back the music, that's $70,000.
And that leaves us with $77,000, which could bring back a second coordinator.
I have no idea if that's correct.
I think that math is pretty close and pretty close to accurate.
What do we do? How do people feel about the assistant principal at the elementary level?
I know Shauna had spoken pretty strongly and on, on things, especially when it applies to special ed, I, I do weigh Shauna's opinion a little bit differently than the rest of ours.
Um, you know, for me, I, I, I trust Dr. Botella's instinct there also, but I'm curious what the group, how the group feels about that position. Cause I mean, Julie, you sort of nailed in a lot of ways, my priorities here, um, to be honest, but I'm curious how people feel.
When?
I guess I'm kind of curious how that plays out logistically.
Um, does, does each assistant principal split two schools?
How, how much time do they spend in each school?
How do you know, how often are they going back and forth between each school? It just feels messy and inefficient.
Although I understand that, you know, we need to find the, find the, the cut and the savings, but logistically it, I don't know that it makes a lot of sense to me right now. I think the concept of, especially at the smaller schools, cottage and East sharing a special education administrator is, is not without its merits in its own.
Um, the, um, it would be a stretch, but that's something, um, you know, is a model, um, where, you know, one individual is strictly focused on special education and student services. And the other is focused.
And if we had a second was focused on, you know, more of the AP role.
Um, uh, so I think it, it, it, even though it seems like it is not logical to some, it, it could be, it's a very, it's very focused on that.
Uh, but again, loses has, you know, um, the, the assistant principal, basically, you know, cut from both of those schools, which has its, you know, um, deficit.
So I, I think, but I think the special education part, um, can work just like you sometimes have, you know, team chairs across multiple schools.
Um, this would be, you know, uh, uh, uh, special education administrator type role across, you know, to school with that focus solely, but you do lose the assistant principal part. So that's, that's the part that is, is, is a loss. Thank you.
That, that, that explanation makes sense to me.
Julie, did you have your hand up?
Oh, uh, no, no.
Should I?
Okay. That's cool. Adam, it's your turn then.
Okay.
Sorry.
So just to, to follow up and clarify.
So right now, each building has their own, uh, kind of special education coordinator slash assistant principal.
Is that, is that right?
Yeah.
And Heights has that, you know, the largest population of, um, uh, of, uh, special needs students, including, um, two of our larger programs as well. So that one would, you know, really mean, maintain, maintain, be intact, um, with, you know, um, with perhaps some support for the other schools, but for the most part would, would remain, intact as far as that position would primarily solve, uh, serve that school.
The other position would serve, um, cottage in East.
Gotcha.
So, so effectively what we're saying is we would maintain the special education coordination across both schools, but both schools would lose an assistant principal.
More or less. Yes.
SPEAKER_UNKNOWN: All right.
Thank you. So, um, Shauna.
Um, so I see, Miss Murphy on here and I'm just wondering, Dr.
Botello, it, that seems like more of an organizational shift within the special, like student services department.
And if we're going to shift team chairs or special ed coordinators, do we want to look at including the EEC or maybe partnering the out of district coordinator?
I mean, like, again, like this kind of just brings a different layer amongst it. And I really have a hard time losing the assistant principal.
So I think like, like if we're, I agree with you, Dr. Botello, like, I think with the two small schools, if we wanted to look and make a 1.0 special education administrator type team chair position, it's, it's pretty common to see, um, that across smaller schools.
It's very manageable because the, again, the job is pretty concrete and direct.
Um, but I think that's kind of opening possibly a can of worms.
And how do we get back our assistant principal at the elementary level? That's my biggest concern. Makes sense.
Um, all right.
Do, does anybody else have anything move us forward here?
I know, I think Julie had sort of pushed forward an idea that try to build some consensus around.
I personally was supportive of it. Um, I think, go ahead, Adam.
Uh, I'm just curious.
So I know we, we've been talking a lot, um, at the table and we've been working through a lot of options.
Um, and we have a lot of people here, uh, although the numbers is starting to drop a little bit.
Um, I'm curious to, to reach out and, and hear a little bit from the community at this point. Like we've been talking through, when, when can we get kind of their take, you know, in particular, I know we have, you have folks here from CPAC. Like, I'd love to get some additional, um, context on some of these proposals.
Right.
Um, yeah, I think that that's a good point. I know also we have a lot of educators on, and I think that that's an opinion, um, that matters quite a bit. So I think if everyone on the committee's cool, I would probably give a little bit of deferential treatment, uh, to our educators, as far as who we call on first, um, make sense.
Don't all speak at once.
All right.
Um, do I have anybody who can keep time? We'll keep it to two minutes.
I can, I can do that. I mean, all right.
Appreciate you. All right.
Uh, I see Lori Davis.
Do we want to take down the slide just for the open comment portion?
Please.
Or maybe leave it up for the people.
I mean, it just, I can just tell you it's hard for me a little bit, but, um, to see who I'm calling on and all the hands.
That's fine. I can minimize this. I'm fine.
All right.
I think I called.
Me, Lori Davis.
I'm not sure.
Um, hi, I'm, I'm here. Um, I just wanted to, uh, speak as a teacher at the high school, um, a little bit about the coordinator's position and, um, my concern about the cut to the coordinator's position, as well as cutting an assistant principal to halftime.
Um, coordinators are very important, not only to each department, but also, uh, and the assistant principals are as well in conducting observations of classrooms, um, and doing our observations, our formal observations.
And I guess my concern would be if we're cutting an assistant principal to part-time and we're cutting, um, possibly cutting coordinators, my concern would be about the feedback teachers would receive in regards to the evaluation process, um, um, um, and how it would be expected for, you know, department heads, if, if that's what the route we're going, um, to be able to, to manage six through 12, it just seems fairly overwhelming.
As a former department head at my last district, managing, you know, a small department of 10 was hard enough as it was while teaching a half course load.
So I just want to keep that in mind as well, that the coordinators are, and the assistant principals are extraordinarily important for, for teacher growth and feedback on their evaluation process.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Uh, Jackie Kay.
Hi, thank you for, um, giving me the chance to speak. I have been a school counselor at Sharon High School for the better part of 20 years. Um, I was concerned to see this cut come on the table.
I just wanted to be sure if people are aware of our contractual caseload cap.
From what I was hearing, it sounds like you're looking at raising the caseload of counselors.
There is a contractual caseload cap of 200.
Um, also concerned about the impact of the loss of the Dean of Academic Affairs.
Um, it is a student focused forward position, seeing as this kind of came as a surprise, um, on this meeting.
I'm not fully prepared to speak to it. However, um, I would ask that you take a look and see what the impact is on students.
Today alone, we, we all saw dozens of students about course selection.
There's a myriad of things that we do that that position is, um, intertwined with, if you will, as well as supervision and, and things like that, that keep our kids safe. Um, coming off the heels of COVID, I can assure you that that person, that position rather had quite a bit of interactions with students.
So I would respectfully request that maybe you evaluate the impact of that position a little bit further, as well as the potential loss of a school counselor.
Um, we, we, we meet with students all day long. Um, um, so I would respectfully request that you take a look at that.
There's a lot of things we do that we may not be able to do. Also, we do oversee 504s at the high school.
We write them and we oversee them along with the Dean of academic affairs.
So I just wanted people to be clear on that.
Thank you.
Dr. Giselle.
Hi, thank you. Um, clearly the writing's on the wall in terms of, you know, my position and everyone's thoughts on my position.
So I'm not here to speak about that.
I would just like to advocate for everybody else's position that's here.
Um, when I have gone in, looked at the budget and looked at, ways that we can save, um, the 1.5 million.
Um, I can do that without making any cuts to coordinators, without making any cuts to APs, without making any cut to counselors, um, with just taking into account teachers who we know are naturally leaving.
Um, and a couple of, uh, positions that I know are going to be retiring next year. In addition, there are ways to do this by, um, as already discussed, you know, reinstating the kindergarten fee, perhaps starting to, um, institute some fees for what I consider to be level one clubs, for example, drama club, um, you know, places where, uh, salaries are coming out of the operating budget, looking at ways to reduce in, um, non-student centered places.
So for example, supply lines, um, you know, extra items, copy machines. There's a lot of ways that you can be creative without touching a single one of these people, um, on this list. And I would just say, given that you all, there's not a single person in this town that doesn't want academic excellence for our schools and doesn't want the value of our schools to decline. I highly recommend you really look at how to do this without making any of these cuts, um, to the people who are day to day working with children.
Um, and I'm certainly happy to show you a list of them if you need that. Thank you.
Thank you. Casey McLaughlin.
Thank you. Um, I wanted to say that, um, I wanted to first of all, thank Avi and Adam for making themselves available for, uh, residents to contact them today.
Both gentlemen answered all of my questions.
We're very candid about, um, their opinions as well regarding the budget. I had proposed the idea of putting Metco on the negotiation table. Um, cause I read in a Boston globe article that they only reversed $8,300 per student.
I was under the impression that we were losing money as a result, but it was totally reasonable to, um, put it on the table. But, um, even though the calculus isn't a hundred percent clear, um, overall, it seems that hosting Metco actually makes us eligible for state funding, which, um, turns out to be a net positive.
So I wouldn't have known that if it weren't for these guys who took the time, uh, to have the conversation.
So thank you again. I really appreciate that.
Um, I did want to say, I disagree with Dr. Patel's argument that teachers are unable to coordinate curriculum.
Even our younger teachers should be able to take the frameworks, come up with some essential questions and backwards design their way from assessment and rubric to create some lesson plans.
Hopefully, um, everybody learned this in grad school. That's what the program's for, uh, those teacher prep programs. And now that we have AI, there's, you know, a myriad of ways that we can be creative about this as well.
As for collaboration though, within the departments, isn't that what all of these half days are for?
I, that's what I thought it was for. Um, why not within each department, create these curriculum teams of two or three teachers that teach those classes and have them coordinate their curriculum under the oversight of the assistant superintendent of curriculum and instruction, who would be in charge of all of the pacing. And as, uh, all of the observations, which was just mentioned, um, you know, observations don't happen all the time. They're staggered throughout.
So making sure all of the departments are in compliance.
I'm sorry, your time's up. That's fine. Thank you. That's all I need to say.
Thank you.
Uh, Mary Belinky. Mary Belinky.
Mary Belinky.
Oh, sorry about that. Can you hear me now?
Okay.
Um, so I, first I want to thank this committee for handling such a difficult conversation.
So respectfully of all the people who are involved.
And I want to make two points.
Uh, the first of all, we are dealing with people.
So for example, we talk about cutting the leap teacher because this year we happen not to have any leap students.
We are losing that expertise when we know that next year, we quite likely will have students or maybe the year after who will need her back. So we should think about maybe, um, um, making sure we could keep, uh, uh, this teacher around by maybe finding a new position for her. At the same time, our curriculum coordinators, which, um, have been yo-yoed back and forth for several years now. I think we need to accept the fact that structurally this, this, uh, district cannot afford curriculum coordinators as much as we want to. And we need to figure out a new way to operate. Um, as Mrs. McLaughlin said, there are creative ways to do it. Besides relying on people, we should start relying more on structure. For example, purchasing curriculums, which more naturally lend themselves to, to coordination.
For example, in math, it's pretty straightforward.
If you have a, if you have a math textbook, you agree which chapters get covered with things like ELA or social studies.
Once again, you agree which topics get covered, which books get read.
Um, it's, um, it's easier, obviously in some departments and others. And to some degree, we have to accept that our teachers, which I know are better paid than in some districts.
Hopefully that means they come, we get better teachers.
They will bring their personality into the classroom. And yes, the students will get different instructions here and there, but we need to focus on keeping the teachers.
And not the people who administer the teachers.
Um, so I think honestly, uh, when Mr. Shane suggested that we should start with a budget, which basically keeps all the teachers and only then think about, you know, which cuts are absolutely necessary.
I think that is a much better starting point. And I hope that we just have to accept that we have to start operating differently.
Thank you. All right.
Thank you. Dan Newman.
Thanks.
Hi everyone.
Last Wednesday, we saw a list of proposed cuts.
We remember the shock. We felt to see the magnitude of the teacher cuts on that list. Don't wait.
Teachers in essential positions like math, reading, art, uh, foreign languages, librarians, AP teachers, special ed teachers, without those teachers, we don't have a school.
That's what I felt.
Uh, some of those essential teacher positions have come off this list of cuts.
I'm grateful for that. Thank you.
Some are still on the list. Uh, those losses would be felt deeply.
I hope we can reduce the list of teacher cuts further.
My whole family are teachers.
My parents are teachers. My wife's a teacher. My brother and his wife are teachers and so on. I know how essential every classroom teacher is.
So naturally the question is, what do we cut instead?
Last week, I asked to prioritize non-essential administrative layers.
That's a budgeting term, non-essential again, not a value judgment about the positions.
Uh, and it's clear from this presentation to me, at least that consolidations, while very difficult are possible between administrative positions in our district that tracks with the recommendation I made last week to focus there. First consolidating, uh, the number of assistant superintendents is one example of consolidating academic affairs department is another.
I hope to see more teacher positions coming off that list before this process is final.
Uh, if it's between administrative layers and our teachers, I prioritize teachers first.
Um, some of the teachers on the call described other models for coordination.
I thought that was interesting. It's not that we wouldn't do coordination, but there are different models.
Um, maybe we could use a model that puts more teachers in the classroom, something to consider today. Wasn't a full prioritization.
The kind that I'm used to, there are non-essential administrative positions that weren't even considered.
We don't know why, uh, we didn't have an opportunity to rank them. We should do a full prioritization like that every year.
That's what I want to see.
Uh, even so these are the kinds of options I asked to see last week. You brought them here.
Thank you. I appreciate it.
Um, and thank you for listening to the community. I feel that you did.
Thank you.
That's the whole purpose of these meetings.
Thanks.
Thank you.
Boris.
Hello everyone.
Uh, first of all, you guys did an amazing job at making the whole budget cut proposal a lot more humane to say the least.
And I totally agree with what Mr. Shane said about minimize the impact on students because this is really what it's all about.
And some of the things, some of the points I was going to make, they were already made before, like consolidate the, um, the admin position onto, onto the teachers.
I'm really, sorry about that.
I'm, I would really be against cutting any teacher positions because I mean, students after all, they have like favorite teachers, not favorite admins.
Or, or I'm coordinator.
So that's all.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Emily.
Mark.
Hi, thank you for recognizing me.
Um, I have, uh, several points here. I'm going to try and do those quickly.
Um, before I get into anything about coordinator jobs, which is a role that I fell, um, I wanted to mention the Dean of academic affairs position that coordinates MCAS AP exams is already doing the job of two people and working with his department and working with students and carrying a caseload.
And, and, and, and, and continuing to go on. And the only reason I know the committee has received a lot of letters in support of the coordinator positions is because we had kind of a heads up on Friday that we may see our positions on this list. And that was not the case with some of these other positions.
And we've gone through this exercise before of talking about coordinator jobs. We've gone through the exercise of talking about the Dean of academic affairs position.
And I guarantee you that if there was a heads up on Friday, you would have gotten just as many letters in support of that position.
Um, another point that I wanted to make is about, um, the counselor, uh, position.
And if there's a counselor cut at the high school, that means that they would go over their contractual number of students per counselor, which is 200 to one, um, which is already an extremely large number. Um, so that's extremely concerning for me and should be for all of you who want to focus on those that are facing students every day.
Um, and a lot of these things that have been brought up in regards to the coordinator position, counselors, riffing teachers really needs to be negotiated and discussed with the union, um, president at the very least, and give us a chance to look at alternate solutions.
And to help meet those budgetary guidelines.
Um, so the last piece is about coordinators.
I think there's a lack of understanding of exactly how much we do. We did send a letter to school committee.
And if I could read all six pages of it to all of you, um, including two and a half page long job description, I would do that, but I can't do it in my two minute, um, time limit.
What I can do is say that collectively we oversee 122 teachers teaching over 176 different courses and multiple sections of those courses.
Um, every day we're interacting with students and we teach our own courses and help with clubs and do the seal of bi-literacy and do travel opportunities and outside opportunities for students. We are constantly working with the counseling department to make sure students are placed in the appropriate courses.
There's a lot of value and student facing time that we have that I want you all to be aware of. So if I could share that letter with every single person on this call, that would be great. And I would do it. Um, I just want you to be aware that of course there's repercussions for any cuts, but some have even deeper and, um, more repercussions than others. And I think we need to start looking at that.
Thank you. Thank you.
Judith Weider.
Hi, thanks for recognizing me. Um, like Ms. Burke, I wrote everything down in bullets. So apologies.
This seems a little disjointed.
Um, first off, I appreciate that tonight's presentation has far more creative solutions than the prior options.
So thank you.
Um, I also need to see the options side by side because it's a little hard not to be able to see it all on one screen and scroll at will. So it's, it's hard for me to give complete feedback on a versus B.
Um, I'd also like to co-sign everything Dr. Dussault said about finding even more creative options.
Um, she's a credit to this district and we're lucky to have her in, in town and in Sharon public schools.
Uh, point of clarification.
I keep hearing 3.127,
but the priorities allocation is 3.1227.
I understand it's one extra syllable, but I want to confirm we're budgeting the right amount because those do lead to two different dollar amounts at the scale we're talking about.
Um, I'm in favor of reinstating full day K, but I would recommend going back to the full cost as opposed to going to the fee we had only two years ago.
I understand we have a goal to get rid of the fee altogether, but financially that doesn't seem feasible right now. And it may not be feasible for the next several years.
And frankly, if it's a choice of multiple teachers or specialists versus a full K fee, I'm in favor of that full fee for, you know, basically to, to save those jobs because we need those more than, than that.
Um, I also want to co-sign Julie's proposal to allow students to use a sport to substitute for their PE or wellness requirement.
Um, particularly for those that are juniors and seniors next year. I'm curious about what that would actually mean for students who've already submitted their course selections, because they know those are in flight right now.
Um, this was something that had been discussed last year and we thought it was happening and then it didn't happen. And we'd love to see it happen. I also want to say, um, Avi and when I agree with you about instrumental music, it's really important.
And I'm concerned about the equity issues that it raises.
If that becomes only a fee-based afterschool program.
And then lastly, I want to, um, just echo what Ms. Kay said.
Um, she's also a gem.
Um, please don't reduce our school counselors.
We need all of them.
We need more of them probably, but please don't take any of them away.
Thank you. Thank you.
Judy Crosby.
Uh, hi. Thanks Avi. Could I ask that you come back to me and call on three teachers who currently have their hands raised?
Ms. Kelly, Ms. Carroll, and Ms. Max.
Um, I think I, I always, when I chaired, tried to give deference to letting teachers and students speak first and I feel strongly about it. Thanks.
Tina Kelly.
Hi, can you see me? Okay.
Can you hear me? Okay.
Yes.
Okay.
Um, so my name is Tina Kelly. I am the six through 12 math coordinator.
Um, I sat in this meeting last week and listened to the budget presentation.
Um, and then I listened to everyone call for remover of the coordinators.
Um, this is my first year in this position.
I came from Natick where I was a middle school math department head.
Um, I just want this committee to consider when you start dismantling the things that, um, really, you know, behind the scenes work that we do, what costs it will be on the education.
So I'm an educator.
I'm a teacher.
I ha I teach a class of algebra two.
Um, I spend half my day with kids, whether it's working with them in my classroom and, or meeting with them to talk about their needs in the math classes.
Um, I became a coordinator.
I could have stayed a teacher my entire career because I love teaching.
I decided to become a department head and then a coordinator and specifically to come to Sharon because teachers need that in between level of support.
Okay.
Because administrative duties that principals do assistant principals do does not really allow teachers to get that level of support. Um, I'd be happy to share the work that we're doing on a daily basis. So you can see the impact we're having on students, um, and the impact we're having on teachers.
I just, and I would say the same thing about, you know, Bob Homer, who's our, um, our head of our counseling right now.
If you start dismantling the system, you're not going to get the results that you want. And so I would call, let's really look at our budget.
Can we cut down our supplies by 20%? Are there ways that we can be creative?
Because I think we can, I'm not, I don't want to eliminate anybody.
And, but I do feel like you're starting to dismantle the things that make us good and strong.
And I think you really need to consider that because the impact will be huge.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Nicole Carroll.
Hi, thank you. Can you hear me?
I can hear you. Thank you. Awesome.
Thank you for, um, allowing some time for everybody to speak. My name is Nicole Carroll. I'm a third grade teacher at East Elementary. I have been a teacher at East Elementary for eight years and have been teaching for 10.
Um, I had prepared something to say in response to last week's budget presentation.
And I am thankful to see that there are, um, less elementary classroom positions being cut in the budget.
But I do think that some of what I had prepared is valuable to share to the community.
Um, with just going over how drastically our jobs have changed, um, and how the state of education has changed even in the last 10 years.
Um, you know, I can, I feel like with confidence, I can say my job was significantly easier back in 2014 when I started teaching.
And, you know, post pandemic, we are facing a large increase in social emotional needs, um, special ed needs, English language learner needs, um, behavior needs.
The list could go on and on. My job is not just teaching third grade standards anymore.
There's so much that goes into it every day.
And while there's not a lot of classroom teacher cuts at the elementary level on this, on these two different proposed budgets, um, what concerns me is how this could affect the tier two instruction and all that we've done at the elementary level, um, for our wind blocks, which are intervention blocks that happen four days a week.
Um, we've worked so hard to really try, fill those gaps post pandemic.
Um, and they're there and they're, you know, it's getting more and more challenging with each year and, you know, cutting something like the fourth math specialist would really affect our tier two interventions.
I know right now, um, we have two reading specialists and then one math specialist plus a floater who's at my school for part-time.
And during a given win block, we have both reading specialists pulling, um, two separate groups, the teacher pulling a group and the math specialist pulling a group.
So I really just wanted to provide some insight on how some of these students still directly affect students.
Um, and you know, if there's ever any questions you could feel free to reach out. Thank you. Thank you.
Thank you.
Shawna Max. Hi, thank you so much.
Um, so I'm Shana Max.
In addition to teaching social studies, um, in eighth grade at Sharon middle school, I'm also a product of the Sharon public school systems, a daughter of the product of the Sharon public school systems, a sister, a niece, and a cousin of products of the Sharon public school systems.
I'm very well invested in the community and in making sure, um, that it succeeds. I know that our schools are a big reason why people come to the town.
Um, I would like to address, uh, the possibility of the cuts for coordinators.
Social studies, um, has had not had a coordinator.
The last time those positions were on the chopping block, um, social studies was the only one that was actually cut. So we have functioned without a coordinator.
I, I do understand what it means to take on those responsibilities.
We had, uh, teachers at the middle and high school level who, uh, stepped in and stepped in well and the facilitator position.
Um, but at the same time, I think that gives us some insight into what not having a coordinator means for the department.
Um, and in particular, I actually sort of want to take exception with some of the language that I've been hearing about the role of the coordinator, because it feels very much like it's being posited as if it's solely something that's beneficial to the teachers, as if that isn't also something that is at its heart, beneficial to the students.
If I have a coordinator, who's helping to guide me in the best ways to address the brand new civics MCAS that's coming down the pipeline in two months, um, who attended, you know, various trainings on it so that I can be in the classroom with my students and then tailor my curriculum best to help them be successful that way. That's not a benefit to me directly as an individual.
That's a benefit to me in terms of what I can give to my students.
And that's true about vertical alignment, coordinating with the high school. That's true about budgetary things for providing for the civic action project, which is state mandated for my students. So, uh, I argue for the coordinators, not because it benefits me, but because it allows me to better benefit my students.
Thank you. Thank you.
Rebecca Smoller.
Hi, thank you. Um, I'm just lowering my hand.
Um, Shana actually really just said a lot of, what I wanted to say. Um, I've been listening to this meeting all night and I've been hearing a lot about positions that have kind of been deemed not student facing and therefore not as essential.
And so I just wanted to reiterate some of those points that I think for a lot of these seemingly non-student facing roles, if we're doing our jobs well, um, then we're allowing the teachers to have all of that quality, amazing quality instructional, social, um, social, emotionally developing time with your kids, which allows them to come home and say what a positive experience that they're having with their teachers. A lot of the cuts that I've heard tonight, um, along with those cuts, I've heard lots of language that puts more work on the teachers that the district is claiming to care so much about. And so, um, I just wanted to point that out. If, if we are a district that is claiming to value teachers, then putting them in a position to take on additional roles of having to think about their supply ordering, having to communicate their curriculum to families, having to attend more meetings with community members and families, um, being responsible for looking at the alignment from fifth grade to sixth grade, to making sure that we're supporting literacy or that kids have their math skills, that's all now going to be placed on the teachers, um, in addition to all of the work that they're already doing. And so, um, same goes for the Dean of Academic Affairs.
Um, maybe it seems like in that position, they're not directly facing students all the time, but they're doing all of the work that allows students to access the courses that they want to take. And, um, you know, think about what their pathway is going to be after high school and supporting the counselors in having all of that meaningful one-on-one counseling time with students.
So I would just ask to, um, maybe take a closer look at, um, you know, what those roles, what the impact might be on teachers and then in effect students.
All right.
Thank you, Julie. I see my time is up.
Thank you. Thank you.
Uh, Jennifer McCullough.
Hello.
Can you hear me?
Can hear you.
Yes. Great. Okay.
Um, so I'm Jen McCullough.
I'm a world language teacher at the high school. Um, I have been for 16 years.
Um, I've been on the call now for however long an hour and a half. And I felt that I couldn't sign off the call, um, without speaking in support of our steady, consistent, wise, multifaceted, does everything director of student services.
Um, I've heard his, his position thrown out there quite a bit. Um, he does a lot for us, for the school, for the district, um, our wonderful, hardworking coordinators.
I wrote a letter in there, you know, speaking their glories this morning.
Um, I'm just really asking, I, I just can't fathom that there aren't other line items in the budget. And I unfortunately did not have time to look at every line item. I started to, but I couldn't had other things to do.
Um, but I really ask that you check every single line item in the budget down to the penny, the markers, the Chromebooks, the paper, the online subscriptions, the site licenses, the consultants, the professional development, the textbooks, by the way, in my department, we haven't purchased or used a textbook in 10 years. We create every single document slide that we use.
We create ourselves.
So I'm kind of puzzled about these conversations about purchased curricula.
I've heard comments about needless to say, I'm really concerned watching these cuts.
It feels like our lives as teachers, um, as my fellow teachers have mentioned, it's gotten a lot harder. And there are many of us who are wondering how difficult teaching will be next year.
If a lot of these cuts, um, happen.
So, um, I just, please, please ask that you consider other items that are not people.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Jody Spear.
Hi, thank you so much. I'm going to try not to be too long. Um, I too have been on, like most of us, we've been on this meeting for an hour and a half, but I feel it's very necessary to speak about the, um, elementary assistant principal position that's being talked about being cut. Um, I work at the East elementary school and the special education department, and we've heard a lot about the coordinators positions and the director of student services. And I agree with that position, but I think it's very, very important to talk about the assistant principal, who is the person who does the special ed coordination at the, at the elementary schools, and also has responsibilities under the assistant principal, which includes the social emotional learning, the behaviors, the discipline, the tone of the building.
And having been in education for 35 years, 22 years of Whitman Hanson, and my ninth year here in this district, um, I've seen this play out in different ways. And when you have, when you turn over this chairing of special ed meetings to many different people and many different facets, it can open itself up to many different unintentional issues without having it streamlined.
Um, additionally, having a person share the two elementary schools then means that you have neither building being fully efficient and neither building, dealing, having someone in place for that social emotional stuff and dealing with the discipline.
I'm sorry I'm not speaking more eloquently because I wasn't going to speak, but I just, I am very upset to hear about the assistant principal and sharing it between two elementary schools.
The way our schools are now, the needs of the students, the population of our students is so different as it, as you were all well aware of it.
The assistant principal and the director of students, they're, they're very important positions. And in fact, one last thing I would like to say is special ed teachers, it will directly impact us who will directly impact the special ed students because we will then have more on our plates to do leading the meetings, setting up the meetings, doing the paperwork that we're going to have to turn where we won't have as much direct service with the kids. It's, it is a domino effect.
And I just want to say that.
Thank you.
Thank you.
Judy Crosley.
Thank you, Avi. And thank you for indulging my request to take educators first.
So I had a couple of things.
First, I wish, and I don't know that there's time to do this, that every single proposed cut had actually been talked through because we're talking about cutting the director of facilities and a maintenance person and going to one combined position for half the cost. We have a new bigger building.
And last year it was identified that one of our greatest needs was an additional custodian for that new bigger building.
And, and we didn't get it. And now we're cutting more. And on your agenda for Wednesday night is putting in a statement of interest for, for, for, you know, for elementary funding to the MSBA, which of course requires somebody in that position, which is a relatively large position.
I would like people to listen to Dr. Dussaud, who, as always, is incredibly classy, arguing for everyone else's jobs.
You know, she says she has a plan.
I would consider it. I would put everything on the table.
Please go all the way back to full day K fees. I advocated for years to not have full day K fees.
I voted against them, but I will never vote or recommend cutting humans who currently work in our district over instituting a fee.
Right. Right.
And, and if you reinstate them to full, you could, it would be twice what Alan said it would be if she went to Julie's increase, which would have put them back to three quarters of what they were in fiscal year 22, put them all the way to what they were in fiscal year 22 and, and raise 300,000 more dollars.
Please walk through every single one of these cuts, go to the high school and talk to the kids. SPEAKER_UNKNOWN: The, the impact on that building.
If you cut to a halftime vice principal, if you cut a school counselor, besides not meeting your contractual obligations, is huge.
And, and also I think it was Rebecca smaller who made the point that you're trying to increase the work on the teachers by these cuts.
Remember each place where it says, well, we'll go back and bargain with the STA. You don't have time.
You have to get a budget done.
You got to look at what. Ms. Crosby. You're over time. Thank you.
Thank you, Robbie.
Hi, I'm going to, can you hear me?
Yeah.
Okay.
I'm going to take a little different course than everybody else who spoke. I'd like to first thank you all the teachers for staying on the call at this late hour on a Monday night.
I know working in a neighboring district, I'm faded a long time ago.
A lot of our kids, former and current teachers are on this call. Um, so I'm going to speak on behalf that what's become glaringly obvious sitting through multiple meetings is a lack of understanding.
Although I will give you that you're trying by the superintendent and the school committee of exactly what educators do day in and day out. Um, what makes a building function, what makes them a team, what makes our kids thrive.
Um, um, it just clear every time someone speaks.
So we talk about numbers that the big picture is missing.
Um, and I'm going to encourage you to be more forward thinkers to look big picture.
Um, obviously there's some immediacy here. There's some things you have to do. Um, I believe it was Ms. McCall.
I'm, I work in Stoughton where we just settled to learn the same thing.
Differences.
Our superintendent had a meeting with all of us today and we saw the cuts and we went over them and we discussed.
And then we discussed them and pages long, guess what was missing.
There wasn't one staff on it.
So I think there's a big, bigger issue here than numbers.
And, um, I just want to, again, thank the teachers for showing up and numbers and solidarity for continuing to do their best. And I hope that, um, we can do better by you.
Thank you.
Thank you.
I didn't realize.
No, I'm calling on Barbara Mundin.
Cool.
I'm hitting unmute.
I'm muted myself.
Uh, Barbara.
All right.
We'll come back to Barbara.
Uh, Alan Matenko. Hi, everybody. Thank you for the chance to speak.
Um, Dr. I commend you on coming back with a far more detailed, um, presentation, but what I haven't heard mentioned tonight, and there's a lot to talk about, but what I haven't heard mentioned tonight at all is advanced placement classes. And it seemed like last week, every teacher recommended cut was tied to an AP class.
And it's just not clear from this presentation, which teacher cuts are, or are not now tied to an AP cut. And it sounded like, for example, Dr. Prezello, when you mentioned the retiring, uh, social studies teacher who we know teaches one of the most popular AP classes, it sounds like there's some hope that that particular class could be reabsorbed among other teachers, but I don't know if that also applies to some of the other academic, uh, staff cuts, particularly at the high school. And we're just hoping that at some point, whether tonight or on Wednesday, can get addressed.
Thanks. Thank you.
Charlotte Hogan.
Hi, thank you for, um, listening to everybody.
I just, I'm so impressed with our teachers and the way that they're presenting, um, you know, what their feelings and what they have to say.
Um, first of all, I do want to echo, um, what people have said about Meg. I think it's incredibly classy that she can fight for other people's positions when hers is potentially being cut. Um, I also want to speak about the potentially cutting of a counselor and the Dean of academic affairs.
I know that the counselors themselves have spoken about this, but as a parent, I've had three kids so far go to through the, um, high school, go to college. I've also had a son, um, on a 504 plan and also had, um, you know, some significant mental health issues. And I, I can't stress enough how important the, his school counselor was for him and how helpful they were to him, our family.
Um, and I'm, I'm hearing the counselors talk about their caseload already and the kids that they help and what they do day to day. And what, um, Mr. Palmer does as well is, uh, from our perspective, incredible. And I think cutting either of those positions would be extremely detrimental to our kids.
And, um, listening to Adam last week, talk about what's the most important for our students.
I strongly feel that cutting either of those positions would be incredibly difficult for our kids and, um, the counselors as well.
Uh, that's it. Thank you.
Thank you.
Thank you. Barbara Mundin. Hi.
Um, I, sorry earlier.
I couldn't get it to unmute.
Um, I'm, uh, calling in, uh, for, I didn't plan on speaking, but there's a few positions that I felt like I really needed to speak up for at the high school. I teach, uh, wellness and PE at the high school.
My office, um, is now, um, since the new building in the same office as the athletic director.
So I see firsthand how much is involved in that position and how many hours are involved in that position, including weekends and vacations, um, with so many events that, that, uh, he's in charge of. And I see the number of students who are in and out of that office, um, on a daily basis all day long. So I can't imagine that position being a 0.5.
Likewise, I can't imagine the assistant principal position at the high school being a 0.5 either, because, um, I see, um, how much work, um, they do on a regular basis.
Um, and that is directly, uh, impacting students, um, as, as well as supporting everybody in the building. So I can't imagine those two positions that are both more than, uh, 1.0 positions, you know, cut in half. So I just wanted to, uh, to bring that up. And I also want to echo what, um, Judy had mentioned about the facilities, um, position as well.
Um, and, you know, any cuts there because of the size of our, our new building and how they're stretched so thin as it is already.
Um, so I had, um, concerns about that. And I wanted to really reiterate what a few other people had said about, um, the counseling office and the director of academic affairs. I mean, I can't even begin to, quantify how much, um, the Dean of academic affairs does for students and for, um, the building for teachers, for so many, uh, people and, uh, the counseling staff as a whole. So, I mean, I could go on and on. I've worked at the high school for over 20 years. So, um, it's, it's painful hearing about all these potential cuts.
Um, and, you know, lastly, I mean, obviously, you know, there's a potential 0.5 position in my department that may or may not be filled. Um, and I just wanted to say one thing about the, um, having, um, students have their sports, uh, count as PE credit.
That's something that, um, we fought very hard in this district to not have happened.
And I know that with the audit, that was, um, something the state didn't want to really see happen either.
So, um, so thank you for listening.
Um, thank you again. Thank you.
Uh, Victor Dubinsky.
Hi.
Can you, yes, you can hear me. Hi. Thank you. Uh, first of all, thank you very much for the great meeting. Uh, really, really nice to hear it. Now to the point, I'd like to really, uh, kind of repeat what Julie said about, we have a great proposal, I think, to raise the cost of the K, which we try to make free. And unfortunately it might not happen, but then you almost have to cut nobody and stop dismantling a great system.
And I think we should really consider that my family will be the one that might fall under this. My daughter should start K this September.
And look, if I need to pay the full cost or maybe not to go because of that, that's okay. Because two years ago, that was the plan anyway. Right. But then we don't raise taxes on everybody in the town. We don't cut people. And therefore don't, uh, you know, our kids still stay in a great system just because we don't want to raise a little bit of fees to what they were.
And I would highly, highly, highly consider that. That's all I want to say. Thank you.
Thank you.
Uh, Philip King.
Hi, thank you for letting me speak. I have a son at cottage street school whose teacher quit at Christmas time, at Christmas break for the month of January.
They had no sub. There was a mixed match as a district.
We are having a hard time finding substitute teachers.
We don't pay them very much. I am really concerned about getting rid of an assistant principal.
We will have two assistant principals and three principals for force, three schools that are rather large.
The smallest elementary school is more than twice the size of the elementary school. I went to.
And what if a teacher and one of those administrators goes out on medical leave?
We then have one assistant principal across three buildings.
I mean, it could be really devastating to have such low staffing levels.
If anything happens, we have no subs, we have no buddy to cover classes.
So having such a low level is beyond concerning.
In terms of the kindergarten fee.
I don't want to see it reinstated, but I also understand we have budget issues.
Um, if you're going to compare our town to other towns, you need to take that into town as well.
There's only 10% of the state that charges for it. We already pay huge taxes to charge this fee is really sticking it to the residents.
And I don't think we have an override that will pass in this town.
You're good. Yeah. According to your agenda for Wednesday, you might be looking for money for a building in the near future. And please keep in mind, any of these cuts are not temporary.
You're going to have a similar budget shortfall next year and going forward.
So these are permanent cuts. So don't act like this is just a one year thing.
Thank you.
Wendy McArthur.
Hey, I just wanted to comment a couple of things.
One, how graceful Meg DeSalt has been in her comments.
Um, just thank you, Meg, for all of you've done for the school.
But the other thing I want to say is the school committee is really commenting on things that they don't see day to day.
I highly encourage all of you to go into the schools and see what each of these teachers are doing on a daily basis that you are proposing to cut.
Um, I know this probably can't happen this year, but think about it for next year, because it seems like the same positions are being reconsidered year to year.
Um, the other thing is, is it seems like Dr.
Patello kind of sprung this on a lot of teachers that their positions might be cut. Um, and that's not fair to the teachers. That's not fair to the school committee that these were kind of unknown ideas that were, you know, bouncing around in his head. It should have been like, these teachers should have been made aware so they can kind of bring forth what they do and share all of the work that they do, all of the information that they do, all of the work with students, all the work they do with teachers, all the work that they present, um, just to our town in general.
So those are two things I think might be helpful moving forward.
One school committee, go into the schools, spend the day with these teachers and Dr. Patello to don't spring it on teachers.
Thank you.
The last bar. Um, thank you, Avi.
Um, I just wanted to say a quick word.
Thank you for the school committee members for a robust, respectful, and thoughtful discussion.
Thank you, Wen and Avi for keeping instrumental music and addressing equitable access to our arts programs.
Thank you to Julie.
And in particular for rethinking the full, uh, the free full day kindergarten in the, um, more complete fee. I do think we should go further back and, and charge a little more in service of keeping some of our teacher positions.
Um, please listen to Meg do so and Jennifer McCullough and continue to look for cuts that are not here yet.
That are also not teachers, teacher supports or counselors as hard as you can. I want to echo the concern over the loss of counselors and the Dean of academic affairs, especially with post pandemic social, emotional, mental health issues and behavioral issues in the schools.
I'm concerned greatly about the loss of our curriculum coordinators.
If that happens, especially in a year where we must implement new curriculum and maintain curriculum alignment.
Thank you to the teachers and curriculum coordinators for their input tonight on the importance of keeping the structure in place.
Our teachers should be able to focus on teaching duties and please consider Ms. Smoller's voice about how curriculum coordinators work and consider coordinator position, positions, student facing.
Um, thank you so much for your time. And again, thank you to the school committee for all your hard work. I know this is painful and tough and I appreciate all your thoughts and questions tonight.
Thank you, Mrs. Frost. Uh, just state your full name, please.
I guess Zianette Frost.
Zianette Frost. I just want to say how invaluable Mrs. Carlson is at East. I can't imagine what our experience would have been or would be without her.
Um, I agree with all that Jody Speer has said. And I think that, um, her presence boosts the morale at the school, which I think is really important.
Thank you so much.
Trish Goldman. Hello.
Can you hear me?
Yes, we can hear you. Thank you so much. And, um, thank you, um, to the school committee and Dr. Patello for, um, um, the presentation and for the discussion.
Uh, we understand how it's not lost on us on how difficult this is. And, um, we understand we must, uh, operate within our means. And this is, um, we hate to lose any teachers.
And so we, um, just thank you and employ you to, continue to prioritize, um, teachers and small classes, small class sizes.
Thank you for your time.
Thank you.
Uh, Victor Dubinsky.
Sorry.
I just, Victor Dubinsky just want to correct, uh, one thing I said previously. I want to echo what Judy Crosby said. I, I mistakenly said Julie.
So I apologize for that. Thank you.
Understood.
Thank you.
Sorry, Julie.
Um, all right.
Going back to the table. So, you know, further hands, uh, is there anything more from the table?
Julie, go ahead.
Um, if Ellen's, um, could Ellen, could you calculate how much, if we charge the old full fee before the 29, um, kindergarten fee? I can't see the felons here, but.
Um, hi.
What was high? What was the amount of the, of the fee?
Um, it was approximately 3,600.
3,600.
Okay.
Give me two seconds. I'll try to find the exact number.
Okay.
Jane, if you can help too. Um, and, um, while we're, while we're waiting, is there, so, uh, somebody was writing down all the comments.
Somebody had said to look at our, um, like, supplies and copiers.
I mean, is there anything in that realm?
We, that could be. We can certainly look at that further.
We, we have been over the last several years cutting that back. Um, and so the amount of, uh, extra is, is, is very small. And, um, and so in, when, if we have unexpected expenses, like higher utilities or things like that, that's when we often go into a kind of a soft freeze on supplies and stuff.
Um, so it's not something we could reduce significantly, but we can certainly continue to look at those line items.
But we have been cutting the back over the last several years to make them right size based upon needs, but we can continue to look.
So there might be some minor savings, but it's more at the edges versus major positions and such.
Understood.
Shauna?
Um, that was, that was my one thing, you know, it's, it's hard to sit here and, and go through everything.
And then, you know, obviously, um, I, I appreciate everything that Dr. So has done for the district and then, you know, have her come on.
Sorry, that was my laundry.
Um, okay.
Have her come on and say that there are other ways.
I'm, I'm sure Dr. Patel you've seen, and, and you've gone through all, um, hundreds of line items of the budget, but if we can take one more look, um, and look to see if there are other additional sources of, um, income that we can bring in or, um, cut that aren't people, um, it would be greatly appreciated.
Um, I guess, are there no other.
Sorry.
Can I just, I think the fee, sorry, I'm sorry. I should have raised my hand. This is Jane Martin.
I think the fee for full day kindergarten was $3,635.
I think that was the full, full fee.
That's the last record I, I could find.
Yeah, that sounds right.
All right. I have a couple of points to make one on the kindergarten fee.
Um, on the kindergarten fee, uh, look at the end of the day, I personally believe that we should be looking at everything and scrubbing everything. So I do believe that considering putting the, the kindergarten fee up, I, I, I actually agree.
Also that fees, um, you know, on some extracurriculars should be considered in a sense that philosophically, I would be against it. On the other hand, I don't see necessarily a difference between certain clubs and extracurriculars and sports, as far as my values.
And we do charge, unfortunately for athletics.
Um, so I think those are places we can be looking at that being said, the, I do think I just, I'd be remiss if I didn't tell this committee that, or remind this committee for, for those who knew and tell for those who were unaware when the, that kindergarten fee was reduced that first year that was on a reallocation at priorities.
And that was a reallocation made select board and FinCom in conjunction with the school committee, based on the idea that they were funding kindergarten.
Um, not for nothing. I do actually think I personally think there's a difference.
Uh, last year in the sense that they believe that they were making a one year allocation.
And so if that money is baked into our, uh, baseline, there was, there was at least an understanding that we were going to be funded from another source.
So I guess for me, I can, I can, I can reason that that amount of money was given to us understanding that the kindergarten money was going to be paid from another source anyway.
So that's still in our base line.
And then at least there was an understanding that that would be there, um, from, from people paying attention.
But I do want to say on that first year, that reduction was made on an intentional reallocation and specific for reducing kindergarten.
Now, I'm not saying that when we go to FinCom and if we were to involve select board, that they would necessarily feel like the fiscally responsible thing to do would be to not jump that. But I do want to make sure everyone having the conversation is reminded of the history and understands that we are, we would be using funds that we asked for an allocation specific for kindergarten.
We would now be using those funds for something else and then charging that fee to the public again.
So just like we're trying to avoid raising taxes, uh, because we view taking money from the taxpayers, um, as a very sensitive subject, we should remember that we did use the taxpayers dollars that they, that were allocated for something else for a service in our budget that we would now be charging somebody else for. I just, I just want to make sure people have that history and that context. So they do not unwittingly, um, use funds allocated one way for something else, uh, without it, again, at least knowing it. Uh, secondly, the, um, right. And, and to be clear, that was, that was only an allocation of $75,000.
We allocated an agreement.
We allocated the other 75,000.
So, you know, we could do the math however we want. Again, I just want to make sure people understand that.
The other piece that I wanted to comment on is, you know, I personally do believe that our administration, uh, has combed through every aspect of our budget.
Look, I think a lot of people, I think it was Philip King, um, who had commented that, I mean, this is, this is going to be a reoccurring problem.
I mean, we have, as we've touched on earlier, and this is not me complaining or asking for more money.
This is just me making sure we're all always aware of the context.
We have a revenue issue in sharing.
And the truth is that, that at, if at one point, our labor represented this much of our budget over time, it became this much over time, it became this much. All the other stuff is the stuff that gets scrubbed.
Every time we end up in this spot until you're in a spot where all you have to cut.
Are things that are terrible. And for me, what the, the thing that I, I would say I most gained from hearing from the public today. And what I've heard from talking to more than 45 parents today. And what I heard from talking to more than a handful of teachers and read their emails. And, and we're responding back and forth with them is that there's a whole lot of stuff that matters to every stakeholder in this district that's on this table to be cut. And the reality is that, you know, they say heavy is the head that wears the crowns.
I put the plural S here since there's more than one of us.
We sit in seats as does Dr. Patello, where sometimes we end up in a no win situation.
And unfortunately we're going to pick things that we believe have less of a priority than other things to us based on what we're hearing from the public or, or from educators or both with Dr. Patello is recommending.
And either way, there are going to be lots of folks. I mean, like lots and lots of folks that feel like we took something like the thing that they wanted the most, because we all have different priorities to some degree.
And that's represented in government, I guess. So for me, I do think this conversation has to, has to continue in a productive way to get to a place that we're, where Dr. Patello will have an inkling of, or more than an inkling, a pretty clear vision of what to bring back on Wednesday, if he wants a budget of, I think it was 31227, to pass.
And again, I'm one voice there.
If the, if the feeling of this committee is that we go a different direction, I'm here to listen.
I think we're in a tough spot.
And the best thing we can do is grab a shovel and start digging.
I don't think that we can really just bemoan our situation.
Ellen, I saw your hand and then I'll go to Adam and Veronica.
Go ahead, Ellen. If we return to having the fees back to where they were of 3,635, after adjusting and increasing the amount we would be responsible for, for benefits to be paid out of the funds we take in, we would take in an additional $262,000.
So that's on top of the 317,000 that we already have accounted for on this, on Dr. Botella's spreadsheets.
So I'm sorry, Ellen, because I asked this question.
We would take in a total of 579,976 dollars.
So you're saying that if we add back the full fees, we get back about a third of the deficit.
Yes. Oh, okay.
And that's total. We already had accounted for, on Dr.
Botella's sheet showing the net savings.
We had accounted for 317,865.
So we would essentially be netting out another $262,000.
Okay.
So if we're considering add backs, then we should be saying it's 262.
Correct.
Okay. Got it.
Thank you.
Thank you so much.
Another thing that on the fees worksheet, which we didn't look at, the possibility of adding some fees for our clubs that really kind of meet as frequently and, and, and are as rigorous as our, our sports teams. We figured we were, we have been discussing at the high school level, the idea of like these level one clubs, like drama and then level three clubs, things that might be like more like student council or BSU. Those would not have fees, but clubs like drama or other things that, you know, meet really regularly.
Um, and you know, are, are, have a lot of, uh, expense to them, you know, could incur, let's say a hundred dollar fee.
Uh, and, and maybe there being a second tier that would have a $50 fee. They're like more in the middle in that. We, um, just very, very roughly estimated.
We could raise between 20 and $25,000 for that.
That's still, you know, kind of in, in process, but something for consideration.
Yeah.
Yeah.
And so I, I just wanted to second, I think what, um, Shana had said, um, from folks in the public, from, uh, Dr. So if there are, if there are ways to recoup, uh, kind of any additional money through those club fees or additional savings on supplies, I know that's already stretched super thin, um, any additional retirements that we may be aware of.
Um, you know, I, I do think we are in a position where, uh, unfortunately every dollar counts.
Um, and I think we do want to, to minimize that impact. So, um, yeah, we just, I know, I know, uh, where are you looking under every stone, but if there are any others we can turn over, obviously is a, is very much appreciated.
Yeah. And we, we certainly will do that again. There is a, as far as making cuts to certain things, there is a breaking point with that too, where, you know, where if you do not budget, at least enough to, you know, provide basic levels of service, then you end up over spending in that. And then you end up, you know, being in danger of having a deficit.
In addition, there are some unexpected costs, whether it's changes in utilities or, um, other things that you cannot control. And you need to have some level of flexibility within your budget, or if not, you'll be coming back and not, or, or, you know, you'll be one of those districts that's trying, that needed to riff someone in the middle of the year. So, so there is a certain breaking point, but we will certainly scour the budget.
Um, as far as additional, you know, fees and stuff, as much as we don't want to do that, uh, those are things that are additions.
Um, but we will, we'll, we'll, we'll look both ways to, to do whatever we can, but there is a breaking point with that. And that's where we're, you know, we, if we don't, um, say that we have an additional amount, say with supplies or things, it's because we're trying to be fiscally responsible while still being very austere at the same time.
Veronica.
Yeah.
Thanks, Avi. I want to thank all of the folks that came forward to speak. And in particular, the teachers for really educating us on some of the, you know, critical things that they would, uh, reckon with if some of these cuts were made, but I, I do want to say, and I appreciate what you said earlier, Avi, because I was, I wanted to jump to restore, restore, restore.
Right. And what I understood you were asking us to consider, and I know you said you're one of seven. And I was thinking to myself, no, I don't want to go along with that. Right. I don't want to do what I'll be suggesting.
Cause I, I can't imagine myself voting for either one of these 3.1,
two, two, two, two, seven pictures.
Right.
And I'm understanding you to be saying, well, we're not exactly voting for it. It's not like we support it. It's not like we love it.
It's just like, we're in compliance with the directive from my priorities, uh, committee, right.
To show what that will look like. Right.
That 3.1,
correct.
Well, to be clear.
Well, no, I think we're in disagreement there. Okay.
So when, and I vote on priorities.
Um, so to be clear, when I voted to accept that allocation target, I did it sincerely.
Um, do I think that it would be great to have a revenue, uh, number that got all the way to the original 6.9,
um, that Dr. Ritello presented?
Yeah, I do. I also know though, that that comes from the taxpayers.
Um, I understand that prop two and a half number plus 2.3, has a starting at a four or eight.
So at the three, one, two, two, seven, we're at a 4.8% increase in Texas.
We go above that.
And like any extra dollar we get. And again, we only, we would get 75, 75 cents on any extra dollar that comes in. Now.
What I, what I like to see the state come back with more funding. Once that process is done, of course I would, what I like to see us save every job in this district.
Sure.
And if I was voting for only my, my own property taxes, which, you know, again, I happen to pay a couple of them here, but would I, would I agree to raise mine in order to save the jobs that we've discussed tonight, the roles and the services provided to our kids? Personally, I would, I'll be honest with you.
It's why I moved back to this town. It's what I loved about growing up in this town is the focus on our education. And I believe strongly on a personal level that that matters. I do want to be clear that I believe the directive that we have is not from FinCom.
It is not from select board.
It is from the town.
It is from the populace.
I I'm hearing.
And you tell me if you're hearing different.
I've had one parent approach me and say, Hey, let's just pay that tax bill.
Like we need that stuff. And I respected it. I did, but that's what I, that's my experience so far. So to be clear, like I'm not, I feel like I need personally, my one out of seven votes is that I need to get to a place where I feel comfortable voting a budget that if that is the budget and that is what is in place, I believe that the kids, this district are being provided for, and I don't know that that's, I don't know that that's possible, but that's, that's the directive that I feel like is driving me. And I don't want to mislead you all. I don't want this to feel tongue in cheek. I don't, I don't want to, I don't want to sit here and as your chair, ask for the three, one, two, two, seven, and then add backs with any sort of a commitment or promise to those add backs. I think Dr.
Botella has made it clear throughout this whole process.
He showed us nothing.
He doesn't believe we need it. So I think it's very clear that no matter what, unless we get to 6.9,
we're going to leave stuff on the table that Dr. Botella believes we need.
And I think at this point, he's showing us cuts, all of which he's made clear multiple times tonight.
And then our educators made clear. And then other members from the public made clear are not, are there. We've seen nothing tonight with no exception, nothing that we're just like, well, that one's an easy one. No, everything we've seen tonight is painful.
Well, I guess what my point was, was trying to say sort of something philosophically, which is to say that the lists that we have in front of us, right. And the number that we are now having to confront is not something that we necessarily feel. And I'll speak for myself.
It's, it's, it's hard to, it's hard to bring myself to vote for something that I'm feeling is going to be.
Destructive is, is a word I'm going to use. Um, so those, the, the two versions without, without looking at alternatives, I suppose, neither one of the two versions, if we're, if we're stuck with those two, right. And we didn't go forward in looking at ad backs, because I understand when, when people speak tonight, I understand our committee members are saying, okay, let's see what, what we are cutting before we can talk about ad backs. That makes sense to me. But there's just, I, with every fiber of my body, it's hard to, uh, vote up or vote yes to either one of those two lists that we saw tonight.
Like I can't, I'm not ready to, and I, I would agree with when in that regard, neither one of those two has my vote.
Yeah.
And just to be clear, and I'll call on you now, Julie, but to be clear, I also wouldn't feel comfortable with either one of those lists, but that's because for me, I would mix and match some stuff.
That's, that's where I'm at. Uh, go ahead, Julie.
Okay.
I have another proposal.
Um, this is all back of the envelope calculation.
So, so I could be wrong, but if we add back the full kindergarten fee, we get 262,000.
if we replaced Dean of, um, academics with the head of, um, whatever the position was called, that's 33. So we have 295.
Okay.
So now that would pay for instrumental music at 70 K, a school full-time school counselor at, um, 72 K and the elementary, a leg coordinator, because we're getting new curriculum and the secondary math coordinator, because we're also getting new curriculum.
So that adds up to, um, 329.
And the other adds up to, um, Oh, Oh, and the wellness, if we replace, if we don't have the 0.5 wellness, that's 30. So that actually balances out more or less equally.
So I'm not sure my math is good, but I, that's my proposal.
Can you list off the position again?
And I don't need the dollar amounts again. I trust your total math, but what are the positions you're suggesting?
Okay.
So on the like increased side, that would be increasing the kindergarten fee to the 3600.
We would replace the Dean of academic affairs with the, um, head of, I think it was head of counseling was the title.
Um, and the, um, the 0.5 wellness, like we could try and, um, allow sports to count as wellness.
So that's on one side.
So on the other side, we can add back instrumental music.
Cause I think that is something we all care about. That's 70,000.
Um, a school counselor, because I heard, um, the teacher saying, you know, number one, we, we kind of have to, because we have, um, contractual limits, but also because we want to, because that person is important.
Um, and the elementary ELA coordinator, because we're getting new curriculum, um, if for elementary literacy and the secondary math coordinator, because we're getting new curriculum for that too.
Um, so those two things balance out pretty close, I think.
Do you want me to write it down and show everybody?
I don't really hear anybody.
Chris, no, do you have something to say?
Yeah. Um, truly like you're starting from scratch or were you starting from one of the existing lists? I missed that part.
Sorry.
Oh, I think I was starting from the second list. The second list. Okay.
I, I, I kind of, I'm sorry if I got a little bit lost in there, but no, you're good. That just needed a clarification processing.
Thank you.
I, I mean, I appreciate what Julie's trying to do here guys. Like for the rest of the committee, this is, this is the meeting that we added.
We have this conversation.
So the Dr. Botello can bring us something on Wednesday that we can vote.
So if nobody has any views and is comfortable with just, we've shared our, our thoughts and we're just, we'll see Dr. We'll see Dr. Botello again on Wednesday. Then feel, then, then somebody tell me that that's how they want to move.
Um, it's fine if you all don't want to workshop, put your stamp on this, but that's where this was the opportunity.
And let's not, let's just be ready on Wednesday. Then to vote, vote a budget. Go ahead, Veronica. Uh, no, I appreciate that. I mean, what I guess I'm understanding from what Julie has suggested is that the top half of the list with the other, um, administrative, um, you know, combined reductions is hold, hold, right, Julie.
Say that again.
That, that if you're working off of two, um, you've added back that coordinator position, correct?
I've added two coordinator positions because that, um, what we, I, I, I think it's a priority, which is if we are getting new, um, elementary literacy curriculum.
So having the, adding back the elementary ELA coordinator to oversee that, I think is important.
And we are also in the process of getting new curriculum at, in the high school math.
So keeping the, uh, secondary math curriculum coordinator to oversee that, that.
Got it. That's great.
I guess if, but Dr.
Botella was going to come back to us on Wednesday night, I might want to just see Dr. Botella, what the plan would look like. If in fact, we didn't restore to the full kindergarten fee. And we went with what I wanted to reflect Avi telling us with respect to the option.
Right.
Uh, because I think that we do want to make clear to the select board and to Fincom that we're respecting some of the thought that went into, you know, those changes.
And so I kind of don't want that to be lost in the sauce.
Do you know what I mean? Like, I love the idea that this add back of revenue brings us to this sort of much happier place in terms of flexibility.
But I also feel like if we were going to be looking at options, I would want to see that kindergarten fee, uh, with that more gradual, um, you know, adding back, right. As opposed to going back to the full, just to see what it looks like and to see what we would lose and gain and, and to make that your priority and recommendations.
Okay. So I'd love to be able to compare those two side by side is good. I guess I want to say.
Okay.
Thanks.
All right.
Oh, Avi, I just made like quick spreadsheets so people could like visualize.
What I just said.
Could I, could I share the screen?
Yeah, I think that's helpful.
Okay.
Um, okay.
I knew, can everyone see my screen here?
Julie, you got to make the numbers bigger. Yeah. I'm sorry.
How's that?
Thank you. I actually, I actually found out I added wrong, so I'm sorry, but, um, SPEAKER_UNKNOWN: um, so if we have over here, we add the K fees, we, um, take the Dean of academics to the head counselor.
That's 33.
And, um, we don't have the 0.5 wellness and PE.
That's three 25 back.
Um, um, if we add back instrumental music, SPEAKER_UNKNOWN: um, um, if we add back instrumental music, um, if we add back instrumental music, um, and the secondary math coordinator, and the secondary math coordinator, I think those numbers are right. I'm not, I'm not sure if I did those numbers right, but I think this sort of ends up, even if I did them wrong, it kind of ends up being in the same neighborhood.
Julie, just for the minutes, I want to make sure I understand.
So when I write this down, you're saying that you're going to look at option B, and these are the changes you're going to make to option B.
I think that's what I'm saying.
Okay.
If, if that's the case in option B, I just have one coordinator cut. So you could, you could, you could apply that 77,000, the secondary math to another position, because we only need to make up for one coordinator.
Okay.
So this would be another.
Coordinator.
Right.
Okay.
Okay. Another coordinator.
And then some, yeah, then something else.
It could be something else in the instructional list.
Okay.
Instrumental music. It could be one of the specialists.
It could be one of the high school.
I do.
I do have the instrumental music here already at the top. Okay. Yeah. You already have instrumental music and the school, the school counselor, maybe like this, maybe somebody like the admin. For the counselors to help reduce their workload.
I don't know.
Yeah. Well, if we're adding it to, I could, I could definitely, I could see what you're saying is if we add the additional fees, how you want them be applied to, to be.
Jane, your hand up.
Adam.
I can go.
I mean, where I'm still getting stuck is on the assistant principal, on the specialists, on the instructional staff, right? Like this is where, when we look at classes offered for next year at the high school, you know, when we don't have the, the science teacher and students can't double up on sciences, which is what we heard last week, you know, that's the impact on the students.
And I know that it is incredibly hard. And I know that it is like, this is not easy. And these, these cuts are incredibly painful.
And, and everyone in our district is doing so much, but that's where I really go back to, you know, how do we retain the counselor?
How do we retain that vice principal?
How do we retain those teachers?
How do we retain the, the, the reading specialists and the math specialists who are doing the interventions that help ensure that we have fewer kids who need additional help of 504s or IEPs, later on that serve also to, to make our budget kind of more difficult to, to navigate.
Like, I think we need those positions and I really think we need to start from an instructor first or an educator first perspective and acknowledge, yeah, this is going to be really hard.
We, we effectively have to do more with less.
But that is true effectively in any organization when there are cuts.
And that's the situation we're in. So, you know, I don't think it's a reasonable expectation to say, we can't ask people to do more with less.
I think that's the situation we're in.
And from my perspective, I think we have to maintain the, the folks who are kind of doing that one-to-one engagement with the kids.
And I think then we have to get really creative about other solutions to try to compensate for the loss of, you know, what are effectively full-time support staff. So I'll call on you.
I just want to say, like, I think we're at the point.
I don't want this to become circuitous.
Like, I think, I think we're at a point where we're at a crossroads where we have to decide. Like, I mean, I think Julie is doing a strong job of workshopping this, putting proposals up.
And I think everyone else is sort of, let me keep it. I don't, I don't want, I don't like the way that sounded.
Everyone else is trying their best and I respect it, but let's from now, like from here in the meeting forward, let's either you're putting numbers up and saying what you would do and you're putting your name on it and that's you, or it's okay that you don't have anything.
But Dr.
Botello has made it very clear where he's at.
And, and I know there are people in the district that are with that. There are people that respect it.
Regardless, he said what he's going to say. We have two choices, right?
You can go right on the crossroad and you can go with the doc, with the Dr. Botello route and say, that's our educational leader. And we're going to go that way. Or we can say, look, the budget's ours. And so we're going to make some calls, even though he's made it clear, he doesn't disagree with those calls. But I think repeatedly saying, Hey, we want you to scrub.
I mean, earlier Adam. And again, I say this, you know, you know that I respect you care about you. This is not meant as a personal shot, but you did hear yourself earlier say, I know you've looked under all of the stones, right? So all of the stones at all, but can you just try to look under some more?
That's not a thing. And so I think we're at a point now where this is what we signed up for. This is the hard part. This is the tough part. You are all going to make a choice to either. Push a cut that Dr.
Botello doesn't believe in or back a cut that Dr. Botello does believe in. And there are going to be people that think you did the wrong thing.
And that is the, that's the price of sitting in the seats.
But the idea that we can just sort of waver forever in the hopes that we've sort of said, whatever. Well, so when someone's mad, we cut something, we can say, no, but you did hear me say how important it was. Listen, it's all important, but we, at this point, you're, you're, we're spending the money on this or we're spending the money on that. And we just got to go. That's what we got to do.
So I, I mean, I, I think I made that pretty clear earlier in terms of where we can cut and what we can retain.
I think if we're bringing back the kindergarten fees, then I think, and I haven't done this math out.
But, you know, if we have, I don't know.
I don't know. I'd have to sum up the position, like the, the coordinator costs, but like put that many back towards the coordinators.
If that's, if that's where we go and bring back, you know, four, five halftime, you know, 0.5 coordinators, 6.5.
Like I said, this is where we have to build up.
And with all due respect, I think we said at the beginning, you know, we have a sheet that lists these cuts, but even in the course of the meeting, we've heard, well, and we can potentially institute a fee on tier one club. And that could be 25, $30,000.
That's 0.5 of a coordinator.
So this is where I'm saying, as we think about the next budget, and I can, you know, if we want to put the spreadsheet up and start reworking it, we can, but I would like to see starting with the assistant principal, principal with the, excuse me, with the kind of counselor, with the instructional staff and music and arts maintained, and then rebuild from there using the additional kindergarten fees, using the addition of the tier one clubs.
Like that's how I think we rebuild this budget while minimizing the impact of the kids. So I think that's pretty direct.
Okay.
Do people agree with Adam?
Can Adam, can you just like jot that down and throw it up there so I can visualize it?
Yeah. Let me put that into a spreadsheet and then I'll, I can put it up. Thank you.
Can I chime in?
Yep.
Absolutely.
So I'm interested to see, I'm a visual person too, Adam, so I kind of would have to see the proposal, interested to see where that lands. Um, as, uh, Ellen was talking and giving back the numbers, I was quickly trying to put together, um, some numbers as well. Julie, you're faster than me at it. And so I actually really did like where you were going with that, with, um, with your proposals, Julie, I think that, um, look, I, we've been saying it on meeting. I will say it again. All of this stuff is hard. These are difficult cuts. No one wants to be doing any of this. And also we got to do this. And so, um, I think where Julie was landing is something that I can roll with. I would just say that Dr. Patel's point about, I think you had two coordinators in your list and he only had one in his. So that gave some extra, I would sort of, um, suggest me adding the math coordinator in that. But other than that, I think I could be on board with, um, the goals of the direction that Julie was kind of going in. So that's where I'm landing. I wanted to put, put that out there.
Well, thanks.
Um, can I just say one thing really fast on that? Thank you, Priznell.
I appreciate that.
Um, I think what Dr. Patel has said is he had budget for budgeted for one in the second option B, there was already one coordinator in there.
So when I said, add two coordinators, he was saying now we can have, that's actually a third coordinator.
In, in option B, I reduced one coordinator.
So if you're working from option B, all you need to find funding for is one coordinator.
Oh, Oh, you're reducing more. That's different, but that's not, that's not in my, my initial options.
Jane, I know you had something to add. So I'm just, I should resist the need to clarify, but I want to clarify.
I think what Dr. I think in Dr.
Botello's A and B options, he's not cutting coordinators.
They're still, they're still in the budget, except for option B, where he's proposing either cutting one or cutting 0.5 and 0.5,
which equals one. So people keep, it sounds like I'm hearing school committee members saying they think that the coordinator days have been cut, but they have not been cut in either of Dr. Botello's proposals.
That's just me making sure everybody's on the same page.
Thank you for indulging that.
No problem.
Shauna. I'm going to sound like a broken record, but if we are going back to the K fees of what's were yonder, is that still proportional to the EEC fees that we have raised?
Cause I think that needs to be looked at as well.
Thank you.
When.
You're muted, man. You're muted, man. All right.
When now.
All right. When, when's audio is not working. Okay.
When now we can hear you.
No, we can't hear you.
Dang.
How about now?
Yes.
All right. No. We can hear you.
Okay. Great.
Yeah. So I wasn't quite sure what Shauna meant about the proportionality of the, the K fee and the ECC fee, but I'll see clarity on that later.
I did.
I was just sticking loudly because I, I feel like there was a misunderstanding about what, like the coordinator positions that are on, on the budgets and not on the budgets.
Um, I think that I will be consistent in saying that I, I instrumental music.
I'm not willing to let that go. I am not willing to let a school counselor go.
Um, and I am in favor of putting the butt, the kindergarten fees back to a full, um, full amount if that is feasible.
Um, and I would probably, I mean, I think that kind of, that balances out if, um, the, the two things that I'm not willing to cut, um, I'd like to put the math specialist back. Um, I'm okay with the elementary math specialist, the floater, um, being tabled for now.
Um, and I think those are the major things I, I think I'm okay with the elementary assistant principal, um, two over three.
It sounds like the, the Dr.
Pell and, um, Ms. Jessica Murphy think that that is feasible.
Okay.
Um, understood.
I think for me, I'm almost there as far as what you, where you're at when, um, you know, again, I don't think it will surprise anybody that I, I don't like the idea of going back to the school.
To the full kindergarten fee.
Um, it should, I guess, to some degree, not be all that surprising that like, when we get into these tough spots, this is what, what, what our options are. And what we do is sort of add back fees.
You know, I, I philosophically believe that kindergarten is a part of education.
And just like, I don't think it's appropriate to charge, uh, for music after or before school.
And I think that should happen at school.
And that's why I want that music position, uh, in the budget. I also think kindergarten is, has become an incredibly vital part of public education.
And I think charging money for it, which is indirectly just, you know, it's, it's not raising taxes, but it's, it is in, it's not, not either in a sense that it is take, it is charging the parents of our district money for our public education in order to, to fund our district.
That being said, it's obviously very clear to me that there's a consensus around that. And I don't, that's what we're here to do. I respect, um, the work that you guys are doing. And in particular, I respect, um, you know, Julie's viewpoint and the way that she is putting this together, because we're here to make hard decisions.
And I think Julie's, you know, way of putting it forward is strong for me. I would probably lean towards removing elementary.
I shouldn't say probably. I would prefer to remove elementary coordinators over an assistant principal in the elementary.
Um, I think we've seen the value of all quarters, but we also have heard the value of the assistant principal.
Um, that's, that's probably a place that's probably like sort of the one fundamental piece of where we're at at this moment that I disagree with.
Um, I also think that if we're going to add back fees, which is essentially increasing indirectly, what's the same thing as increasing our allocation to some degree.
We haven't really then turned back Dr.
Botello and asked what he would do. And because we haven't gotten to the ad back slide, we haven't actually seen that. So I don't think Dr. Botello unless I'm wrong came into this conversation prepared to be given that additional revenue.
And so, you know, we're at, we're saying we would add back in a trade off. And I think that's important, but I think Dr. Botello also probably has some things he would add back. In short, I like most, I like most of the stuff that you guys are adding back. I don't like how we're getting there, but I like what you're adding back.
For me, I'd, I'd lean assistant principal back over the elementary coordinators.
Jane, I see the Sharon schools hand up.
Are you, is it, is that just from before that new?
Okay.
Um, anybody else?
Let's talk to Botello.
Do we want to go to the ad back slides?
Do we feel like we're at a place where we're in agreement as a group that, that we've gotten close enough to be able to see a budget on Wednesday?
You asked me to put together a spreadsheet.
So I'm still working on that.
Okay.
I actually didn't ask for a spreadsheet, but somebody did, I think. Sorry. Someone asked for visual.
I think Julian.
I could, I couldn't, I was just, I couldn't follow it. I'm sorry.
Yeah. You know, it would help me, Avi, I think, and maybe the rest to, to know how you envision, uh, the rest of the night and next week going, because it feels like, maybe it feels for me, like the work of getting to this 3.1,
the priorities number budget tonight with some, uh, consensus feels like a kind of place to go.
And then maybe the ad backs still feel to me, you know, I'm reversing myself a little bit. It feels like it's almost too soon. Still. Like I'm still feeling like we're not exactly at consensus with the 3.1.
Um, but, um, I've got more, uh, bandwidth for, an ad back discussion.
So we have a little bit of a tee up, a little queue up, right.
Of what we might be seeing in a couple nights.
So I, I also see the value in that. So I could see kind of stopping here with some idea that we'd have a return to some version of the three point, the priorities number budget that we could, uh, see to vote on. But I could also see seeing a little bit of window into the, uh, proposed ad backs.
I think that might be helpful to have at least get a quick view of it before Wednesday.
Yeah. What, what, what I was thinking, cause it seems like I've gotten, um, general support to increase the full day, the kindergarten fee.
I think, I think all the way to the 3,600.
I know some people.
I think, no, no, I think, I think you at least have a majority.
Straw poll.
I think if you do that, you get a budget pass.
Right. As well as, um, add some, uh, level of fee for activities or, or clubs.
Um, I think, um, and then I've been noting down or what are some of the hard nose for people, things that they definitely do want, do not want to, do not, um, agree should be on the cut list.
And then what are some of the things that a couple of things that people would prefer over others?
So I've been noting those and I was, I would think that I would go back with Jane and go over the tape again to get those and, um, be workshopping after I see at what, what Adam has, you know, kind of a, a budget.
Um, and what I would be doing is if I can come up with something that I, you know, that I can, that I can support, like as an educational leader, I'll just come up with one. If not, I would probably come up with two because I, because again, I can't, and you guys obviously get to make the decision, but so you could see, you know, me hearing you, but also me still putting more of my stamp on it if I feel necessary.
So you can consider that, um, for what it's worth.
I think that's fair.
Adam.
Yeah.
so I can just show you what I'm talking about.
Um, so I'll share my screen real quickly.
All right.
So I put together, uh, this option.
Uh, it's long, so I apologize.
I'll have to scroll through it, but effectively from a, a non-instructional position perspective, it's everything that was, um, referred to previously, kind of from, uh, option B, except that I swapped out the Dean of Academic Affairs.
Um, I do still have the, the guidance secretary and the admin assistant. One of those, uh, or both of those could be, uh, again, kind of replaced.
Um, but this is effectively, if you look at it with the admin, uh, kind of consolidation and, and down leveling with the coordinators removed.
The only instructional positions, excuse me, and the, uh, I should note the vice principal has been removed from this list.
Right.
So this is the, uh, consolidation of the athletic director and principal, uh, and then the, the right consolidation there, the consolidation within central office, um, down leveling of director of facilities, removal of the maintenance position, the Dean of Academic Affairs, head of school counseling, uh, and replacement with, um, kind of supervisor building grounds, the guidance secretaries, and then the curriculum coordinators.
Oh, excuse me. And I didn't actually remove this, which I should have.
Um, so if we do that, the only instructional positions that need to be impacted are the leap teacher, which we said is not an issue.
And the wellness fee teacher, which we said we potentially could, could find a way around.
This includes the CC fees.
I didn't remember the exact number. So I just put in 580, which I think was about right, but it's not, I'm sure it's not the exact number.
Um, but we can fix that.
I added the 25,000 for the tier one clubs, which I believe was the number. Again, I didn't write it down.
So apologies if that is wrong.
Um, but if we do that, that leaves us with 309,000, so roughly 300.
If you total the cost of the curriculum coordinator changes, it's about six 11.
So you can actually restore 0.5 curriculum coordinators for every single curriculum coordinator with this plan.
Adam.
Yeah.
Um, I hate to tell you this, but, um, I think Alan clarified that the 580, we're not getting 580. We're getting 262.
Like that's the surplus.
Yeah. That, that this is the total. I think the total was like 580.
I may be wrong again on that number.
I, okay.
I, I thought it, I thought my understanding was that number was 262.
No, it was 262.
262 on top of the three 17.
Adam did it from the start.
Like he, he went back and did the whole thing. Oh, okay. Okay.
I saw a look on the, you're usually, I mean, you're a very good poker player, but I saw the corner of your lip go up just enough to see, am I reading that right?
That adding half coordinators, is it feasible or is that feasible?
And that could be, you know, you could add whole, some whole coordinator, some no coordinator.
Like I'm not trying to, to even stipulate kind of which coordinators should be kept where and at which percentages. My point is there's just, there's a lot of room to play there.
And I think we can retain a lot of the, that infrastructure that, that we said we cared about.
But don't forget, Adam, by the way, don't forget that there is a math problem here. Just in that, I see that the coordinators, you put salaries there, but don't forget, it's not the salary.
It's the delta between that and a $70,000 teacher.
You're bumping.
Cause they're those teachers like at $115,000, they're going to bump a $70,000 teacher.
So that with the savings is not one 15.
Sorry.
So I took the consolidated difference.
I think that's what was kind of in Dr. Patello's spreadsheet.
Okay. Right. So if we look at the menu of reduction for the world language coordinator, for example, I think the number that was given is right.
So it was one 17 plus a stipend minus the facilitator stipend minus moving that position to world language.
And then the removal of the world language teacher for total of one 15, nine 82.
Yeah.
That is the reason that's correct.
And it's more is because we have, um, retirements, I think in those areas or.
Okay.
I'm just using this number.
Individual people, high, high paid people who would be, um, leaving due to retirement.
Um, so it, it makes it more profitable.
Yeah. So those are accurate.
Most of the time it's 76, but those two numbers are accurate.
Okay.
As long as those numbers are accurate. I see what you did there, Adam. I don't know if the whole, so I, I need to, we would need to check to make sure, but those numbers.
Yeah.
Okay.
Go ahead, Julie.
No, I thought Julie. Well, Adam, I'll say I, you removed the elementary assistant principal, right?
And the, from the, from the cut list, like the, the elementary principal is there.
And, and the, and the music, uh, as well.
So, I mean, for me, I personally, I could support that if we can add back the three, uh, if we can add back three of those coordinators or some semblance of it.
And I also would support that if Dr. Vitello were to come back with something that moved a few things around.
And I guess it would depend on what they were, what those things were, but if they were, or if there were other non-instructional cuts, air quotes, because I think coordinators have made the point tonight, actually where they are instructional.
So I don't want to call them non-instructional because I think they actually very clearly made the point that they are instructional.
Um, I would be open to hearing after hearing Dr. Botello make a pretty impassioned and convincing case about the coordinator's positions, finding, seeing if he, if there are non-instructional positions that he would cut before those coordinators, because I think you're pretty close there. I mean, if you can get a couple more coordinators on there, we're not devastating things as much as our educators have made the point we've considered tonight at some points. Go ahead.
Thanks, actually, Adam, thank you for putting that together. Would you mind putting that back up on the screen?
Um, and while you do that, um, Dr. Botello, I'm actually curious your perspective on the sort of two counter options that you've seen.
Um, if you have just any, again, I get that this is happening on the fly and all the things we've said before, right? No one wants to be making any cuts, but all that notwithstanding, um, it would be helpful to get your perspective on, uh, the two different approaches here. Um, I, SPEAKER_UNKNOWN: um, I, I like the, you know, the, the movement as much as I don't like to increase fees. I like the movement of being able to, um, support some additional positions by, you know, by having that revenue that comes in from fees. Um, I, I like the idea that there's still is some room to, um, to, um, not reduce some of the coordinators.
Um, I need to analyze the whole top section, but I, I do think it still is, um, going too deep on, um, um, the kind of the leadership, uh, and, um, to strike that balance of reducing as few of the, um, positions that are in front of kids all the time with the critical supports that allow teachers to be effective with kids all the time, as well as the coordinators.
Yeah. I, I probably should have never put them in non-instructional because they are teachers. Like that's, it's different than they, they, they teach and they, um, teach courses. They co-teach with new teachers.
They provide interventions.
So they're, you know, as much as they're teacher leaders and have that room in their schedules to do other things as far as building curriculum.
Um, we do have, you know, in addition to literacy and math, we do have, you know, new, new curriculum materials that are less expensive, but, uh, so that's why they weren't brought up, but coming in, in, in social studies and, and new curriculum being developed in English as well. So those, those people are critical. So I would still, you know, be still looking to, for creative options to, to strike a better balance, but I, I can see where, you know, um, at least some of the committee is going and that's, it's helpful for my, my, you know, my next steps. I do think Dr.
Rattella had made the point earlier though, that if we're insistent on the academic affairs Dean, you actually, you do need to leave that guidance secretary and admistice.
Um, yeah.
So, yeah.
If you cut those, you lose a little bit of the wiggle room, but still have a good amount.
Right.
Right. Can I ask a question as long as we're, I'm not saying this sarcastically, but as long as there's an appetite at the table to talk about increasing fees, um, is there any appetite?
I know, I mean, again, our administration brought us a fee schedule and they had mentioned previous meetings based on, I think a desire not to raise fees, but I mean, there's athletic fees, something we consider playing with.
Um, you know, we're adding fees in places where we'd never had fees.
Um, obviously athletics, the cost of everything has gone up over the last few years.
Um, I don't know.
It's a, it's a, I'm just, as long as we're talking about some other fees that I, I find even more troubling than athletic fees. It's something I think maybe it's worth bringing up. Julie.
I'm, I'm not, I'm not dismissing out of hand, raising the athletic fees, but I do just want to comment that, that we are actually charging a little bit more than other schools are.
So they're already like kind of high relative.
I can go back and check and see if any of them have raised their fees in 2023, um, for fiscal 24, but, um, I can't imagine it's that much higher.
All right.
I asked, it feels like, go ahead, Wynne.
Um, I also like to know how common it is to have an activity fee.
That's something that I've, um, never experienced.
And I know it's, you know, it's, to some extent, it's a nominal fee. It's not as high as athletic fee, but, um, philosophically, I, I guess I, I don't know exactly where I stand on this right now. It seems fairly uncommon to me, but maybe that's just my, um, my own experience.
Veronica.
Yeah.
Uh, when I can speak to that a little bit, because about four or five years ago, I was on a committee that did a review of, uh, sort of cross, you know, communities looking at fees for things like instrumental music and, um, like drama theater, some of the things that we've been thinking about.
And it wasn't really, uh, across the board. It was very consistent that at least at the middle school and high school, there were often fees for things like music, especially if they happened after school, obviously if they happened after school and drama. So it was not uncommon to find, um, other communities charging, um, activity fees for some of those, particularly when you're talking about something that requires, you know, seasons like we have for theater, for example, right? You've got the musical, you've got States, and then you've got the fall or the spring show.
You know, you're, you're talking about several different seasons. So, um, usually that was, that was something that we found was pretty consistent. So it's, it's, it's not, not the norm. It's, it's more than norm. We found at the middle and high school levels to, um, to see those fees. And I don't know if that work still exists, but it was pretty extensively, uh, researched.
We, we opted not to add those fees, by the way, and we would consistently come to the table and not add them because of how people didn't want to, you know, institute a fee, but maybe desperate times call for desperate measures, you know? then I would probably say that there should be some sort of distribution, right? I mean, if, if it's something that is not uncommon for other districts, then maybe rather than raising an athletic fee, we instate, um, an activity fee, a club fee.
Fair.
All right.
Do we feel like we provided enough for Dr. Botello to make some decisions and bring something back or something or two things?
Go ahead.
Yeah, I think so. I just want to come back to the, um, sorry guys, I'm forgetting what you called it. I'll be not the, uh, the secondary add ons.
Is that what we're calling them?
Where's that conversation landing?
I mean, I think, I think we've changed.
This is just my opinion. I think we've changed enough that I don't mean like we've changed enough.
Let's not do this. I'm saying, I think we've changed so much that I think Dr. Botello's ad backs are going to have to sort of adjust as well.
So at this point, it feels like looking at those, I mean, the ad backs are just the, the first few things, his top priorities that get cut.
So I think that's sort of some of the stuff he's going to have to weigh.
I mean, Dr. Tell me, you feel the same way to me. It just feels like whatever you take from this conversation and bring us back.
It's just going to go. What, what could you get into three, one, two, two, plus the kindergarten fees and all that. And then the next couple of things.
And it feels like there'll be room for that conversation when we vote the budget.
Yeah.
And again, I will definitely listen to the tape. And if people have, you know, just other Adams got something clear there as far as his perspective, other people have other things that are really like, you know, kind of strong, strong, you know, hard nose or, or really things to, to consider, then just throw my way for my, you know, for my consideration too. But I think I got, you know, based upon the tape, I think I've got a lot to work with.
And I might be wrong about this, but it felt like both Julie and Adam got to a place that had support at the table, maybe different levels of support, maybe different groupings of support, but it felt like both of them presented options that folks were getting behind.
All right. Are we, do we feel comfortable then with where we're at?
Um, I feel like we did discuss quite a bit about fees, but we didn't see the actual fees.
Did Dr. Mattel, is that, did that encompass your fee conversation from the evening or do you have more you'd like to show us? Yeah, no, I mean, fees was basically again, transportation, no change athletics.
It was no change.
And it seems like, it seems like we're sticking with that.
Um, yeah. Reinstate a fee for full decay. And so we discussed how much, uh, ECC up 10%.
And then again, consideration of the activity fee. So that, that really captures, captures it.
Um, so the exact number of what keeping transportation athletics are, you, is in your packet, but it's not changing those, those things. fair.
All right.
Pursuant to MGL C 30, a S 21, a three to discuss strategy, the respect to collective bargaining or litigation with the ST.
Yay.
And over meeting may have detrimental effect on the bargaining or litigation position of the Sharon school committee. And the chair so declares not to return to open session.
Would entertain a motion.
So moved.
Second.
There's now.
Yes.
Julie.
Yes.
Donna.
Yes.
Veronica.
Yes.
Adam.
Yes.
When.
Yes.
And I'm a yes. Motion carries seven. Oh, see you all. And exact. Thank you for the public. I know 64 of you, I think close to a hundred, just a minute ago.
Stay down with us. I know that was a long one. Appreciate all of your patience and cool.
And collaboration.
Have a nice night. Thank you.